Talk:Windows Server Essentials

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Microsoft Windows: Computing B‑class High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Microsoft Windows, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Microsoft Windows on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Microsoft WindowsWikipedia:WikiProject Microsoft WindowsTemplate:WikiProject Microsoft WindowsMicrosoft Windows
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

Premium edition features?

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

4.0 release date

Most people identify December 1999 as the release date, but that was just the date that Microsoft announced it. See the press release here [1]. The press release says "General availability is expected in late January 1998.", but I can't find any source that says for certain when it was actually released. AlistairMcMillan 13:11, 2 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I was using Microsoft Support Lifecycle

Also this page says it was on October 22, 1997 --tyomitch 13:45, 2 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Just realised that press release I was looking at was for "BackOffice Server 4.0" not "BackOffice Small Business Server 4.0". Found the correct press release [2]. So the October 22 1997 date seem to be correct. AlistairMcMillan 16:05, 2 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Uhm... And what are the release dates at Microsoft Support Lifecycle, for that matter? They are all different from PressPass dates. I thought initially that PressPass list just 'announcement' dates, but now I'm confused. --tyomitch 07:41, 3 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea why they thought it was "generally available" in Oct 1997 in Oct 1997 but now in May 2005 they think it was generally available in Dec 1997. But since they have this to say about their Product Lifecycle, I'd prefer to just go with the original press release...

Because we must respond to changing market conditions and are constantly evaluating how to better work with our customers and partners, such documents should not be interpreted as legally binding commitments, but rather as flexible documents subject to change occasionally. Similarly, we cannot guarantee that any information in such documents will be error-free or kept up to date after they are posted.

I'm pretty sure they aren't allowed to go back and rewrite press releases. AlistairMcMillan 14:27, 4 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Service packs "Since the release of SBS 2008"

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)[reply]

R2

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)[reply]