From: Howard Lowndes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>I am trying to put together a cost comparison for a client
>comparing the
>costs of going down the wholly M$ path as against the Linux servers/M$
>desktop path.
>
>The client is a small office setup with around 10
>workstations. They will
>want a permanent Internet connection and the plan is to connect them
>through BPD so they will be running their own mail server, and later on
>their own low volume web server. Ignore the desktops, they will be
>staying M$.
>
>
>I have a good idea what the Linux costings will work out at,
>but I am not
>too sure of the M$ costs. If anyone has any info in this
>field they would
>care to impart I would be grateful.
>
>The areas I am looking at are:
>
>Firewalls and Internet connectivity. What does M$ need here?
>
>Licence fees. I can get these worked out.
>
>Mail server. Does M$ need Win2K server and M$ Exchange server?
>
>Internal file & print server. I assume Win2K server will do here.
>
>What does it cost for this lot to be set up by a COMPETENT M$ bod?
>
>Costs of maintenance and support down the line and ease of remote
>maintenance.
I would recommend against having the same machine offering your firewalling
capability and your internal F&P. Separate the two boxes (for security more
than anything else). Clients will probably want to tinker with the F&P
machine by setting up new shares and users while they won't have the same
incentive to tinker with the Firewall machine. If you use one machine then
there is a chance that they'll create a security nightmare unless they are
well clued up on what they are doing.
On that note, I'd be looking a long way before going past Linux on the
firewall machine. Win2k can do the NAT etc natively (using RRAS) but you'll
need a third party product to do proper mail serving - the SMTP server that
comes with Win2k is only an MTA and has no MDA or MUA with it. Exchange is
usually massive overkill for a small company. Remote admin comes with Win2k
through Terminal Services (it's free for admin only use), so no cost
advantage here for Linux.
As for the F&P machine, if you clients are already familiar with Windows
then you may find it better to install a Win2k machine as a server.
Remember that they will probably be wanting to create shares, printers and
other things by themselves at some stage and familiarity with the system can
save a lot of headaches later on. Personally I'd be more comfortable
leaving a client familiar with Windows with a Windows server so they can do
a limited amount of stuff themselves, and a Linux machine as a firewall and
warn them to touch it at their own risk (maybe offer a web page to maintain
POP users).
Of course if there is anyone there familiar with Samba and Unix then go a
Linux solution.
Costs for Win2k are pretty easy to work out - look at Microsoft's site for
RRP and bulk costings. Cost for installation - I'd probably charge about
$500 to $750 for installation of the two machines, depending on how
difficult their physical network topology is and how much training they
needed.
Hope this helps,
John Wiltshire
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
More Info: http://slug.org.au/lists/listinfo/slug
