SBS 2003 and Branch Office
|
Prev: Reminder - Microsoft Responds to the Evolution of Community
Next: Connecting to domain on SBS 2003 after windows xp sp3 repair
From: Leythos on 21 May 2010 11:53 In article <#QTmnDP#KHA.5476(a)TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl>, cyberdudeiq(a)yahoo.com.br says... > In the meantime I would like to ask what your experience is in regards to > Exchange/Outlook on remote offices. Does it work OK or is it very sluggish? > Since you would use Cached mode, over the internet, it's almost no different unless you have really large attachments that you send/recv. I actually configure cached mode over https for all my outlook connections, even inside the lan. -- You can't trust your best friends, your five senses, only the little voice inside you that most civilians don't even hear -- Listen to that. Trust yourself. spam999free(a)rrohio.com (remove 999 for proper email address)
From: Milhouse Van Houten on 21 May 2010 13:16 So it's something in Server 2003 R2 that they stripped from SBS?! http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc778621(WS.10).aspx "Cliff Galiher - MVP" <cgaliher(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:#0o3DaL#KHA.5592(a)TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... > dfs-r is not available sbs 2003. > > -Cliff
From: kj [SBS MVP] on 21 May 2010 13:24 Milhouse Van Houten wrote: > So it's something in Server 2003 R2 that they stripped from SBS?! > http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc778621(WS.10).aspx > > "Cliff Galiher - MVP" <cgaliher(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > news:#0o3DaL#KHA.5592(a)TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... >> dfs-r is not available sbs 2003. >> >> -Cliff I wouldn't say 'stripped', but the SBS2003 R2 Upgrade did not include all of the functionality of Standard editions of 2003 R2. On the other hand SBS2003 R2 had *some* inclusions that Standard 2003 R2 did not. Different SKUs, different products, different features. -- /kj
From: Cliff Galiher - MVP on 21 May 2010 17:11
Not stripped. Remember that "R2" is just a naming convention MS uses to differentiate a major release from a minor one (or that is what it was at one time...it has morphed a bit.) And "R2" on one product does not necessarily tie it to an "R2" of another product. In the case of SBS 2003 R2, the R2 is tied to the SBS bits. Those got a minor revision update. The underlying core was 2003, Windows Server 2003, NOT Windows Server 2003 R2. As such, any technologies that required the Server 2003 R2 kernel *could not* be included in SBS 2003 R2. It isn't like they went in and stripped things out, but more that they couldn't forcefully wedge things in. -Cliff "Milhouse Van Houten" <btvs(a)myrealbox.com> wrote in message news:egz6IlQ#KHA.4368(a)TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... > So it's something in Server 2003 R2 that they stripped from SBS?! > http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc778621(WS.10).aspx > > "Cliff Galiher - MVP" <cgaliher(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > news:#0o3DaL#KHA.5592(a)TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... >> dfs-r is not available sbs 2003. >> >> -Cliff > > |