Home Forums server OS

We are approaching the 4 year anniv. of opening the practice. Our "server" was bought right before opening. It's really just a normal PC, a Vostro 400 dual core 2.2GHz w/ 3GB RAM running XP Pro.

We've grown to have 9 client PC's, 5 laptops and 4 desktops, all currently running XP.

I'm looking into replacing the server 80% because I think it's time and 20% because I hope maybe it will make V6 faster.

My first issue is should I use Win7 Pro or Windows Server 2008. We only use the server for AC and as a file share, so we don't need SBS I don't think, but is there a reason to consider it?

My only real reason to think we want a server OS is to get better hardware -- the servers on Dell seem to require it or else you are on your own installing Windows 7.

Any advice welcome. I'm a programmer but I used to having an IT department do all the IT for me so this is all new!

Just upgraded my 4 year old Vostro "server" to Dell studio XPS 9100, 12 GB RAM, Win 7 ultimate 64bit, Raid 1. Works very well. Seems that all my workstations are working even better then before. I didn't have any speed issues with AC V6.0.10 but now whole system is faster.

@Philip,

OK, take this in the spirit it was intended.

First, we need to define server both in software and hardware. Technically, the definition of a server is a computer that all other computers connect to share files or a database, etc.

I think of a server as being server hardware such as a Dell T410, etc. and a Server OS. Therefore, for me, WIN 7 Pro on a workstation computer is not a server but more a "main computer"

So, I would use that term, "main computer" for your question.

Now, will a server (server hardware and software -- OS -- Server 2008, etc.) make v6 faster? Absolutely. Will it be extremely noticeable? Probably not. But, in my opinion, and many will argue, overall you are better with a client/server setup (meaning a real server and OS). Can you put 2008 on a workstation. Yes, if it can handle 64-bit.

Another thought is and WIN 7 OS can handle 20 concurrent inbound connections. Server OSs are only limited to their CALs. Well SBS is limited to 75.

Now, the interesting comment you made is "Do I need SBS compared with Server 2008?" The way I took that to mean is that you consider SBS to be needed for a larger network. It is just the opposite. Server 2008 is generally used in large networks such as hospitals and Google, etc. You certainly don't need Server 2008 in a small business. Server 2008 can have multiple domains and subdomains and have multiple servers on a domain. SBS can only handle 75 computers and can only be the one domain controller.

What you want if you go with a server OS is SBS 2011 or 2008. Microsoft was in an awfully good mood when they came up with SBS. It is called Small Business Server for a reason. And, it comes with Exchange and SharePoint. SharePoint is the least used, best application for a company ever designed.

SBS is also much easier to set up with the wizards and easier to maintain. It is less expensive. There is no decision between the two.

Also, with a 64-bit server OS, you can run almost unlimited RAM. Most workstations can't support 12, 20, 24 GBs of RAM such as the Dell T410 or T620.

Thanks that is all really helpful.

I was asumming Server 2008 was cheaper than SBS because SBS comes with additional software. Actually at least with the Dell prices it looks like Server 2008 R2 Standard Edition is slightly cheaper than SBS 2011. Very slightly. So if the setup for SBS is easier I would go with that even if I'm not using Exchange or Sharepoint (which we don't plan to).

So with either server OS is letting AC install SQL Server Express the right way to go? I think I read some people buy the full SQL Server instead? I'd prefer the simpler solution as long as it performs well.

I'm doing a "compare" between the T410 and T610 and it's hard to see what's different. Seems like this is the right ball park for us. Oh geeze the "Help me choose" page for RAID is really intimidating! A lot to learn.

Hmmm, that is our other option to get a good workstation rather than a server. I definitely want RAID 1 this time (we have no RAID today). So good to know you can do that with their workstations.

For SBS I was just reading you need to buy CAL (client access licenses) for users and devices? That seems like another barrier, just understanding and managing them not so much the cost. But maybe it's easy?

Connection limit of 20 would be plenty for us.

A nice sounding thing the servers have is dual power supplies.

I'm still undecided.

Two other options:
1) SBS Essentials, has a limit of 25 but don't have to buy CALS. It does Active Directory and merges backup features of Windows Home Server. Does not do Sharepoint or Exchange, but you can add a Premium package that includes Windows Server 2008 R2 Standard technologies and Microsoft SQL Server 2008 R2 Standard Edition for Small Business.


