Windows Server 2012 on an Atom Mini PC
Discussion
My wife's business needs an IT upgrade. Their Windows Server 2000 system is about to die a timely death so I'm looking for a good cost-effective solution.
I don't want to spend a huge amount as I need to also upgrade all the client systems from Windows XP to Windows 10 as XP is no longer supported.
Having read some reviews, these new Atom based Mini PC's look pretty powerful and since all I need is an active directory set-up, file and print server, a Windows 2012 Essentials license should work just right.
Has anyone tried this before I go out and buy the hardware?
I don't want to spend a huge amount as I need to also upgrade all the client systems from Windows XP to Windows 10 as XP is no longer supported.
Having read some reviews, these new Atom based Mini PC's look pretty powerful and since all I need is an active directory set-up, file and print server, a Windows 2012 Essentials license should work just right.
Has anyone tried this before I go out and buy the hardware?
HP Xeon microserver might be a better bet: http://www.ebuyer.com/632935-hpe-proliant-microser...
mikef said:
HP Xeon microserver might be a better bet: http://www.ebuyer.com/632935-hpe-proliant-microser...
That's a bit pricey. Like I said, budget is the keyword here, so something like this is sadly not an option and overkill in terms of performance.The business is basically a small hotel so there are no big IT budgets.
I'm even wondering if a Win Server is needed and I'm looking at Linux as an option instead. They use an antiquated (DOS based), hotel management system which runs on Windows 10 through an emulation mode. I need to check if it'll work with a Linux server.
However, it would be great to know if Win Server 2012 works as an option on the Atom hardware.
Just as a reference, this is the Mini PC I'm considering:
https://www.amazon.es/Plater-x5-Z8300-Processor-Ex...
https://www.amazon.es/Plater-x5-Z8300-Processor-Ex...
It'll work but it'll be slow, simple as really.
How are you handling backups
I'd stand back a little and look at the business impact if the "server" fails. If it doesn't matter then perhaps ask yourself why are you bothering with a server? If it does matter why use a "server" which costs significantly less than a decent desktop.
Do you even need a server?
How are you handling backups
I'd stand back a little and look at the business impact if the "server" fails. If it doesn't matter then perhaps ask yourself why are you bothering with a server? If it does matter why use a "server" which costs significantly less than a decent desktop.
Do you even need a server?
This is the thing. I'm not entirely sure if we need a server or not. The way it was set-up was with this reservation system in mind.
I'm trying to find out if this system needs to sit on a server or not, but to answer your back-up question, yes we do have scheduled back-ups both locally and on a cloud.
These are all user files, but what's more interesting, the "IT guy" who set this up before didn't use an active directory as he stupidly installed XP Home Edition.
As a result this is something I would like to add so I can manage each client system. There are 7 in total (plus the server), and all used by older generation ladies who like to install toolbars and other crapware which means I'm constantly cleaning up their systems.
If I can add some control over this, it'll save me a lot of time.
If the Atom Mini PC isn't appropriate, can anyone recommend any options for no more than £300?
I'm trying to find out if this system needs to sit on a server or not, but to answer your back-up question, yes we do have scheduled back-ups both locally and on a cloud.
These are all user files, but what's more interesting, the "IT guy" who set this up before didn't use an active directory as he stupidly installed XP Home Edition.
As a result this is something I would like to add so I can manage each client system. There are 7 in total (plus the server), and all used by older generation ladies who like to install toolbars and other crapware which means I'm constantly cleaning up their systems.
If I can add some control over this, it'll save me a lot of time.
If the Atom Mini PC isn't appropriate, can anyone recommend any options for no more than £300?
You'd probably do better to put some basic controls in place like URL filtering and ensuring they don't have any admin right whatsoever.
Thing is if you slap Windows Server on a Desktop PC all you're doing is putting a lot of your eggs in a pretty fragile basket, and even if you said you have £5k to spend on this I wouldn't automatically be saying "Go buy a server".
What do you need to be able to do?
Thing is if you slap Windows Server on a Desktop PC all you're doing is putting a lot of your eggs in a pretty fragile basket, and even if you said you have £5k to spend on this I wouldn't automatically be saying "Go buy a server".
What do you need to be able to do?
OP I think you should be asking yourself (or 'the business') some questions like:
1) Is a server crucial to the operations of the business?
