Talk:Windows Server Essentials

message: Shouldn't that read "Frontpage server extensions"? You generally wouldn't run FrontPage itself on the server, but I haven't ever actually used SBS.  Can anyone with experience clarify?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.14.89.164 (talk) 15:38, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Windows 2000 Small Business Server included Windows Sharepoint Services (later WSS 1.0) and would install MSDE (Microsoft Database Engine; an Embedded or Express edition of SQL Server 2000) unless you had the Premium version of SBS which included SQL Server 2000 (limited version). WSS were free downloads for Windows Server (Server 2003, WSS 2.0 support 2003-2008) and could be run on Workstation (through WSS 3.0 sp1) for development purposes (q.v. Sharepoint Designer). WSS 3.0 is near end of life and current free version is SharePoint Foundation 2010. Some differences between Office SharePoint Server and Windows SharePoint Services that I can think of offhand is Active Directory integration, Email integration with Exchange, and site size limitations. Note that networking best practices requires not putting Exchange et al on your Primary Domain Controller (Server Limitation in SBS is PDC only). Supposed to use multiple server boxes in SBS 2008. MIIS (lite version of Microsoft Identity Integration Services) used in Microsoft Online Services migration cannot run on PDC. 
Shjacks45 (talk) 04:13, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: From memory, the premium edition included Frontpage, so that you could develop websites to put on your SBS server, using the Frontpage extensions. Generally, SBS2000 include both Server and Workstation components. 203.206.162.148 (talk) 03:39, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Premium edition features?

message: I've changed that to read "SBS 2003".  The references I've given are for 2003 SP2 and 2003 SBS SP1. You will notice that 2003 SP2 is for products including SBS. and if you look carefully at the SP1 article you will notice that the SBS SP1 service packs consists of the seperate service packs for Server 2003 and for the other server services.
Note that IN GENERAL, when discussing new editions (like SBS 2008) MS will list features that are ALSO in old editions (lie SBS 2003). When MS says that SBS 2008 is updated with standard service packs, that DOES NOT necessarly mean that previous editions required special service packs. This is a general feature of MS marketing material that you should be aware of.
Although the SBS2000 service pack "contained" the standard server service pack, I haven't gone looking for more details, so I don't have any references or exact information.
203.206.162.148 (talk) 03:37, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Earlier SBS editions like BOS 4.0 or SBS 4.2 or SBS 2000 DID require separate service packs or else functionality was compromised. (It was recommended that admins use the SBS Console because dependent user settings are changed together.) The downgraded Exchange, SQL, NT Server, et al did not always accept default registry changes and files of full version upgrades. In fact, read the articles about SBS functionality problems after install Windows Server 2003 R2 atop SBS 2003 (or SBS 2003 R2 which is based on Windows Server 2003)which has had Windows Server 2003 SP1 installed. (Windows update has hosed several of the SBS2011 servers I maintain because of full version updates and dependencies in SBS).  Shjacks45 (talk) 13:02, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Service packs  "Since the release of SBS 2008" 

message: SBS 2003 R2 is based on Server 2003, not Server 2003 R2. For this reason, "Windows Server 2003 R2 UNIX Interoperability" is not available on SBS 2003 R2: you have to use SFU 3.5 
http://www.winserverkb.com/Uwe/Forum.aspx/windows-server-sbs/79342/sbs-2003-R2-and-SFU
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/sfu/archive/2007/04/12/services-for-unix-vs-windows-server-2003-r2-unix-interoperability.aspx  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.206.162.148 (talk) 03:53, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  R2 

message: "All Windows Small Business Server versions up to SBS 2003 are limited to 4 GB of RAM."
That is not entirely true. It was a service pack which introduced the hard limitation, ostensibly because some drivers assumed that no memory existed beyond 4GB203.206.162.148 (talk) 04:01, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  4GB RAM 

message: This article reads like it's a press release. It needs re-written to neutrality, without "It is ideal as a first server for small businesses with up to 25 users. It provides a cost-effective and easy-to-use solution" and "For more information about Windows Server Essentials, see the External Links section on this page." 76.180.138.185 (talk) 03:59, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Please do! -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 07:43, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh please! Novell Small Business Server had the same advertising byline. Shjacks45 (talk) 13:04, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: MS PR Department