Bah.
It's just about automation. I don't believe in repeating things time after time after time after.well, you get the idea. SCE does everything I ever wrote, and does it better. And it's cheaper than I am, too. J Regards, Michael B. Smith MCSE/Exchange MVP http://TheEssentialExchange.com From: Carl Webster [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2008 1:14 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: 175 servers If you are as good as Shook, then 175 admins. If you are a scripting god like MBS, then 1 maybe 2 (just so he can have someone to talk to). Webster ----- Original Message ---- From: David Lum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: 175 servers Here's an open-ended question, but with 175 Windows servers, how many admins would you think it would take to maintain OS images, patches, availability, installed program updates, as well as other maintenance like inventory of both hardware and software, as well as troubleshooting various performance issues? I'm talking admins who's job would be just to handle the underlying Windows infrastructure, not the apps running on it (except for the initial install). FWIW 95% of the servers are local. We have SMS and WSUS to leverage some of this, but SMS is currently very underutilized. I ask because we have about 250 employees - so a fairly small company, but we have 175+ Windows servers, plus 4 SAN's because our main product is currently web delivered, I'm wondering if we're overstaffed or understaffed or someone in the "normal" range. I would expect that in a more typical file/print/Exchange/SharePoint (intranet) environment that 175 servers would mean a few thousand end users and thus perhaps a dozen IS staff. ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm> ~