2) Windows Server Foundation has a limit of 15 (I think) not sure how many CALs are included. It has the full features of Windows Server but can not be expanded beyond 15


Foundation can be found at Dell, it is only sold as a "starter" server. Not sure Dell sells Essentials, but you can get it at Amazon for under $400. You can buy an HP version of Foundation at Amazon (actually for about $200) if you have an HP server.

Depends on what you want to do with the server.

Another option is to use Windows Home Server and not use an Active Directory. WHS 2011 is REALLY CHEAP (not free but close (~$50 at Amazon.)

That was one of the reasons why I decided to go with powerfull Dell desktop. Not to many desktops comes with Raid 1 also. This XPS 9100 with i7 processor, 500 GB HD and 24" HD monitor is blazing fast and very easy to work with. I think should be enough for my solo practice. Hopefully will last for at least 4 years

PS
All my client machines are runing windows 7 ultimate and have at least 4GB of RAM so maybe that is reason why I don't see speed issue with V.6.0.10

I replied earlier to a post regarding a scanner recommendation, concurring with the consensus Fujitsu. At the end of the post I stated I do not use IT products intended for home use in a commercial environment, which 9 clients certainly makes; that's again my point here.

I have two Dell servers, one running Unix 24x7 for probably a decade now without a single hiccough and a two year old single-raided T 310 created specifically for AC which has also run flawlessly. I bet I could have saved money on the AC server going with off-the-shelf desktop, recommendation in early 2010 when I first downloaded AC, but at what cost had something not intended for heavy use collapsed?

With regards to the OS, you're not going to get better advice than from fellow forum contributors Wendell and Bert customized for AC, although if you're curious, the Ac Server with an equal number of clients as you is running 2008R2 SP1 with all the necessary CALS and SQL server 2008R2 standard.

How ever you decide to proceed, best wishes.

GNicoll

SBS Essentials is not available at Dell that I can see, a fact which is bemoaned here:
http://www.brucebnews.com/2011/08/microsofts-missing-servers/

So when you say buy from Amazon you mean buy the Dell server with no OS and do the install. This makes me a little nervous that you have to setup the RAID yourself for example, and install all the drivers, but maybe it is not hard. I'm definitely used to getting the machine from Dell and just plugging it in.

The limit of 10 for Server 2008 Foundation might be too low, we have 9 client machines (max of 5 simultaneous users). Also this 2009 doc says Foundation is limited to a single processor and 8GB of ram:

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd744832(WS.10).aspx

What Dell offers today on a T410 is:
1) No OS
2) SBS 2011, Standard, $825
3) SBS 2011 PREM, $1489
4) Server 2008 Enterprise w/ 10 CALs, $2999
5) Server 2008 Standard w/ 5 CALs, $755
6) Server 2008 Datacenter, $5999

SBS Standard has CALs too but they are not mentioned.

With those choices only I'd say it's between SBS 2011 Standard and Server 2008 Standard. Bert was saying SBS is a no-brainer because it's easier to admin, etc.

Our clients are all XP and some even XP Home. We could upgrade to Win7 Pro as part of all this, but would be nice to decouple the two transitions. I don't know much about domains and active directory and stuff. Can SBS/Server just do workgroups as an option?

One thing I've considered is hiring an IT service to help spec the server maybe help with setup. I've done all the IT for my wife's practice for 4 years but that's was based on my experience as a consumer. I don't have any server experience.

I would not use a home desktop machine either. If I go with a "main machine" instead of a server it would be a business desktop or workstation.

I'd prefer real server hardware but I'm just unsure about the OS side, seems complicated. My ideal would be good server hardware but WIN7 Pro for simplicity. But that's not offered pre-installed and I'm not sure WIN7 drivers are available for the server hardware. Plus I wouldn't want to beat my own path, if the offered choices are desktop/WIN7 or server/ServerOS then I probably want to pick one or the other.


So what does SQL Server buy you over the SQL Server Express which AC installs? How does the install work does it just recognize SQL Server is installed and use it? Given my admin experience I'm inclined to stick with SQL Server Express unless there's a huge advantage.