2) If it is crucial, then how long can the business do without it, should it die?
3) Does the business have any shared data, such as documents, spreadsheets etc., accessed by multiple users?
4) Do you want a 'fit and forget' (pretty much) solution?
5) Do you want to be able to lock down user desktops?
6) Anything I've not covered here.
I usually say that if the answer to (3) is yes, then (1) suddenly comes into focus as as well (depending on acceptable down time) and forces a decision about (2).
If you bought an HP ML110 (low end tower server) and stuck two disks in a RAID - apart from regular monitoring, you would get (4).
If the answer to (5) is yes, then a server becomes essential, however you need some knowledge of Windows Group Policies, and will also require Windows 10 PRO desktops as a minimum.
(6) covers things I don't know about 'the business' and will generate questions from you.
I've not mentioned virtualisation, as I don't believe it has any relevance here.
Of course it is possible to share files from a single desktop (point 3), however this can be fraught with issues.
1) Is a server crucial to the operations of the business?
2) If it is crucial, then how long can the business do without it, should it die?
3) Does the business have any shared data, such as documents, spreadsheets etc., accessed by multiple users?
4) Do you want a 'fit and forget' (pretty much) solution?
5) Do you want to be able to lock down user desktops?
6) Anything I've not covered here.
I usually say that if the answer to (3) is yes, then (1) suddenly comes into focus as as well (depending on acceptable down time) and forces a decision about (2).
If you bought an HP ML110 (low end tower server) and stuck two disks in a RAID - apart from regular monitoring, you would get (4).
If the answer to (5) is yes, then a server becomes essential, however you need some knowledge of Windows Group Policies, and will also require Windows 10 PRO desktops as a minimum.
(6) covers things I don't know about 'the business' and will generate questions from you.
I've not mentioned virtualisation, as I don't believe it has any relevance here.
Of course it is possible to share files from a single desktop (point 3), however this can be fraught with issues.
b
hstewie said:
hstewie said: You'd probably do better to put some basic controls in place like URL filtering and ensuring they don't have any admin right whatsoever.
Thing is if you slap Windows Server on a Desktop PC all you're doing is putting a lot of your eggs in a pretty fragile basket, and even if you said you have £5k to spend on this I wouldn't automatically be saying "Go buy a server".
What do you need to be able to do?
I will be up-front and say I'm no expert here but I have network knowledge based on home systems and I do know my way around Windows and OSX. I've had a small amount of experience with Active Directory so again, limited knowledge.Thing is if you slap Windows Server on a Desktop PC all you're doing is putting a lot of your eggs in a pretty fragile basket, and even if you said you have £5k to spend on this I wouldn't automatically be saying "Go buy a server".
What do you need to be able to do?
The guy who set things up before was a cow-boy and charged a fortune to do so. Sadly it was before my time otherwise I would have never let any of this to happen.
The requirements are as follows:
- 7 clients.
- All are hard wired over a gigabit LAN which I set-up. No problems there.
- All clients have Windows XP Home Edition. They are not valid licenses and need replacing with valid Windows 10 licenses.
- All clients must have a shared folder, personal folder and the management (2 users), require access to all folders and private folders of their own.
- The reservation system is DOS based and I'm not entirely sure if it needs to sit on the server. A standard windows 10 client could work just fine. I do however know all clients need network access mapped to the program folder.
- As all files stores will be on the server, this should be backed up locally to a USB external drive. At the same time, we also have a cloud back-up of the files.
- There's no need for a print server. We have three ethernet printers (one colour, one large office B&W printer and one on reception), and some clients have their own private printers hooked up but no need to share these. The other three need shared access but that can be configured by device.
Finally, my wife requires a VPN service to the office network so she can work from home. I don't know if Windows Server 2012 offers this, or I can do something through a Linux based server. Short of the long, whatever we choose needs to be free or as close to zero as possible!!!!
And that's it. The main purpose of this is to ensure we have everything stored in the correct places and backed up correctly.
I'm on a really really tight budget here....£200-300 (excluding Windows licenses).
TonyRPH said:
OP I think you should be asking yourself (or 'the business') some questions like:
1) Is a server crucial to the operations of the business?
2) If it is crucial, then how long can the business do without it, should it die?
