New server - 2003 or upgrade to 2008 ??

[pooley]

The lease on our server is about to expire and I am looking at a replacement.

 

The server is currently 2003 and is the only sever at the school (Primary).

 

Its roles are

 

DC

Exchange 2003

DNS

DHCP

File and Print sharing

 

 

Now there are only 60 or so machines hanging off it with around 240 pupils logging on.

 

What are peoples experiences with 2008 server ?

 

Do I make life interesting and install Server 2008 and exchange 2007 and then migrate roles and mailbox's across or stick with what works, i.e. 2003 ?

 

We are buying new desktops which have XP & vista on them, so when we do decide to move across to vista which server version is better suited to controlling / locking down the desktops etc ?

 

Any advice gratefully received

 

Si

[contink]

I'm in a similar situation with a school that's getting all new kit and the server is one area that's particularly sensitive.

 

My heart is saying to go with 2008 but my head is reminding me of all the problems Vista had and the old fallback position of "Not until SP1".

 

I suspect 2008 may be slightly different as chucking this out to businesses and having it fail would be much worse for business compared with Vista but I'm still holding off.

 

If you can get a 2008 license but get downgrade rights I'd go with that as the best of both worlds...

 

That's just my opinion though as I've not had a chance to install 2008 on a test machine yet.

[robknowles]

Hello,

 

Technically Windows 2008 is at SP1 level. I've got it running school at the moment (2 DC's, 2 Cluster File Servers, Backup Server and our VLE Server (Moodle). Works great not a single problem - been using it on the 2 Cluster File Servers since Beginning of Feb.

 

Exchange 2003 will not work on 2008 Server, so if you go with 2008 server than you will need Exchange 2007 SP1.

 

For managing Vista Clients you will need either Vista Business, Enterprise (which you only get if you are a schools agreement) or Ultimate.

 

Thanks,

 

Rob

[Freedom]

I've just gone with 2008 after a complete hardware failure on our 2003 server. Go for it mate.

[gshaw]

I'm in a similar situation thinking about our Exchange 2007 upgrade in the summer, could well be a cluster so go for 2008 or 2003 hmmmmmm

 

I've tested both out, works equally as well - just don't wanna find some showstopper bug in 2008 server the week after it goes live!

[Outpost]

I'm in a similar situation, at the moment we have 3 servers all Win 2000 with exchange 2000 as well. I need to make some big changes and I'm looking at Server 2008 but not sure what version, 32 or 64bit. I know Exchange 2007 and HyperV are 64bit only, are there other factors I need to consider ? the future is looking 64bit to me.

[Michael]

What we all have to remember is although Windows Vista SP1 and Windows Server 2008 are at the same level, this is no different to Windows XP and Windows Server 2003.

 

2003 Server was released just over a year after Windows XP and although it was faster and more robust than XP, it's still had its fair share of bugs. This is inevitable, even with 2008 Server.

 

Personally I'd be more inclined to setup 2008 Server as a test server or of course a member server on your existing domain. You also have to remember that unless you're running XP SP3 or Vista SP1, then 2008 Server won't offer you much more than 2003 R2 does now.

[zag]

You need to think about what 2008 will give you over 2003 I mean all we want in our jobs is to make computers work for people reliably and offer them the features they need.

 

Upgrading for the sake of upgrading can sometimes be a mistake, especially with new Microsoft software.

 

I made that mistake with the exchange 2007 RTM, it was awful until they released SP1.

[Outpost]

Valid points and sensible. I think the problem a lot of us have, are old existing servers/networks and the chance to upgrade/rebuild. This chance doesn't come too often for many of us and we want to make the absolute best of it knowing it could be a decision that will be final for several years to come. I dare say that there could also be some pressure thrown in the mix with head staff and governors expecting minor miracles.

It's a toughie for sure. Do you play safe and go for 2003 with untold support from all quarters with rock solid stability and guaranteeing a job well done or jump on the new 2008 with less support, largely unused in schools but with some great features and basically future-proofing yourself for some time to come. Don’t know what I’m going to do yet.

[Netman]

After trialling it I'm looking to go over to 2008 for most of my servers this summer... I like an interesting life!

[joe90bass]

We'll be heading the 2008 route with all our new servers this summer. I'm plunging straight in and setting our new school up with a vanilla 2008 network (Vista and XP SP3 clients). The decision for 2008 is NAP and mainly the improved TS features. Currently trying to convince management to let me have MS 2008 training!

[Outpost]

What build 32 or 64bit????