Philip,

SQL express allows utilization of 1 GB or RAM, regardless of how much your server has, and there have been discussions in this post that discuss 8, 12,16,20 and 24 GBs of RAM in various scenarios. In these cases, assuming the server or main computer whichever your flavor, is going to be dedicated to AC, then the extra 7, 11, 15, 19 or 23 GBs of RAM is just taking up space. Upgrading to paid versions of SQL unlocks the RAM to do what it's supposed to do. Prior to upgrading the SQL server I timed out in certain applications in AC ~90% of attempts, now it's one-Mississippi, two Miss...and I'm on my way. And one more note... AC does not support anything other than SQL server 2005 express from what I understand, so once you've upgraded and there is an issue, the upgrade gets the blame from tech support, I speak from experience.

I hope my explanation of my situation help you with yours.

GNicoll[font:Microsoft Sans Serif] [/font]

Wow I didn't know that. That's horrible. And "SQL Server 2005 Express Edition Overview" says it "supports 1 CPU, 1 GB RAM, and a 4 GB database size.". So if you have 2 CPU's what does it do, use processor affinity to lock itself to one?


Wow what a crappy choice. Be stuck with an anemic buffer size or be on AC's bad side. I'm a rule follower so I'm not sure I could stomach using unsupported software. But yeah I was hoping to get at least 24GB RAM but what's the point. We don't run anything on the main machine besides AC and file sharing.

This could influence me to stick with a workstation instead of a server. AC seems like it's not ready for server hardware.

Philipw,

While that may be horrible, it's also important to note that SQL Express is also free. Should Amazing Charts make the executive decision to include SQL Standard with AC, the price jumps up an automatic $2,500.

Furthermore, going with a server should not be determined by the version of SQL. For example, let's say you Amazing Charts, Quickbooks, Attendance Rx, and tons of files in your My Documents. You could install Quickbooks, Amazing Charts, and Attendance Rx on a server with 8G of RAM and be all set. Use folder redirection to store your My Documents on there as well. That way, you have one and only one machine to back up in the company which means, come disaster day, one machine to restore.

JamesNT

I agree it would be unfortunate and unlikely for AC to require SQL Standard because of their low pricepoint. But the ideal would be to include SQL Express for free but run with SQL Standard if the practice chooses to pay for it. I don't believe this would be a stretch because Microsoft admits it is in fact the same program with a software limit, rather than being two different programs requiring different integration strategies. Still some additional testing would be required, so I understand AC's position, I just hope they eventually grow to offer more database options.


This is certainly a valid point but in our case we just run AC and file sharing on the main machine today. We have no other apps would could throw in there. I guess the OS would use a lot of RAM for a disk cache which would speed up file sharing (which includes AC imports) so it's not a total loss, but it'd be really nice to use the RAM for AC itself because that is our main program and our main source of perceived IT slowness (starting with V6).

We use a Dell 2950 W/32 Gigs running MS Server 2008 R2 Standard and use remote app sharing. This allows an icon on all the workstations for AC that runs like a local app and not a full desktop typical of Remote Desktop. The main benefit is SPEED AC is so much faster not to mention you don't have to upgrade all the hardware or software at the workstation level just one location to upgrade, big time and money saver. another benefit is cross platform, you can run AC on Macs, droids, IOS devices "iPads, iPhones and iTouch"

-Dog

Why would you not use SharePoint? Why would anyone not use SharePoint? You turn on the server, and there it is. Except for RWW and Exchange, SharePoint is the biggest reason we stay with SBS.

Someone once said, and I apologize for not knowing who said it, "SharePoint is the most little known, under utilized and best application Microsoft ever made.

May have missed this in an earlier thread, but call up Dell, choose four hard drives and ask for a RAID 5 or a RAID 10. Or just get two hard drives and get a RAID 1.

You will get a million different opinions, but they are all fine. Of course, you may want a hot spare. So, a little technical.

I agree with GNicoll for the most part. 24GBs is overkill.

But, that doesn't mean with 8GBs, 7 are wasted. Your server will not perform well with 1GB. Unless he is talking about the 1GB for SQL. But, you would want (if you have 64-bit to get at least 8GB to 12GB as you may add SQL Standard later.

The biggest problem that a lot of people have is they have SQL Express with 4GB of RAM, SQL takes 1GB, there is only 3.2 to start with. Processes and other functions take other RAM. Next thing they know they are down to 400MBs and their server is running very poorly. They reboot the server and get all the RAM back including from SQL and now all of the pages stored there are gone.