3) Does the business have any shared data, such as documents, spreadsheets etc., accessed by multiple users?
4) Do you want a 'fit and forget' (pretty much) solution?
5) Do you want to be able to lock down user desktops?
6) Anything I've not covered here.
I usually say that if the answer to (3) is yes, then (1) suddenly comes into focus as as well (depending on acceptable down time) and forces a decision about (2).
If you bought an HP ML110 (low end tower server) and stuck two disks in a RAID - apart from regular monitoring, you would get (4).
If the answer to (5) is yes, then a server becomes essential, however you need some knowledge of Windows Group Policies, and will also require Windows 10 PRO desktops as a minimum.
(6) covers things I don't know about 'the business' and will generate questions from you.
I've not mentioned virtualisation, as I don't believe it has any relevance here.
Of course it is possible to share files from a single desktop (point 3), however this can be fraught with issues.
Just saw this after I posted my previous reply. Thanks for the feedback.1) Is a server crucial to the operations of the business?
2) If it is crucial, then how long can the business do without it, should it die?
3) Does the business have any shared data, such as documents, spreadsheets etc., accessed by multiple users?
4) Do you want a 'fit and forget' (pretty much) solution?
5) Do you want to be able to lock down user desktops?
6) Anything I've not covered here.
I usually say that if the answer to (3) is yes, then (1) suddenly comes into focus as as well (depending on acceptable down time) and forces a decision about (2).
If you bought an HP ML110 (low end tower server) and stuck two disks in a RAID - apart from regular monitoring, you would get (4).
If the answer to (5) is yes, then a server becomes essential, however you need some knowledge of Windows Group Policies, and will also require Windows 10 PRO desktops as a minimum.
(6) covers things I don't know about 'the business' and will generate questions from you.
I've not mentioned virtualisation, as I don't believe it has any relevance here.
Of course it is possible to share files from a single desktop (point 3), however this can be fraught with issues.
1) Not sure as stated before. I need a file server and I'm not sure if the reservation system needs to be on a server or not.
2) Mega problems. Some working files are on the server as is the reservation system. If this system dies, they cannot run the business at all.
3) Yes and this is currently stored locally (and therefore not backed up), and within the network shares, however permissions have not been set-up so basically everyone can see everything which is not ideal.
4) Fit and forget would be ideal. I don't mind a little house-keeping but as little as possible would be best.
5) Yes. Absolutely!
I think that's pretty much all. I've covered the reservation system in my last reply.
2 is your main point.
I'd be strongly considering if you can make do with something like Dropbox quite honestly as whilst cloud may have its own issues, it's likely to be a whole heap more available with PCs syncing to it than a £140 mini PC - that thing is not a server by any means and I think if you try to use it as one it will end in tears.
Something like a Synology may also be worth a look as it can take a lot of the hard work out of all of this stuff, it can help automate backups and DR, and it'll cost less than just the Windows Server license will cost you.
There are a bunch of other solutions but respectfully I'm trying to keep in mind your stated levels of knowledge so I'm trying to stick to what's cheap simple and reliable whilst keeping in mind that cheap tends to introduce SPOFs.
I'd be strongly considering if you can make do with something like Dropbox quite honestly as whilst cloud may have its own issues, it's likely to be a whole heap more available with PCs syncing to it than a £140 mini PC - that thing is not a server by any means and I think if you try to use it as one it will end in tears.
Something like a Synology may also be worth a look as it can take a lot of the hard work out of all of this stuff, it can help automate backups and DR, and it'll cost less than just the Windows Server license will cost you.
There are a bunch of other solutions but respectfully I'm trying to keep in mind your stated levels of knowledge so I'm trying to stick to what's cheap simple and reliable whilst keeping in mind that cheap tends to introduce SPOFs.
I should have been more specific with regards to group policies - you can lock down desktops indivividually, using local policies of course.
Group policies just centralises it all, and makes for an easier life, as you know that any policies set will be applied to all desktops (assuming correct settings etc.).
Given your budget constraints, I would set local policies on all desktops, and use a Linux file server, or even some kind of NAS device (will keep RAID etc. simple then).
I would however definitely centralise the storage, and also provide a USB disk for backups (in addition to the cloud).
