JDS

Disgraceful. By "commissioning" they mean VM'ing the old 2003 DC onto a 2012 box? Two thousand pounds? It's maximum a days work - and I've done similar many times. At most two days, and only if you're happy paying the guys top dollar at £125/h to sit around watching things copy. Sorry but this is overpriced work.

Yep, nothing said - but note my comments are "IF"'s rather than just stating "there's no problem" etc. Also, the OP stated the *OS* was in a bit of a mess. Can easily happen after 10 years use!

The OP didn't mention if this was the only intention - they mentioned hardware AND the OS/GPO's/AD being in a bit of a mess. From that info, it's not unreasonable to say they were expecting a fresh commission. However, that info wasn't verified and no cost for the works was provided, so it's difficult to say exactly what should've/could've been expected - without same info though, I don't think this can be dismissed as "no problem here"? Would be very interesting to know exactly what the school expected, and how much was spent.

More straight-forward, yes, wanted, maybe not! In your case you've taken those particular steps for a reason. The OP doesn't say, but the way I read it was this configuration wasn't expected.. it was a "previous support company", so I'm guessing they're no longer there - is this their finished job? If the company installing this server have VM'd the old 2003 server for any other reason than that's what was requested of them, they've taken a lend IMHO. As with every new technology, trust some horse's ass of a company to misuse it to sell crap!! I doubt the school asked for a sticking plaster job like this.. but if the company WERE asked to do it, why didn't they upsell either a fresh-commission, or at least add it as a new DC and move the operations over to that? Granted this wouldn't solve the GPO/AD problems described, but it would give more of a platform for working towards a better overall network? Assuming DFS was used (2003 R2?), any things like MSI allocations/startup scripts etc could be made to continue to work. Wonder what would these muppets would do at the next upgrade - VM the 2003/2012 box onto a 2017 one, and that onto a 2023 one? :-D In another 15 years they'll be all singing all dancing with the newest 4TB RAM, 250TB HDD server.... and 2003 server behind the scenes gluing it together :-\

Virtualisation is becoming more and more common, BUT that doesn't answer whether or not it was applicable or desired in this case. Now - if the school have bought the 2012 server on the assumption that it'll entirely replace their 2003 server, then they've been mis-sold to. In your post you say the GPO's/AD were in a bit of a mess. This can easily happen over time. You say the original OS was Server 2003 - so they could've had that in anywhere up to 10 years. Over that time it's perfectly possible that things were a bit bodged, and as time goes on, a clean start may well be desired. Did the school REQUEST a clean start, was it implied, and more importantly, did they pay for it? You say "which is still in need of a rebuild" - So, I'm assuming there were/are existing issues with the 2003 DC that haven't been resolved by this 2012 Server install - if so, were you expecting them to have been, or were the school under the assumption that installing this new server would include resolving them? Or, were they fully aware that this was just a temporary fix? Personally, I'm of the believe that virtualisation has it's place. But moving a 2003 DC onto 2012 and doing nothing else is a bodge BUT NOT IF THAT'S WHAT THEY EXPECTED AND PAID FOR. I would not however consider this a "new server", and if it was me putting it in I would not sell it as such. I *would* however do it as a temporary fix (say for if the native hardware was dying and difficult to replace), or if I needed to buy a few months to investigate/fund complete replacement. If the school are expecting their new server to last them 5-10 years, they'll likely be greatly disappointed. Updates for 2003 (which is the lowest common denominator) will stop way before they do for 2012, and you've stated already the GPO's/AD could do with a spring-clean. The new install is likely nigh-on useless now bearing this in mind. Another poster mentioned the ease of VM'ing - I think that's exactly what's been done here, they've gone for the ease. Note - as I said - I'm not against virtualisation, far from it, but if what's implied here - the school have been passed off a 2003 VM as a clean install - then they've had their trousers pulled down. Out of interest, what sort of cost are we talking, bearing in mind any monkey should be able to virtualise a server in half a day?