To add to Bert's comment. It should be pretty clear that SQL isn't the only thing running. Not to mention, SBS/Exchange is optimized to use the maximum amount of RAM it can. SBS 2011 recommends a minimum of 8GB. You get a warning for anything less during the install process. I've ran SBS in a VM and it is quite sluggish with anything under 8GB.

Secondly, why are we even having this argument? RAM is ridiculously cheap. I saw 16GB of DDR3 Corsair XMS3 RAM go for 55 bucks last week. That's the good stuff too. 8GB can be had for as little as 30 dollars. (This isn't ECC RAM though). Just avoid those 8GB sticks because they are still pricey at the moment.

There are plenty of people on this board who know exactly what hardware to get for what you need. I spec'ed, built, and installed SBS 2011 from start to finish. So I should be able to assist with that. The only thing is that Dell still doesn't have the Sandybridge processors (which offer excellent price/performance). Another thing is that Sandybridge is old as of last week. Ivybridge is out, the server processors should be shipping soon. I'd suggest you wait for these to come out. The E5 and E7 Xeons are due out soon. E7 is aimed at the very high end. The E5-16XX series and E5-26XX series should be more than enough for AC, exchange, sharepoint, etc.

RAID is useful. RAID 10 would be the premium one to go for. Requires 4 drives minimum. RAID is not a backup solution, it's designed to minimize downtime. Rebuilding a RAID 1 array can take a significant amount of time compared to RAID 10. The main reason RAID 10 is preferred to RAID 5 is rebuild times. RAID 5 takes quite a while to rebuild, although it's performance is slightly better compared to RAID 10. For anything above RAID 0 or RAID 1, look into an separate RAID Card with a BBU. It's not that bad. When you're installing Windows, it asks you to indicate the location of the driver. Usually you can use the disc or put the driver on a flash drive, then it recognizes the hard drive and proceeds like a normal installation.

The RAID card has a separate BIOS, where you setup the RAID array. Takes very little time. I went with 4 Western Digital RE4 Enterprise drives 500GB for a 1TB usable space. I see the 137GB Seagate Cheetahs recommended a lot, however I'd have to disagree for SBS. It's simply not enough. MS recommends 120GB for SBS 2011 leaves very little room for Exchange, Sharepoint, etc. They are also quite pricey. Actually, every hard drive is expensive now due to the flooding in Thailand, 200-400% of the original price at the moment and it's not expected to return to normal until around this time next year.

Philip,
I am usually the minority voice on this one, but why not just stick with what is working for you? It works well, you understand the software, and you can easily trade up the "main machine" if you somehow feel the need. Maybe I am not understanding the (admittedly knowledgeable) voices above, but I am really not hearing any clear, significant advantages to an overhaul that sounds pretty pricey and time consuming.
Just my two cents.

Actually, I think you're the majority on this one. Most AC users aren't using full powered server OS. That's one AC's main selling points is that you don't need an amazing computer to run it. The main benefits are reduced time investment in the future. Server grade hardware is designed to run efficiently and continuously. Also, server software is designed to run background processes more efficiently than a standard desktop operating system. (less conflicts) Lastly, where it really comes in handy is centralized security. By setting up a domain, you can secure your office by having the user authenticate against the server. However, the biggest time saver is group policy allowing you to install software on multiple machines without having to go through the wizards on each computer. Even if you add a new computer to the domain, all you have to do is join it to the domain as easy as typing http://connect in the address bar in SBS and all the software and settings can be applied. Turn on Folder Synchronization and you don't have to worry about backing up individual workstations. (Grab Carbonite or some backup service and your AC databases, files, and other items will be backed up offsite.) Saves a ton of money compared to buying individual backup plans per workstation. (Much cheaper than AC's online backup service, runs in the background). Windows updates are centralized and you can receive daily reports on the status of your server and domain's update, security, mail, and other notifications. Admittedly, there is a large initial time investment, however, after that, it's pretty much smooth sailing. I can go on and on, but there are significant benefits.

Hello Again Just my two cents,
I am not a fan of SBS do to the fact that it puts too much on one box. I think that a server that you use as an AC server and Exchange is a bad plan. I think that exchange should be on its own box and the same goes for other major server rolls.