Group policies just centralises it all, and makes for an easier life, as you know that any policies set will be applied to all desktops (assuming correct settings etc.).
Given your budget constraints, I would set local policies on all desktops, and use a Linux file server, or even some kind of NAS device (will keep RAID etc. simple then).
I would however definitely centralise the storage, and also provide a USB disk for backups (in addition to the cloud).
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: 2 is your main point.
I'd be strongly considering if you can make do with something like Dropbox quite honestly as whilst cloud may have its own issues, it's likely to be a whole heap more available with PCs syncing to it than a £140 mini PC - that thing is not a server by any means and I think if you try to use it as one it will end in tears.
Something like a Synology may also be worth a look as it can take a lot of the hard work out of all of this stuff, it can help automate backups and DR, and it'll cost less than just the Windows Server license will cost you.
There are a bunch of other solutions but respectfully I'm trying to keep in mind your stated levels of knowledge so I'm trying to stick to what's cheap simple and reliable whilst keeping in mind that cheap tends to introduce SPOFs.
The problem is the current "server" runs Server 2003 so it doesn't support dropbox (tried that). It's also a woefully underpowered Pentium 4 with just 1GB RAM (not possible to expand on this).I'd be strongly considering if you can make do with something like Dropbox quite honestly as whilst cloud may have its own issues, it's likely to be a whole heap more available with PCs syncing to it than a £140 mini PC - that thing is not a server by any means and I think if you try to use it as one it will end in tears.
Something like a Synology may also be worth a look as it can take a lot of the hard work out of all of this stuff, it can help automate backups and DR, and it'll cost less than just the Windows Server license will cost you.
There are a bunch of other solutions but respectfully I'm trying to keep in mind your stated levels of knowledge so I'm trying to stick to what's cheap simple and reliable whilst keeping in mind that cheap tends to introduce SPOFs.
Perhaps you're right regarding the Synology server. I don't know much about these but any suggestions would be appreciated although I am going to struggle to get a budget for this.
If all the server is doing is acting as a file share it doesn't sound like Windows is buying you much - Group Policy is nice to have but arguably not worth the cost of the Windows Server licenses or having to compromise by running it on what you're proposing.
It sounds like what you need is simply reliable storage and something like Dropbox is something I'd consider simply because if you combine it with something like a Synology you've got a pretty nice little combination for reasonably low cost.
Tony is right in that you can do an awful lot with Linux for free or low cost too, but if you want something that you more or less plug in and start using you'll not go far wrong with something like a Synology.
Main thing is make really fking sure you have the backup side of this in hand as you've said yourself you're screwed if it breaks - something to keep in mind when you're budgeting IMO.
It sounds like what you need is simply reliable storage and something like Dropbox is something I'd consider simply because if you combine it with something like a Synology you've got a pretty nice little combination for reasonably low cost.
Tony is right in that you can do an awful lot with Linux for free or low cost too, but if you want something that you more or less plug in and start using you'll not go far wrong with something like a Synology.
Main thing is make really f
king sure you have the backup side of this in hand as you've said yourself you're screwed if it breaks - something to keep in mind when you're budgeting IMO.bhstewie said:
hstewie said: If all the server is doing is acting as a file share it doesn't sound like Windows is buying you much - Group Policy is nice to have but arguably not worth the cost of the Windows Server licenses or having to compromise by running it on what you're proposing.
It sounds like what you need is simply reliable storage and something like Dropbox is something I'd consider simply because if you combine it with something like a Synology you've got a pretty nice little combination for reasonably low cost.
Tony is right in that you can do an awful lot with Linux for free or low cost too, but if you want something that you more or less plug in and start using you'll not go far wrong with something like a Synology.
Main thing is make really fking sure you have the backup side of this in hand as you've said yourself you're screwed if it breaks - something to keep in mind when you're budgeting IMO.
So after a chat with the mother in law I've managed to push the budget up slightly and I've come across one of these:It sounds like what you need is simply reliable storage and something like Dropbox is something I'd consider simply because if you combine it with something like a Synology you've got a pretty nice little combination for reasonably low cost.
Tony is right in that you can do an awful lot with Linux for free or low cost too, but if you want something that you more or less plug in and start using you'll not go far wrong with something like a Synology.
