Home Forums SBS2016

Bert -- or anyone--
Does anyone have experience with SBS2016 (essentials version)
I am mostly intrigued by it because supposedly Win 10 is more secure than win 7, and supposedly it runs better with Win10 clients.

Also, I want to try running a PCI-express SSD drive, supposedly for increased performance-- and I read that Win7 (SBS2008 essentials) won't boot from the PCI-express slot.

comments?

I don't know about the other part, but Windows doesn't make a true SBS anymore. There is no Small Business Server 2016.

What most people have currently, if they are up to date would be Windows Server 2012 R2 on an array with Windows Server 2012 Essentials using Hyper-V. You then set up your VMs. You would have your OS on one partition and possibly three or four VMs on the other. You could separate out things such as AC on one, billing on another, etc.

There is now 2016. This is similar but it has containers (can't get into that right now) and is cloud connected.

An SSD on a PCI-e could be faster, but it is awfully expensive.

For more info contact Luthra-Tech.

-- It seems like this is about the same thing as my SBS "Essentials" ---up to 25 computers and 50 devices, no CALS, no Email, etc.

I downloaded a trial copy (free) but I can't tell how much it costs to buy it. Aside from verifying that it will boot, I haven't done anything with it yet. It is win10 based, for better or worse.

PCIExpress SSD's not much more than the standard SATA drive now -- the reviews claim that they are just blindingly fast, but we'll see about that.

Read the posts above about LAN bottlenecks -- my IT consult thinks it is the switch in our case, but he hasn't tested it. It's supposed to be a Gigabit switch, but I see there are many factors in play that I don't know about.

Intrigued about VM's. Do you mean that if I put AC on one VM, Medware on another, Quickbooks on a third, that I would find that things speed up? Does each VM need its own operating system?
Years ago I played with VirtualBox, and I could put a copy of the same Windows operating system that was hosting VB for the Windows virtual machine, and a copy of Linux on a second VM. It was amusing, but not very effective.

What do you do now? Does VirtualBox still work? Is it still free?

Tom,

I'm up and down the coast with some regularity, let me know if you want me to make the drive out to the coast sometime.

For VMs, I would recommend a Linux host, then the only OSs you have to buy are the guest OSs. Not sure about your version of Medware, but yes you can easily use a desktop OS for Quickbooks, and probably for Medware.

That way the only server OS you need is for AC (and the domain controller, AD, etc)

It makes reverting a upgrade that goes bad as easily as copying back a cop of the VM. It also makes evaluating new software or upgrades far easier.

Linux as a host is about 1-3% load, so effectively transparent. There are also binary pass-through drivers for Windows now.

That is rather inexpensive for the PCI-e. Not sure how many people run them in an array. The problem with PCI-e is your can't run the hard drive in bays for hot swapping.

I don't know if it will be any faster in each VM, it just keeps it cleaner. Besides moving the VMs, it is nice to be able to make a snapshot of AC in a separate VM so you can go back if you need to without causing another app to go back as well.

It may be like your SBS, etc., but Small Business Server, by definition, came with certain server products like Exchange and SharePoint and was designed to set up everything with wizards.

Thank you, gentlemen.
I'm researching, evaluating.
Hard to beat SBS11Essentials and AC6.3.3, but time marches on, and I may be forced to upgrade after all.

My main concern is downtime.
I also don't like cloud solutions -- don't trust.
So I move slowly from one strong position to another.

I can confirm from multiple instances, AC will run faster on a peer-to-peer 'server' than it will on a machine that is running all of the other services that Bert alluded to, so separating them into separate VMs is preferable for MANY reasons.

For simplicity and reliability, 6.3.3 is still the gold standard in my mind. Damn near bulletproof and MUCH less troubled with destructive Meaningless Use.

Intrigued about VM's. Do you mean that if I put AC on one VM, Medware on another, Quickbooks on a third, that I would find that things speed up? Does each VM need its own operating system?

With the advent of Servers 2012 R2, VMs and licensing, etc. became a little less straightforward. After a while it makes sense. For people like Indy, Sandeep and professional IT people, it is nothing. For me, I still wonder if I understand completely.