As for raid you MUST go raid and you must be at least mirrored the speed of a rebuild is not as important as having the redundancy, if one of your ?correction? when one of you drive fails you will have your raid to fall back on. It will keep you running until you can rebuild. If you go Dell they use PERC to control raid and it very straight forward to configure.


For the client that we have using AC we have installed a total of 4 Dell 2950 servers.
First Server:
Untangle box. This is a Lenox based system it's a great solution for NAT,Firewall,VPN,virus protection and web-filtering network wide. OS is Lennox

Second Server:
Domain Controller for Active Directory, Exchange Server 2007, GFI Fax Maker. OS is MS Server 2003 Standard

Third Server:
DATA Server. This SQL server that is hosting AC and we have written a custom reporting front end that links data from AC to a supplemental database to facilitate the generation of California state work comp forms ?Doctors First Reports, PR-2 and End Of Care forms.? As well as a much better method of Clinic reports and documents than AC is capable of. OS is MS Server 2003

Forth Server:
Application server . This server is how all the workstations in the clinic run AC, Office, Dragon Med and a number of other misc apps. This is done by sharing the applications and at the workstation level it functions as if they are just running a program locally ?just an icon on the desktop? not having to run a full remote desktop connection. No data is generated at the workstation this eases in backups and one location to upgrade that will affect the whole clinic. OS is MS Server 2008 r2 with 32 Gigs based on the amount of users.

There are 17 workstations running in this clinic as well as iPads and some tablet PCs all of them run AC. Because of the Application Server it allows cross platform to other devices and users can go to any workstation and keep their workspace just the way they left it even remotely.
This clinic has 4 provides and sees about 150 patients per day

A little bit about me,
I am not a Doc, at least not a human Doc but I am a network engineer since 1989. I have been consulting to ambulatory clinics as my own company now for 6 years since crossing over from designing and managing POS and accounting systems in retail corporations. I enjoy helping out where ever I can.

-Dog

Speed of the rebuild is important in time critical applications. Rebuilding a RAID 5 1TB can take over 60 hours and significant performance degradation will be experienced during this time. RAID 10 offers excellent redundancy and performance. I'm going stick with my suggestion of a separate RAID card with a BBU vs the Perc integrated controller on the motherboard. 4 Separate servers might not economically feasible. I can understand the necessity in a larger practice. SBS was designed to handle these roles, Sharepoint, exchange, RWW, simultaneously. For most, their server is all-in-one solution, a fax server, file, active directory, etc. We have 10 workstations and 2 laptops.


Server Specs:
CPU: Intel LGA 1155 Xeon E3-1235 3.2 GHz
HDD: 4X Western Digital RE4 500GB in RAID 10
RAID Card: 3ware 9650SE-4LPML RAID Card
PSU: Silverstone ST500GF 500W 80 Plus Silver Redundant
Mobo: SUPERMICRO MBD-X9SCA-F-O LGA 1155
RAM: Crucial 16GB (4 x 4GB) ECC Unbuffered DDR3 1333 (PC3 10600)
Case: Ark SR-801BB E-ATX
OS: Windows Small Business Server 2011 Standard
Fax: Mainpine IQ Express 1 Port

My post was not in disagreement with you, just the fact that you need to use raid and not striped but mirrored as a minimum. As for SBS I have worked with it since M$ first rolled it out and I am not it's biggest fan, just too many eggs in one basket and when it has problems so will AC, Email, Fax and what ever else your running on it. I am sure that it has got better over the years but I wont ever use it. The cost of a couple of servers it not near the cost encountered if the system is down for half a day.

-Dog

Did I not warn you, if you ask 10 people, what is the best config for RAID, you will get four or five different answers. They all have advantages. There is nothing wrong with striped. You will just need to research it yourself. Doesn't matter what RAID you use (to a point). Just that you use it.

Philip, if you go the server way, hire someone to do it for you. Watch, learn, install so you can administer some yourself. But, it is good if you have a GOOD IT person you can call that knows your setup. If Sandeep were in your area, you should hire him. Otherwise, I would not just take our word for it on equipment. THIS IS A COMPLIMENT TO SANDEEP, but my guess is you didn't understand a word that was said above. For me E7 is a chess move.