[gshaw]

All our stuff is 64-bit and has been since we put the new servers in 2 years ago, only exceptions are the print and SMS 2003 servers, which are 32-bit (HP are a nightmare for 64-bit print drivers!)

 

Going to be getting some outside help with the Exchange 2007 upgrade as I don't wanna take chances with our email system, first major migration I've done (we did our Teaching Exchange server but that's got no data on lol), not taking any chances! Will be interesting to see what the response to Server 2008 is there...

 

The new SCCM 2007 is one thing I won't be upgrading to, tried it out on the test network and it's a right pain, until SP1 I can't image machines unless I import the MAC addresses first what the hell is that about Keeping with trusty SMS 2003 for a while yet

[Simcfc73]

I thought of buying a new server to do some testing and put WSUS and Sophos NAC on it as well as making it a backup file server but alas Sophos doesn;t support 2008 yet.

 

Still might get one though.

[Dos_Box]

Server 2008 has been rock solid for me. I find it a great advance on 2003 and is stable and contains many new useful features (apart from WDS. They could have made that a LOT easier!). It is well worth investigating, in fact I shall be doing a session on Server 2008 ayt the conf showing off its features and new 'bits'.

[contink]

Stupid question but I'm guessing Win2k3 can co-exist ok on the same domain so long as you upgrade the Win2k3 network to use 2008 AD yes?

 

Next up: Does that kill the legacy RIS on the 2k3 server? I ask because I'm still not up to speed on WDS and don't want to mess with something that works just yet.

[JamesC]

How about considering VMWare ESX and running what ever you want? Hardware spec permitting of course :-)

[Michael]

Stupid question but I'm guessing Win2k3 can co-exist ok on the same domain so long as you upgrade the Win2k3 network to use 2008 AD yes?

 

2003 and 2008 can exist on the same network and both act as domain controllers. You may have to update the schema on 2003 server however, as 2008 AD has a lot more features.

[EduTech]

got server 2008, no problems here is great. only dc and exchange at the moment =]

 

go for it.. why not.

 

and i suspect if your using vista on the clients go with server 2008 on the server

 

jame

[SeanVin]

We’re combining or Admin and curriculum networks by building a new network from scratch, our current networks have evolved from the original NT4 servers and it shows. Although it is ‘ambitious’ to use a brand new operating system, it seems short-sighted not to take advantage 2008. We’re wanting to use NAP, to have better control of printers and TS looks good too. The one thing that I’m not sure about is if Ranger For Networks will run on Server 2008 (has anybody tried it?). It needs to run on a DC, if it won’t run on 2008 then we can only run at 2003 domain functional level and lose all the extra server 2008 AD goodies.

[HodgeHi]

Don't you have to upgrade your CAL licenses to connect to the new 2008 server?

 

IIRC it was mentioned to me when i was looking at 2003 R2. I reconfirmed on here and someone pointed out to me that this was not the case.

 

But i think i read somewhere that with newer releases of server editions that you do.

 

I may be wrong though as i usually am

 

Just found this...

 

2008 licensing

Edited May 30, 2008 by HodgeHi

[SeanVin]

Don't you have to upgrade your CAL licenses to connect to the new 2008 server?

 

I am working on the assumption that we have to update our CALs for Sever 2008, however if we have to run at Server 2003 functional level to support Ranger for Networks (see my last post) then I am not going to update the CALs.

[HodgeHi]

Sorry i actually meant to point that towards the OP as it may have been something that he forgot to factor in when upgrading server versions. I know i always do

 

But does it matter at what domain level you run at (or have i misunderstood) since if your clients connect to the server 08 for anything then they will need the updated CALs. That is how understand the way CALs work. If i am wrong then please enlighten me as it may save me some cash.

[SYNACK]

Sorry i actually meant to point that towards the OP as it may have been something that he forgot to factor in when upgrading server versions. I know i always do

 

But does it matter at what domain level you run at (or have i misunderstood) since if your clients connect to the server 08 for anything then they will need the updated CALs. That is how understand the way CALs work. If i am wrong then please enlighten me as it may save me some cash.

 

You are right, the CALs do not depend on the functional level. All the functional level does is define how the AD servers talk to each other. If you are connecting to a 2008 machine you still need a 2008 CAL.

[everton4europe]

I am in the position where i am installing a new server this week and had the choice of 2k3 or 2k8. I went for 2k3 as there were no drivers for the raid cards i use until december and there are no clear drivers for the printers we use. I would asume that windows would have the drivers built in until i can get a straight answer that other hard ware will work i am sticking with 2k3.