Basically, with you purchase Windows Server 2012 R2 (now 2016), you get one license and 2012 R2 Server as the host. When you enable Hyper-V, you can then add VMs. Everything runs in VMs on SSDs/HDDs, etc. Some will use SSDs, and then get a huge 4 TB drive for storage or data.

Server 2012 comes with two VM licenses and each of those come with Server 2012 OS. You can purchase more VMs two at a time. Some will run regular OS such as Win 7 or Win 10. Those you would have to purchase. I would recommend Win 10 if you go that route. You could use Windows Essentials in one of your VMs and use it as your system drive.

Server 2012 will also allow you to back up your clients to it, hence having a large drive. The advantages of a VM are endless. You can make them smaller or larger on the fly. Move them. They don't even have to be on similar software. Running one major app/database on one VM, as Indy stated, has many advantages. For one thing, the snapshots are invaluable. Install a new version. Everything gets screwed up. Just revert back to the snapshot. Get a virus. Revert back to a snapshot. But, snapshots don't take the place of backups. And backups don't take the place of snapshots.

With 2016, you will get Windows Server containers and Hyper-V containers. Containers will allow individual apps within a VM to interact with the OS separately. They are cool, but they are getting over my head.

You can use containers with Linux and with Windows. What is the difference? Sandeep will like Windows. Indy will like Linux. LOL. But, containers are something I will turn over to Sandeep or Indy.

Obviously, the other reason to go with 2016 is it is 2016.

Hi Indy--

I'm going to experiment with WinServerEssentials2016
I'm going to put AC 9.2+ on it
I'm going to put it on a new server so I can run back to 6.3.3 if it doesn't work out, if it does, then the old server will just function as a backup. I haven't had any hardware issues with SuperMicro and SamsungSSD, but I always worry -- and we are getting more and more dependent on the electronics -- so I need the security of near instantaneous backup. Our internet isn't really reliable enough to fully trust the cloud.

I really fear that MACRA and other similar programs (if they survive in the new administration) will require upgrade to 9.XXX

So if I run AC on the hardware server, can I run Medware and Quickbooks and maybe an instance of Chrome for general internet browsing to keep viruses contained in separate virtual machines on the Essentials version.
Do you use Hyper-V?
How do you set it up? Is it like VirtualBox -- just download the software?
Do office clients log in separately to all the virtual machines?

Several offices here in Astoria use AC -- and most of the them use MossyTech for IT support. If you really want to come to Astoria (it's pretty much out of the way) -- I would buy you lunch, could even put you up for the night if you wanted. I'd really like to meet you some time.

I think you are missing the role of Hyper-V. You don't need to download anything. It is all included in Hyper-V and the host.

Windows Server 2012 R2 is installed as a host. You go to the roles section and enable Hyper-V. In Hyper-V Manager, you make your VM. You then install the guest OS; in this case Microsoft will allow you two copies of Windows Server R2. You can also use a role in the server host to enable Windows Server Essentials Experience.

In order to revert to a snapshot and allow it to revert the database, it would have to be installed in a VM. The database would be there as would the AC folder. All of the clients would have to access the XML file to access the database just as now.

This is just my take on what you are trying to do, which sounds good. But, just going by my lack of experience, I know I am taking my time. It seems like you are really moving quickly in an area that has a lot to offer and many ways to do it. But, unless you are Sandeep or Indy or I am sure many others, it may be good to get more of their take. One way to look at it is that Indy certainly knows this stuff, but he spends a good deal of his time with hosting and traveling the country, etc. Sandeep only builds servers and sets up networks and other things in that realm. Not to pit one against the other. It may be a good idea to see if either can set up a plan that would best suit your situation.

I know one thing I was taught by a friend of mine that will hopefully allow me to come out ahead this time with 2016. If it is done correctly the first time (I didn't really get it that way in 2008), then you will have a lot less issues.

Just my three cents.

Few points:

1. NVMe SSD's can be used in hotswap bays. There are various form factors PCI-E/HHL AIC, M.2, and 2.5". The 2.5" form factor is what servers with hotswap bays use. The NVMe interface links directly to PCI-E. It's only supported on a handful of servers. (E.g. Dell Poweredge R830/ Lenovo System X3650 m5) You need a server with a backplane that supports NVMe 2.5" SSD's.

If you intend to use PCI-E/HHL cards in a PCI-E slot, you lose the hotswap capability and become restricted to software RAID through Windows.

2. Bert is correct on Hyper-V. You add it as a role when you install Server 2016 as the host. There is also the barebones Hyper-V Server, but I wouldn't recommend that for beginners. One of the biggest upsides (and biggest downside for larger companies) is that the VM's can be managed directly from the host. That means you don't need special knowledge of networking to find your hyper visor's IP and use something like vSphere to manage it.

3. Virtual box is a program that runs of top of windows like VMWare Workstation/Player. One of the biggest considerations that many people overlook when choosing which Hypervisor to use is the backup method. VMware and Hyper-V are well supported throughout the industry. With Hyper-V, you get the included Windows Server Backup while VMWare requires 3rd party software like Veeam. The other upside is that there are plenty of tech professionals familiar with the products.

4. We are using Server 2016 and it looks just like Windows 10. All the menus are nearly identical. One of the biggest upsides of Win 8.1/10 Pro+ was that Bitlocker was included making a lot easier for medical offices to implement full disk encryption.

5. The price difference between NVME SSD's and SATA SSD's isn't that big.
Datacenter-grade SATA SSD: $0.58/GB
Datacenter-grade NVME SSD: $0.72/GB

However, you will only find the NVME backplanes on the top lines of servers. Usually only on the rackmount versions too. That's what makes it expensive to implement. For instance the Dell R830 starts at $5799

Nuff said.

This is in no way dissing Indy. Just figured Sandeep would weigh in sometime.

Thank you again, gentlemen.
I am way ahead of where I was when I put in my SBS Essentials server a few years ago, but i am never going to be an IT pro.

We have a tiny little office, and I can't afford the time to get too involved in the hardware. And our practice isn't profitable enough to afford much in the way of IT support. If I understand what you are saying, Hyper-V is built in to the server software -- but the full scale server, not Server Essentials. I see no option for virtualizing in Essentials. So I would have to buy the Server 2016, the Server Essentials for AC and an additional OS for each virtual machine? Or does Hyper-V function like an OS?

I'm taking all this to heart, and will definitely study up -- but I think we will stay with Windows Server 2016 Essentials on a single server, and forget the virtual machines. I can' see some advantage, I think -- but since only the bookkeeper uses
Quickbooks, and only a couple of the staff routinely use Medware, it doesn't seem too logical to put those out on virtual machines.

It really doesn't matter how many use it. The advantage for the programs would still be there.

Windows Server 2016 is installed as the host. You then activate Hyper-V. Free. You then make two VMs. Free. You then load the Windows Server 2016 OS. Two free. You could run Essentials or purchase two licenses for two VMs and run Windows Server Essentials as your domain controller and AC. AC could run on one VM and Medware and Quickbooks could run on another.

If you wanted to go that route, you could hire an IT person once and have them set it up.

I won't single someone out, but I know of Docs on here who have setup Linux (easiest being Ubuntu) servers and installed virtualization in less than an hour. It isn't that hard, and saves some serious licensing money if you don't need bells and whistles.

This subject will keep coming up because folks will need new hardware, and with good reason don't want to give up on their W7 machines. Physical-to-Virtual tool, and voila, your old friend W7 on brand new hardware.

With respect, I'm not certain how installing a different hyper visor than Microsoft Hyper-V will save any licensing costs.

Regardless of hyper visor, the Windows licensing clearly states that Windows Server 2012 - 2016 allows for two virtual guest installations per physical host (server). Datacenter allows unlimited installs per physical host (server).

So if you have one physical server and are using VMWare as the hyper visor and have purchased Windows Server 2012 R2 Standard Edition, you may install Windows Server 2012 R2 Standard Edition no more than two times as a virtual guest on that physical machine. The same is true for Unbuntu, Citrix, Hyper-V, or any other hyper visor.

In regards to virtualizing Windows 7/8/10 desktop, that requires a VDA license which, IMO, is not worth the cost. Better off to go with a server.

JamesNT

Exactly.

Sandeep has said it. I have said it. You have said it.

And, I value what Indy has said. There are other ways.

This is why I continue to advise, but few listen:

WORK ON WEEKEND. A SATURDAY. A SUNDAY. BOTH. MAKE $1,000.

Then instead of making the biggest decision you will make, tech-wise, get a certified company to come out and look at your setup. Let them see your needs. Let them see AC and how it works and what it needs. Let them make suggestions.

Let them read this. Give them the options of Linux and Microsoft. Once they do their thing, if you go with Microsoft or whatever, buy the server and plug it in. Let them come over and set it up perfectly. I would tell the company you want to watch and learn.

You don't have to pay them a support contract. You don't have to use them ever again. But, if you do run into a problem, they will know your setup. And, you can at any time decide to have them work on it.

I lease an office from a FP doctor. He has a complete network. In ten years, he has only asked one question. I have never seen him work on a computer. It is all done by a company. I do think they remote to the server to check things. And, they do the backups. I remember once they installed six computers in an afternoon. They even tried to do mine, lol.

The only thing he ever asked me was to choose between the two companies on their suggestions and price. I spent, as usual, about four hours going over them and typing out my reasons. He went with the other one. Probably wise.

I enjoy tinkering with things. Fixing a broken network. But, if I worked more closely with a company, I would have nothing to work with.

A properly set up server should run months without needing any attention if set up correctly. Unfortunately, Microsoft hasn't gotten to the point that updates sometimes need a reboot.

Thank you Bert, Indy, James, Sandeep --
We had a similar discussion several years ago when I moved from desktop to server (ultimately I built a server from SuperMicro board and used SBSEssentials). Your advice proved to be excellent, and the system has been totally trouble free (at least, the hardware and OS).

Now I'm moving to AC v9.3 -- and to do so, I am building a new server -- same as the old one, with updated hardware. I am assuming that it will be similarly trouble-free, and what I read is that SSD's are pretty much bullet proof with a very low failure rate and little or no data degradation over any meaningful lifespan.

I have downloaded a trial copy of Server2016 Essentials (which is much like SBS Essentials) -- but is Win10 based. It seems slick, but I haven't really explored it. It does not include Hyper-V.

In my old setup, all office programs runs off the server directly -- no "virtual" machines. We only experience minor slowdown when 2 or 3 people are scanning large volumes of documents into Imported Items and the docs try to pull up Imported Items in an exam room at the same time. It's a matter of 5-8 seconds vs. 2-3 seconds, and not really a big deal-- especially since that only happens sporadically when there is a big backlog of scanning.

Brings me back to my initial question -- what is the point of "virtualization" in a little installation like this? I will keep the old server as a spare so we can quickly re-deploy in case of failure, but there has never actually been any failure of critical electronics in the past, and going forward, stuff seems to be even more reliable.

Furthermore, Medware has declared it is at the end of its life, and AC practice manager seems to be getting better, so we might only have AC on the server in the future.

I want to keep things as simple as possible, consistent with adequate performance, but I am always interested in learning new things. It certainly would be no real trick to use Ubuntu Server and run Essentials in a virtual machine -- but how would that actually help the office function? My copy of Essentials -- when I buy it -- will be OEM, so I assume that even if it is run in a virtual machine, it will be tied to the motherboard of the physical server, and I wouldn't be able to just arbitrarily move it to a different physical machine (e.g. in case of failure or need for hardware upgrade).

BTW -- if you get tired of this conversation, just stop -- I won't be offended!

Dr. Duncan,

There are very good reasons for virtualization.

1. It makes backup so, so, so much easier. Rather than backing up a bare metal install where every little file has to be backed up and checkpointed, the backup software has to deal with only the virtual disk and the half dozen settings file of the virtual machine. It's also much more efficient for offsite backup.

2. It makes restoring from backup so, so, so much easier. Rather than restoring thousands of files, you restore one virtual disk. DONE.

3. You can checkpoint a virtual machine. What this means is let's say you want to install a new software but you aren't sure about it. Create a checkpoint of the virtual machine of the current state. If you install the software and it falls apart, revert back to the checkpoint. DONE. System back online the exact way it was before the install messed it up.

4. Much more efficient use of resources. You get better utilization of hardware (CPU, RAM especially) which means more bang for the buck.

5. Upgrading hardware becomes so, so, so much easier. Set up new server. Install base OS. Enable Hyper-V. Migrate virtual machines over. DONE. No more re-installing all your applications just to get a new server. No more all-or-nothing upgrades where you have to do the hardware and OS at the same time because the older OS won't run on the newer hardware.

6. You can separate applications that have different requirements but still keep them on the same physical server. For example, it's not a good idea to have Exchange and SQL Server on the same installation of Windows. Before, that meant two physical boxes. Today, I can still separate them into two different installs but still keep them on the same box. SAVINGS.

Virtualization is the ONLY friend you will ever have that is a better friend to you than all of us on this board.

Give in. Join the Dark Side. You have virtual friends you never new you had. All you need is a copy of Windows Server 2016 Standard Edition and your life will be complete.

Hear the call.

JamesNT

Dr. Duncan,

By the way, you are correct. OEM installs are tied to the machine they come with. They cannot be moved.

I recommend Open licenses when possible as they can be moved.

JamesNT

My friend James makes several excellent points about virtualization.

For comparisons sake, there is very little left that VMware does, that KVM [Linux kernel based virtualization] doesn't also do FOR FREE. Most of that doesn't apply to small medical practices.

Another key value of KVM virtualization is being able to move VMs from host to host transparently. All of the hardware connections are abstracted, so the VM doesn't know if you changed network adapters, drives, OS, etc.

One thing I would disagree with my esteemed colleague is there is a better friend that virtualization; a good working dog. I think Leslie would back me up on this one. My Australian Shepherd never failed me. :-)

I am very happy to concede that point.

JamesNT

In response, <while I'm sitting on a VM waiting for an eRX test> The saving of licensing costs is not paying for a server license if you don't need it, or perhaps more importantly, don't want to introduce un-needed complexity into a practice, which can be a significant hidden cost.

KVM has no OS costs, no licensing costs, no VM limits, etc. Other than perhaps James, who has servers with YEARS of uptime - no reboots required on patching, upgrading? The only time I have had to take down a linux server in the last 17 years was to replace hardware, or move it.

As to Microsoft's attempts to limit how users choose to employ purchased licenses, software companies are not having success in that arena, and those sections are being considered an unenforceable constraint of trade. Imagine if Home Depot sold you a shovel, but tried to prevent you from using it in your front yard, only your back.

For many practices W7 Enterprise is a better investment than a server license. Much lower cost of ownership.

In related news, The Borg have decided to port SQL Server to Linux.

https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/sql-server/sql-server-vnext-including-Linux

Prayed to my porcelain god when I saw that one.

JamesNT

Tom, I have to admit I am confused. I appreciate the thanks for the advice. I guess I don't completely understand why you ask. I know you get the other options and then decide which one you want. But, you have all the gurus (and then there is I) advising virtualization. It is the wave of the future. If you want to future proof yourself, that is the way to go.

James summed it up beautifully. Especially the moving to another server. Especially going back to a snapshot. Just being able to make a snapshot, installing 9.3, finding out it sucks and then just going back to the previous snapshot. Now, you have to install it over 6.33, and if it doesn't work, you have the pain of trying to go back.

Say you have SQL Server, Exchange, AC, Medware all in separate VMs. OK, maybe you don't need all those. If you do, you add more. If you backup clients to one VM on a large hard drive, and one has a virus, go back to the snapshot. Don't worry about the virus. And, it is isolated in that VM.

It's one thing to get advice here. But, imagine James being at your office and demonstrating it. I mean there are some things you can learn on here. But, you wouldn't build a house from here. Or do all your retirement planning.

I just never understand why people don't want to use professionals. And, it should have nothing to do with the cost.

I think you hit the nail on the head when you state you don't know why your office would need virtualization. It has nothing to do with the size of the office. It's the quality of the product. You don't need a $100,000 antivirus suite like a hospital. But, you do need a $500 one. Trust me, it took me a while to get Hyper-V and virtualization to where I had my head around it.

And then there are containers. To keep software separate from using the same resources. A whole other toy. And, only in 2016.