SBS is an excellent operating system. Little secret. You don't even need CALs. If AC and SQL can run on WIN 7 Home Premium, it can run on SBS. You can use Windows 2008 Standard Server and be just like your hospital and any other large corporations that need domains and sub domains and more than one server. But, Small Business Server is just that. Made for small businesses. And, you can certainly run AC and SQL on it. And, I don't know how much the person is making in half a day. If they are losing that much money, they must be listed in Forbes.

And no offense to Dog. But, am I reading your post correctly? Are you actually suggesting that an AC user go out and purchase four servers, OSs, GFI Faxmaker, which is rather pricey. I am guessing a Brooktrout fax board for a grand?

Seriously, that is a nice setup, but we are just trying to get some users to get a one server. I doubt anyone will buy four.

Oh, there goes another person with an opinion on RAID. She says go with a RAID 1 for the system drive and an entirely different drive in a RAID 5 with a hot spare and a hot swappable drive.

This is just a joke, and I know others have their opinion, but does Microsoft have to come out with an OS called:

Small Business Server custom made for physicians who use AC and are trying to meet MU.

And on a real note, with all the threads on here about remoting into their computers, while RDC is awesome, you can't beat RWW on SBS. With Remote Web Workplace, users can log in from home to one portal and access their Outlook account, desktops and the Company Web (SharePoint)

I don't personally know what SharePoint does that would help our office. This is largely because I don't know much about SharePoint, and partly because I'm just not aware of any "itch" that needs scratching in our flow.

Maybe because I'm IT support and not on the ground, and the MD and staff aren't very computer savy so they don't articulate any particular need. But basically we set things up as smart as we could at the time 4 years ago, and since then if I get complaints it's because something is broken or something is slow, that's about it.

Probably we are in a local minimum, where stuff seems good but over the next hill there's something way better. I will have to keep an eye out for new stuff more, I've been letting it just ride a bit.

This is completely fascinating to me. What exactly does the "remote app sharing" in this case? Does anyone else run like this, for normal AC sessions? I don't think we'd ever set up something like this, but it's interesting.

Have you ever had sushi?

That is in fact where I'm leaning. It's been interesting to look into a real server but we want to buy something in the next few months, and I'm thinking of just getting a nice Win 7 Pro machine with a fast processor and 16GB or so a memory, a "main machine".

Basically replacing what we have today with the same thing, just updated. I do want RAID this time, so I'm looking at maybe a Dell Precision T1600. Not sure which Dell non-server machines have raid. We don't want a home machine just on principle, it's probably the same components under the styling.

What I had mainly hoped to gain by doing a server OS was better hardware. I don't know the reliability numbers (does anyone?) but you'd think and hope that server hardware emphasized reliability over saving a few bucks or saving a few inches. Nice big roomy cases, more airflow. And redundancy options like dual power supplies.

But beyond possibly better hardware I don't see any advantage to use for a real server over a "main machine". Because again we just run AC and file sharing and no other apps on the server.

We only have 1 FTE provider right now, and probably won't have more then 3 ever, so maybe we too small anyway to worry about a real server also.

Bert,

I've been evolving my system to look like Dog's. I now have 3 servers - two are Citrix Xenservers on Dell 2900s and they run my application server (Windows 2008 Server standard) and 8 virtual PCs which go RDP to thin clients, or are just available for remote access. Another is SBS 2008. All are RAID 5 but I am thinking of updating to mirrored when I start updating to Windows 7 (or the next flavor) since 7 takes more room. I have two more workstations I can take to virtual computers, which would leave us with just 3 real PCs in the entire clinic. If I were better at the thin clients I would figure out to get rid of more workstations, but Medware seems to prefer real PCs and getting printers to work with the thin clients is hard enough, I don't want to even try to hook up a scanner. So far, working with Windows 7 has been a bear. I think I might wait for the next one before updating. We run eleven computer stations at the clinic (4 exam rooms, 2 front desk, 1 scanner station, 2 nursing stations, 1 laptop for PFTs, and my office). If I were smarter, I would start using Sharepoint more - it really has a lot of nice features. Other projects I fiddle around with are a managed switch to subdivide the network - I would really like to use a virtual switch for the virtual PCs and this should speed things up.

Wow, I can't keep up with that. But, that seems very little like Dog's. I'm surprised you have trouble with Medware, given it is the only app left that I use that is a standalone program. You run it completely from the server as you already know.