Main thing is make really f
king sure you have the backup side of this in hand as you've said yourself you're screwed if it breaks - something to keep in mind when you're budgeting IMO.WD My Cloud EX2 Ultra
http://www.wdc.com/en/products/products.aspx?id=16...
It seems to handle everything we need apart from a VPN service. I really can't find any references to this so I'm guessing this is missing. Do the Synology NAS servers offer this and are they worth the extra money compared to the WD devices?
One last question, the WD EX2 Ultra doesn't support a VPN server so I'm going to have to dismiss this.
I can pick up a Synology DS216play for a good price so would this be suitable for a 6 client small office?
It seems to support the number of users plus offer a VPN server which would be great.
On top of this it offers cloud back-up and user groups too.
As suggested, I will configure the users PC's locally and lock them down accordingly. (I'll have to ask for help on this so will post that later).
If this is recommended, I'll order it all tonight.
Cheers and thanks for the help up to now.
I can pick up a Synology DS216play for a good price so would this be suitable for a 6 client small office?
It seems to support the number of users plus offer a VPN server which would be great.
On top of this it offers cloud back-up and user groups too.
As suggested, I will configure the users PC's locally and lock them down accordingly. (I'll have to ask for help on this so will post that later).
If this is recommended, I'll order it all tonight.
Cheers and thanks for the help up to now.
I's suggest finding out a bit more about this application that apparently runs the business before committing
With legacy server systems, it's sometimes safest to just P2V it into a VM on new hardware
beanbag said:
They use an antiquated (DOS based), hotel management system which runs on Windows 10 through an emulation mode. I need to check if it'll work with a Linux server.
Like what currently runs on the server (client-server app, web app, asp, aspx, lamp, access, crappy 4GL, something else), whether you still need a Windows server to run it or not, whether you have the install media, whether you have the server license, know how to migrate any data, etcWith legacy server systems, it's sometimes safest to just P2V it into a VM on new hardware
mikef said:
I's suggest finding out a bit more about this application that apparently runs the business before committing
With legacy server systems, it's sometimes safest to just P2V it into a VM on new hardware
Following a painful discussion with the developer, it's become clear the reservation system can be hosted on a NAS server such as a Synology NAS.beanbag said:
They use an antiquated (DOS based), hotel management system which runs on Windows 10 through an emulation mode. I need to check if it'll work with a Linux server.
Like what currently runs on the server (client-server app, web app, asp, aspx, lamp, access, crappy 4GL, something else), whether you still need a Windows server to run it or not, whether you have the install media, whether you have the server license, know how to migrate any data, etcWith legacy server systems, it's sometimes safest to just P2V it into a VM on new hardware
This means I need to decide which would work best for the business.
I'm torn between two units.
The DS216 and DS216play
https://www.synology.com/en-uk/products/compare/DS...
Both are very similar but according to Synology, the DS216 comes up every time in their NAS selector tool. However, the DS216 only has 512MB RAM so if I start using apps to manage things in the background, it's going to slow things down. The DS216play has 1GB RAM so I'm guessing this will have more flexibility.
They also have slightly different CPU's (no idea of which is best), but the DS216play appears to be faster.
So, I have to question why Synology recommends the DS216? (The only advantage I see are 2xUSB 3.0 ports and one-click copy).
As a wildcard, for the same price as the DS216play, I can buy the DS215+ which is of course older but appears a lot more powerful in terms of some features, but has a slower CPU but 1GB RAM.
More notably, it has much faster read / write speeds, Dual LAN Link ports, more USB 3.0 ports than the DS216play model and hot-swappable support which neither newer model has.
Either way, I have no idea which to select! Any suggestions would be massively appreciated.
Remember, key items needed would be:
- User groups
- Folder permissions
- Malware scanning
- VPN Server
- RAID0
- Cloud backup
Thanks!
Whilst I think that the Synolog NAS option will offer the easiest setup, I think that a Linux box will offer the greatest amount of flexibility and the best performance.
IMHO most of these NAS appliances quickly become bogged down when you start running various apps on them.
If you are able to manage a Linux box, I would surely go down that route.
IMHO most of these NAS appliances quickly become bogged down when you start running various apps on them.
If you are able to manage a Linux box, I would surely go down that route.
Gassing Station | Computers, Gadgets & Stuff | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff