1 NIC only in SBS 2008???

Was anyone else shocked to hear that the single NIC configuration will
be the only available configuration in SBS2008? Is there anyone that
can (without violating any NDAs, obviously) give some context to
that?

How about they rename it "Medium Business Server 2008" while they're
at it?

Big thumbs down in my book, but I'm still very interested to know just
why the SBS team thinks that's better.

Let's keep track of this... SBS2008 - doesn't include Outlook 2007,
doesn't include ISA 200X (which more than likely means that remote
access is going to be much more difficult for small businesses, does
that mean no more RWW?) - what's next on the chopping block? I'm not
complaining about dropping support for tape, that's plenty old school,
you should be able to drop support for old stuff like that, but 1 NIC
only? What's a small business supposed to do?

Someone? Anyone? Some context please?

Here are some quick posts:

http://sbs.seandaniel.com/2007/05/he...on-of-sbs.html

And here:

http://ts2blogs.com/blogs/larrylentz...5/27/8792.aspx

Philip E.
MPECS Inc.

"Mesan" <935main@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1180634528.803685.142330@n15g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
> Was anyone else shocked to hear that the single NIC configuration will
> be the only available configuration in SBS2008? Is there anyone that
> can (without violating any NDAs, obviously) give some context to
> that?
>
> How about they rename it "Medium Business Server 2008" while they're
> at it?
>
> Big thumbs down in my book, but I'm still very interested to know just
> why the SBS team thinks that's better.
>
> Let's keep track of this... SBS2008 - doesn't include Outlook 2007,
> doesn't include ISA 200X (which more than likely means that remote
> access is going to be much more difficult for small businesses, does
> that mean no more RWW?) - what's next on the chopping block? I'm not
> complaining about dropping support for tape, that's plenty old school,
> you should be able to drop support for old stuff like that, but 1 NIC
> only? What's a small business supposed to do?
>
> Someone? Anyone? Some context please?
>

On May 31, 11:16 am, "Phil E." <Gro...@No-Spam.ootbx.ca> wrote:
> Here are some quick posts:
>
> http://sbs.seandaniel.com/2007/05/he...on-of-sbs.html
>
> And here:
>
> http://ts2blogs.com/blogs/larrylentz...5/27/8792.aspx
>
> Philip E.
> MPECS Inc.
>
> "Mesan" <935m...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1180634528.803685.142330@n15g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > Was anyone else shocked to hear that the single NIC configuration will
> > be the only available configuration in SBS2008? Is there anyone that
> > can (without violating any NDAs, obviously) give some context to
> > that?
>
> > How about they rename it "Medium Business Server 2008" while they're
> > at it?
>
> > Big thumbs down in my book, but I'm still very interested to know just
> > why the SBS team thinks that's better.
>
> > Let's keep track of this... SBS2008 - doesn't include Outlook 2007,
> > doesn't include ISA 200X (which more than likely means that remote
> > access is going to be much more difficult for small businesses, does
> > that mean no more RWW?) - what's next on the chopping block? I'm not
> > complaining about dropping support for tape, that's plenty old school,
> > you should be able to drop support for old stuff like that, but 1 NIC
> > only? What's a small business supposed to do?
>
> > Someone? Anyone? Some context please?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Yes, thank you. I read both of those prior to my post - they were the
reason for my post. I felt the posts themselves and the comments at
the time left quite a lot lacking so I made my own post.

I do appreciate your responce though.

Relax ;-).

SBS *next* is committed to being the best SBS ever. There are major changes
in all the components that SBS integrates, so obviously SBS will change as
well.

RWW isn't dependent on ISA, nor is it dependent on x number of NICs.
NTbackup isn't in Windows Server *next*, but that doesn't mean you can't
still use tape with 3rd party products. RRAS isn't in Windows Server *next*,
so using it as a basic firewall between two NICs isn't an option.

These aren't SBS things, but they impact SBS, and it's the job of the SBS
dev team to take what they're given, and integrate and build in value for
small business. That's something the SBS team excels at - so... relax ;-).

--
Les Connor [SBS MVP]


"Mesan" <935main@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1180634528.803685.142330@n15g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
> Was anyone else shocked to hear that the single NIC configuration will
> be the only available configuration in SBS2008? Is there anyone that
> can (without violating any NDAs, obviously) give some context to
> that?
>
> How about they rename it "Medium Business Server 2008" while they're
> at it?
>
> Big thumbs down in my book, but I'm still very interested to know just
> why the SBS team thinks that's better.
>
> Let's keep track of this... SBS2008 - doesn't include Outlook 2007,
> doesn't include ISA 200X (which more than likely means that remote
> access is going to be much more difficult for small businesses, does
> that mean no more RWW?) - what's next on the chopping block? I'm not
> complaining about dropping support for tape, that's plenty old school,
> you should be able to drop support for old stuff like that, but 1 NIC
> only? What's a small business supposed to do?
>
> Someone? Anyone? Some context please?
>

OK, for a small business today, they go out and sped $2,000 and
they've got hardware and software to 1) be a domain controller to
handle access/authentication for all their computers and users (just
like the big guys), 2) have exchange to do their own internal and
external email, as well as share calendars and the whole 9 yards (just
like the big guys), 3) can host their company's website using ASP.Net
2.0 with all the new ajax extensions and everything else (just like
the big guys), 4) can give their employees remote access to their
compters so they can work just as if they were at the office (a bit
better than the big guys), 5) etc. You all know what SBS2003
provides, it's a marvelous product.

Look at a small business 2 years from now... They spend $2,500
(inflation and whatever) and get hardware and a license of SBS
*next*. Oops - we need to spend some more to get something else to
sit on the outside - more money for hardware and software. Oops - we
need to get something else to host our website. Oops, we need to
forward ports 25. 3389, 444 and who knows what else on to our SBS
box... It's turned into "Medium Business Server".

<still trying to relax>

I really do believe that the SBS team is trying their best to provide
the best product they can to server their small customers as best as
possible, but nothing I've been able to read so far helps me
understand how giving up the 2 NIC model actually helps anything.
I'm all over the 30 minute backups, I'm just fine with dropping
NTBackup, but take away ISA/RRAS and the 2 NIC configuration and
that's like losing your right arm and eyeball - you can still walk
around and do stuff, but not like you used to.



It will certainly please all the proponents of 1 NIC and don't put ISA on
the same box as SBS.

Steve <newsgroup@public.lan> wrote:
> It will certainly please all the proponents of 1 NIC and don't put
> ISA on the same box as SBS.
>

<waves>

RRAS.

--
Henry Craven {SBS-MVP}


"Mesan" <935main@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1180642700.436316.74500@n15g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
>
> So what changed in Server 2008 that makes dual NICs no longer a
> possibility?
>

If Yahoogroups aren't savvy enough to be watching SeanDa's blog, then
they need to get a tad more on the ball.



Henry Craven {SBS-MVP} wrote:
> Try the SBS2K List .... now -they- will give you a "Discussion" - this
> is just the break/fix list.
> ;-)
>
> I just don't think the penny has dropped there yet ;-)