The thing about SharePoint, like my sushi analogy, is you just can't explain it. You have to use it. And, the more computer illiterate your staff is (not yours), the better a product it is. It is so cool to be able to click on an icon at home, and get right into SharePoint with EVERYTHING, every file, every form, every phone number right in front of me.

That's over a VPN?

We use logmein andthat givens them access to EVERYTHING as well, certainly any file that's accessible at work is accessible from home. But there is a bit of a remote-feel to it, is that what you're saying is better, that sharepoint is a way to access stuff remotely with a local app?

No, VPN is way too slow. It's directly via web browser over SSL.

It's probably not fair, hence the sushi reference. Hard to know what it is until you try it, then you love it.

Or hate it.

Sounds like you aren't going to use SBS, which is fine.

We use RDC, LMI and RWW to get into the full computer, use AC and other apps.

I remember seven years ago and IT friend of mine telling me after Microsoft Back Office went of date that I needed two things. SBS 2003 at the time and SharePoint. Try as he might, he couldn't explain it. You just can't explain how helpful SharePoint is until you use it.

If you ever change and go to SBS or you can add it to Standard 2008 versions, feel free to let me remote in and show you it in action.

Good luck with your setup. I guess if you go that route, you can always upgrade to a server and still use that computer.

My only caveat would be to not use that computer as anything other than a main computer.

Keep in mind my rules of three when it comes to advice on a network or computers:

1. The person will always try to get you t buy what they like, hence SBS for me, different for dog.
2. Above is not a bad thing if THEY are the ones helping to maintain it, because I would be lost in Dog's system, but know SBS backwards and forwards.
3. People love spending other people's money on things they would love to have. Kind of living through you.

PS You probably won't need this without a full network domain, but if you ever have issues with the network, it is always DNS, DNS, DNS and then anything else. But after you try something else to fix it, go back to DNS. Won't make sense to you now, but it will if you go server/client. In fact, I would get a book on DNS, lol.

Application Sharing is to share or broadcast if that makes it easier to understand, thin client is another name that it goes by. It means whatever applications you have installed on the server that is serving in this roll. From the workstation level it means that the applications are not at all installed on them. There are many ways to sharing applications on the server as long as the application is compatible for said technology. Citrix, M$, Elusiva, 2X and there are others can provide application sharing. Citrix is the pioneer in this arena in fact M$ first licensed it from Citrix with the roll out of M$ Windows Server 2000. Coming from the Point of Sales industry background I have been doing this since the early 90?s. There are many benefits when using shared applications as I have mentioned previously, a couple more that I didn?t mention the requirement for a workstation is minimal you can get by with a slow junky Win 98 PC and once it connect to it?s session it will run as fast as the server is setup to. Also, is you can access shared apps using a web browser.

I have seen it so many times you start out cheap then realize that in the course of getting your system to run for you business needs, in most cases you end up buying a server and then another. When you should just bite the bullet and do it right from the start. I mean AC is one of the least expensive EHR systems out there. On average most other ones that I work with start at $8k to $10k per provider and then there is additional fees for the hardware and fees for how many workstations that you have using it. Not to mention the fees in rolling it out. AC as you know only has a onetime fee per provider and then just annual support. What I am getting at is with AC and spending then money for a good server and network rolled out by a qualified IT firm you still won?t be spending very much in comparison to what I have seen out there.

As for FaxMaker it only runs $109 per user and since it can run with SMTP you don?t need M$ Exchange Server. We have it running with other clinics integrated with the Gmail. Depending on the amount of fax lines we have FM running on just MT9234MU USB Modem the run only $125. As for server you can get them on the cheap by not buying new. There is nothing wrong with Dell Acutions and Ebay just make sure what to buy and you can find then still under warranty. I have seen great servers for under $500.

I love share point but, like pretty much what everyone says you can?t just walk up and start using it, and from what I have learned working with most doctors just want there stuff to be like a switch ?when you flip it on it works and they do not care to learn anything new? Not to mention the staff tend to fight change as well.
One important thing that all should consider is web filtering. I am seeing a rise on the amount of the workforce that is wasting company time with Facebook, youtube and so forth. And trying to place a program each workstation is too time consuming to use. I use Untangle it?s cheap and does so much more than just web filtering.

Just my 2 cents
-Dog