Finally got parts to build a normal file server

[maxse]

Hello everyone. Well I finally got the money together to say good to my PII 350mhz file server computer. I just picked up 512MB RAM, and a sempron 2400 proc. I had a friend give me a sockaet A mobo. I also picked up the Cooler Master CM Stacker case to give me expandibility in the future when I buy more drives...

So.. now that I have the juice to run windows without the computer freezing up every 10 minutes, I want to load 2003 Server edition. I think that is the best one for a server right? (don't know linux).

The thing is that I am so confused with all these different 2003 server editions. There's enterprise, corporate, SBS. Which one do you guys think that I should use. I have no idea in the differences among them.

Just to give u an overview of my setup. I have 2 desktops 1 laptop and a HTPC that will always be connected to the network. I need the server to always be running to store all my movies so that I can access any time on the HTPC. I also need to be able to share partions and map them as network drives... In addition I want to have some folders to only be available to my computer so tha tno other computer on the network can see it. In addition I would like to be able to log in to the server and make changes any time as I please form a remote PC. ( I am doing that right now with ultraVNC but as I understand 2003 Server edition is specifically made for this purpose). I am really excited about the new server and I am completly new to all this. I look to finally set up my home network the right way once. Like a small business would. Please make comments, suggesitons, and please help me out with this. I appreciate everone's contribution and time. Also I believe Verizon FIOS is coming soon to my area so my crappy DSL conneciton will go, and its upload time! Thanks everyone again and sorry about the long thread.

*EDIT* Sorry guys but one more thing I need ot be able to do. I think 2003 server does this at least one of the version sright? I need for the server to automatically download the latest virus definitions from norton and all the updates and automatically update all the computers on the network (Ill make sure that they are all using the same version of norton). Also if possible to do the same with windows updates. The thing is the updates on 2003 server are probably not oging to be the same as for XP Pro which all of the computers are running right now. Thanks again guys. Hopefully I can get some help on tihs.

[garethevans1986]

Microsoft do 5 versions of Server 2003:

Web, Standard, Enterprise, Datacenter and Small Business Server.

Standard Version should be fine for what you want to do.

As for the "I need for the server to automatically download the latest virus definitions from norton" you need a piece of "Norton" software to do that, but the usual "Norton 200x" software wont work on a server so you need something like Symantec Anti Virus Server 8 or 9.

Remove Management

Server 2003 allows you to control it via Remote Desktop.

ChocIST

[maxse]

All right thanks. Just some more quesitons. Some1 reccomnded that I use 2000 Server because its more stable and less bloated. What do you guys think about this idea? Also what are the benefits of using a domain with my setup? In addition will I be able to access the server from within anywhere through the internet?

[garethevans1986]

Id use Server 2003 personally but I havent had much use with Server 2000.

Using a domain on your setup, things are controlled centerally instead of being individual workstations, alot easier if you set things up correctly the first time.

Depends on what you mean by "access".....I can Remote Desktop into my server at home from anywhere on the web aswell as access the webserver/mail server part. Really depends on what you want to do and what hardware you already have.

ChocIST

[maxse]

well basically I am just going to use it as a file server and media server. No web server or email for me. Just got ole file serving holding my music movies and pictures...

[MazX_Napalm]

Rather use W2K Pro or XP Pro (if you have a spare license) or use nix. That is a lot of money to spend on an OS for just a file server.

[Dav-id]

Rather use W2K Pro or XP Pro (if you have a spare license) or use nix. That is a lot of money to spend on an OS for just a file server.

585920012[/snapback]

agreed - if you are to do this legally/cheaply then best way is to use something like Linux - assuming you are setting this up purely for fileshare etc then you can do everything you could possibly want through tools in KDE etc. Something like SuSE has the automatic update function so you need not worry about patching it manually!

Plus once its configured you need not know what OS is installed on the machine

[omniphile]

I'm sorry maxse, but I can't see any compelling reason to use Server 2003 of any variety for your purposes. I use it (Standard version) for about 25 PC's and it does all of things you want, but so does Win XP Pro. Mine also does a heck of a lot more (like run Exchange 2003, WSUS, use Group Policies and OU's, run Symantec Antivirus Corporate, run Symantec Mail Security for Microsoft Exchange, run login scripts, use IIS for Media Streaming, run Routing and Remote Access etc etc). And even then, it is well protected behind a subnet so no Windows boxes are directly exposed to the internet.

Unless you have a burning desire to spend the money to buy Server 2003 for experimental or educational purposes, I agree with the previous poster that it may be better to use XP. There is nothing you have stipulated that cannot be done with XP Pro.

[maxse]

hmm okay so you guys are saying in order to get the norton updates pushed out to all the computers all I need is symantec corporate? Can you post the exact version numbers?

The only real reason I want 2K3 server is because it is just more stable than XP Pro. Price not being an issue. Which one would you guys pick up? Thanks.

[garethevans1986]

Microsoft Windows 2003 Standard Evaluation is free.

Symantec Corporate Anti Virus Server 9 or 10.

