Snow Leopard Sever versus SBS 2011

Question

Just started evaluating SBS 2011. I have been setting up SBS servers since SBS 2000 and have many many years using this however licensing has always bugged me with SBS server and in 2011 the story is no different. It is an 'if, and + but' licensing scheme as I like to refer to it and I have seen instances where volume license professionals and SBS consultants have got this wrong. In a recent case i was proved to be correct in my licensing setup at a client site and the license audit proved wrong - thats how confusing it is. However my clients heads where left spinning with it all and the hours it took to a lot of hours to resolve.
Compared to the Mac Server license model then you would wonder why people tolerate this at all. What does SBS Server have over Snow Leopard Server other than Exchange and how does Mail services in Snow Leopard compare?

Answer 1

Firebird74 wrote:
 Compared to the Mac Server license model then you would wonder why people tolerate this at all. What does SBS Server have over Snow Leopard Server other than Exchange and how does Mail services in Snow Leopard compare?
"Other than Exchange" is huge.  Not that I'm a huge fan of Exchange (it has it's own issues - no software is perfect), but especially with the Mac having a full Outlook client, having in-house Exchange can be VERY nice.  Exchange 2010 Outlook Web Access (OWA) is also increadibly nice and feature rich.  You almost don't even need Outlook anymore.  Indeed, the typical non-power user would probably be just as happy with OWA as full Outlook.  The only other system with as feature rich webmail would be Lotus Domino (and if you want to debate Lotus Note/Domino I will be more than happy to - not in this thread tho).
Here's why I continue to deploy SBS - and now, especially SBS 2011, to the non-profits I support.  First of all, it's cheap for non-profits.  Microsoft has a very gracious charity licensing program.  Second, SBS "just works".  I often wonder how the SBS division in Microsoft survives since they actually seem to be customer focused   They know who their customers are and their product is targeted squarely at that market.  I have been using SBS since the SBS 2000 days, and the progress the product has made over the last decade is simply astonishing.
Once you get past the initial server install and the hour and a half of updates and reboots (typical Microsoft product!) you have an almost 90% functioning and integrated Windows network with a full directory, feature rich email, powerful group calendaring, full remote access for email, collaboration, files and remote access to your office computers, collaboration through sharepoint, file sharing, bare-metal restore capable incremental backup - the list goes on.  The amount of stuff packed into SBS is truely astonishing.
Client machines are joined automatically.  Powerful functionality such as folder re-direction and syncronization of local files are a few mouse clicks away.  Health montioring and patching of the network is fully integrated into the managmenet console and "so easy a caveman could do it".  With a few more clicks SBS will email you status and error reports - great for admins like me who are part time and on demand.
And the new remote access features of SBS-2011 are really, really nice.  Heck, I can even remote into my SBS server from my Mac now!
Yes, with Mac OSX Server I could probalby get similar services and I would have to give up a few things like automatic remote access to the client machines, but there would be allot more manual integration and at the end of the day SBS still offers more.  And the hardware - the server I built for $2K would have been double that and still lacked features like redundant power   This is the most dissapointing thing about Apple's recent moves with the discontinuation of their server hardware.
So it comes down to what is important for you.  If you have Windows based applications, SBS can be a no-brainer.  Especially if you have anything that relies on SQL server.  If your a typical office with light email, light useage of a calendar and basic file sharing then Mac OSX server can also be a viable solution.  It won't be as tightly integrated and you will have to figure more stuff out, but it is cheaper - especially if you aren't a non-profit.  Yes, Microsoft's licensing can be confusing, but if you have a good reseller that understands small business - especially ones like Software House or Software One.
Having said that, I'm still going to work with a friend who owns a small business to upgrade his SBS 2003 box to 2011.  He has a critical business application that runs on SQL server so he's stuck there, and other applications like QuickBooks only work with Windows servers.  That and they are heavy, heavy users of email and group calendaring.  As much as I like Mail and iCal, even with some of the third party add-ons to iCal it just can't stand up to what you get in true enterprise-class systems.
And finally, if I get into trouble, or if I get hit by a bus and the organizations I support need help, they are far more likely to find folks who understand Microsoft than Mac OSX server.  Unfortunatly, that is a critical factor for many organizations.
I don't think it has to stay this way forever, but for right now MS has a better solution for small businesses.
SBS Essentials is also an interesting product.  If you have a smattering of Windows desktops and need basic file sharing, Essentials is a really great deal.  Biggest reason: Essentials can do incremental backups of all your workstations and it has built-in data-deduplication so you don't get 25 copies of the OS, applications, redundant data files, etc.  Before essentials, I installed Windows Home Server to backup up to 10 machines - I have 10 workstations backed up in less than 150GB because of the data-deduplication functionality.  This is enabled by NTFS shadow copy service - Apple really needs some sort of block level snapshot capability in their file system.  It would enhance TimeMachine and make stuff like this trivial.
Anyway, those are a few of my thoughts after supporting several home and small business networks - often of mixes with Mac's and Windows boxes.