Our office has 35 users (all Win 7 Enterprise) and a SBS 2008 server running in Hyper-V.
There are several issues with the existing server and it needs to be re-built. It's a good opportunity to install a new version.
We want to explore the options of either:
- SBS 2011
- Server 2012 Essentials, unlocking the 25 user limit by adding a Server 2012 Standard, and adding two additional VMs to run Sharepoint Server 2013 Foundation, WSUS and Exchange 2013 (we require on-premise exchange).
The negatives of the second option are:
- Additional licensing cost, probably double - I'm waiting for pricing from our reseller
- Extra over head of maintaining 3 VMs instead of just 1
- Extra storage requirements and increased backup hassles of 3 VMs
- RWW doesn't seem to be as nice/professional an experience as SBS 2008, no Companyweb, RDP not as nice.
- Limited documentation on this type of setup, IE installing and configuring Exchange server, WSUS & Sharepoint, we'll be putting Forefront TMG in front of this too.
- Will there be increased SSL costs?
What are the positives of this option over just using SBS 2011?
- Access to the latest servers, Windows 2012, Exchange 2013, Sharepoint 2013 Foundation but what are the tangible benefits of these?
- Direct Access? Is this possible\advisable without a dedicated server with either option?
- I do like the potential for spreading the load across 3VMs and being able to restart or restore then separately.
The most important improvements for us would be to the experience for remote users and any improvement to the backup system, we want to have complete backups to an online service suitable for file recovery and disaster recovery. I hear Windows 2012
has good options for backing up Hyper-V childern, but perhaps this only requires 2012 on the host?
Any advice / comment on the pros and cons of each option would be greatly appreciated.