ChocIST

[mint0]

I'd recommend ClarkConnect Linux, Its really easy to use and great for running any servers or gateways

[Neil]

The only real reason I want 2K3 server is because it is just more stable than XP Pro. Price not being an issue. Which one would you guys pick up? Thanks.

585923347[/snapback]

Windows XP Pro is very reliable and will do what you want, but if you want to spend that kind of money and can afford it, go for it! ;)

[MazX_Napalm]

Microsoft Windows 2003 Standard Evaluation is free.

ChocIST

585923682[/snapback]

Yes its free to evaluate, not to use on an ongoing basis.

[omniphile]

maxse, when you say "Price not being an issue. Which one would you guys pick up? Thanks." that is different for me. My hard-headed side still makes me want to repeat my previous answer. But, I'd not be entirely honest if I said that because, personally, I like to play around and experiment with different OS's and versions.

I had a lot of fun getting up to speed with Server 2003 and trying out the new functionality and what it could do for me. If price is truly not an issue, I'd say skip the Small Business version of Server 2003 (I'm not a big fan of it at all, but it is pretty good value since they throw in a slightly crippled version of Exchange and a few other goodies). I'd go straight to Standard which IMHO is more versatile.

If you do, I'd probably just get the basic 5-user CAL (licences) initially, but you can add to this as required. (You'd have to check out your local MS website for pricing).

Later on, if you wanted to add other things like MS Exchange 2003, or IAS or whatever, you can. From memory I paid about $AUS1800 (equivalent to $USD1350?) for Exchange with 10 licences, but I can't recall how much the additional licences cost.

Edit added: I forgot to add that I agree with the previous poster that stability should not be an issue with either W2K3 or XP Pro SP 2. Well, at least it's not for me anyway these days - it was a lot different several years ago.

You can get Symantec Groupware (which includes Symantec Antivirus and Symantec Mail Security for MS Exchange) for about $50 per seat or so I think (starting with 10 licences?).

You'll find it to be a little bit of a learning curve with all the bits and pieces you can do on Server 2003, but I found it to be lots of fun. Once you have that mastered, if you really want to start throwing money around, you can go to Enterprise or Datacenter editions - but I hope you have deep pockets!

Your choice, and whatever happens, make sure you enjoy yourself!

Edited May 16, 2005 by omniphile

[maxse]

guys what exactly does Exchange Server really do?

[MazX_Napalm]

Exchange gets your email and distrabutes it to the users.

[samg]

To be honest, it doesnt sound like your going to be buying this software. as your giving your self the option of what version.

If i got a *free* copy i would go for Windows 2003 Advanced Server as its the best one. If theres a cost issue just stick with standerd, as it will do MOST things, and theres proberly free alternatives of the extra's on the net.

[maxse]

okay thanks guys. I basically decided to go with 2K3 standard. The thing is though can I just not use the active direcotries and just share the drives and then map them as a dirve letter on the workgroup computers. I really dont have the time to learn how to set up active direcotries and simply dont have the time to play aorund. So I wil be using 2K3 just for its stability. What do you think?

[ahodes1]

okay thanks guys. I basically decided to go with 2K3 standard. The thing is though can I just not use the active direcotries and just share the drives and then map them as a dirve letter on the workgroup computers. I really dont have the time to learn how to set up active direcotries and simply dont have the time to play aorund. So I wil be using 2K3 just for its stability. What do you think?

585941633[/snapback]

Honestly, 2k3 isn't much more reliable than XP Pro... and for a file server, you might as well use XP Pro or *nix. I don't see any compelling reason to use any type of professional server for what you're doing. You might as well be taking your money and burning it. That said, expect to pay about $300-500 for the OS alone if you choose to stick with 2k3 server.

[Revenant]

You are seriously wasting your money, just get Windows XP Pro and you will have more than enough for a file server.

[msg43]

well I don't know how a meida server works mabye someone can tell me but for you need to use linux. It free you can setup samba with little to no trouble I've know a bunch about linux within 3 months of using it. With the tools out there you can have a nice server and some general knowlege of linux. I use my desektop as a webserver, ftp server, and a desktop (I'm usng nix dual to window ot play games)

[maxse]

Let's just asy money isn't an issue when it comes to choosing an OS. Anyway can some1 tell me the benefit of using 2003 of 2000 server? Is there any big difference between them in what I am going to use them for?

[ZeroBS]

Here is a page that compares the different versions of 2003

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003...reeditions.mspx

and some reasons you would want 2003 over 2000

http://windows.about.com/cs/beforeyoubuy/a/aa030601a.htm

:)

[msg43]

dude use linux

if you want to temp web server or ftp server it is so easy to setup with a few tools

I can setup a ftp server in under 10 minutes and apache (web server) also under 10 min plus linux is low on resources. You can even close the graphic user interface down when you aren't confiruging or using the server which would save more space. Try something like debian (no ubuntu, fedora, suse because there setup is kinda goofy) and seriously it a lot easier downloading linux than I pirated version of win 2003

[Premgenius]

Microsoft Windows Sever 2003 - Enterprise or Standard Edition is your choice with SP1 is prefect :D

eBay have some good deals at times...I did a search for you

eBay UK eBay

Just be careful from whom you buy from.

Edited May 19, 2005 by DJ Prem