SBS 2003 + Terminal Server

Our company is in process to implement Great Plains and MS Solutions Partner 
suggested  next configuration:
1 server - WS 2003 standart (Terminal Server)
2 server - WS 2003 Standart + SQL 2000.
Is it possible to use on server 2 Small Business Server 2003 Premium ? What 
about problems with domain?

Regards, 

0
olman (6)
2/8/2005 6:21:01 PM
greatplains 29623 articles. 3 followers. Follow

12 Replies
987 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 33

I do not believe it is possible to have two machines running Windows SBS 
2003 because each machine will want to be the domain controller.

I think you'd be better off with:
Machine 1: Windows 2003 with Terminal Services
Machine 2: Windows 2003 with SQL Server. This machine can also be your 
domain controller, file server, print server, etc. However, unless you have 
a small amount of users, I don't recommend you run Exchange on it.

"Olman" <Olman@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message 
news:2908E3AE-B28C-43C1-9D1A-125CF60B275F@microsoft.com...
> Our company is in process to implement Great Plains and MS Solutions 
> Partner
> suggested  next configuration:
> 1 server - WS 2003 standart (Terminal Server)
> 2 server - WS 2003 Standart + SQL 2000.
> Is it possible to use on server 2 Small Business Server 2003 Premium ? 
> What
> about problems with domain?
>
> Regards,
> 


0
callen1071 (408)
2/8/2005 7:24:13 PM
Thanks,
but only SBS would run as application server.
After digging around I found answer, I guess:
-SBS 2003 as Application server (PDC, SQL)
-Server Standart as Terminal server ( possible with Exchange )
and in future I going to install backup server.
Only I am not shure what hardware I need. Now I have:
Terminal Server - PE1850/2.8GHZ/4G/2x36Gb
Application Server - PE2850/3.0GHZ/1G/3x146Gb
Is it enought?

"Charles Allen" wrote:

> I do not believe it is possible to have two machines running Windows SBS 
> 2003 because each machine will want to be the domain controller.
> 
> I think you'd be better off with:
> Machine 1: Windows 2003 with Terminal Services
> Machine 2: Windows 2003 with SQL Server. This machine can also be your 
> domain controller, file server, print server, etc. However, unless you have 
> a small amount of users, I don't recommend you run Exchange on it.
> 
> "Olman" <Olman@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message 
> news:2908E3AE-B28C-43C1-9D1A-125CF60B275F@microsoft.com...
> > Our company is in process to implement Great Plains and MS Solutions 
> > Partner
> > suggested  next configuration:
> > 1 server - WS 2003 standart (Terminal Server)
> > 2 server - WS 2003 Standart + SQL 2000.
> > Is it possible to use on server 2 Small Business Server 2003 Premium ? 
> > What
> > about problems with domain?
> >
> > Regards,
> > 
> 
> 
> 
0
olman (6)
2/8/2005 8:33:01 PM
I think we're on the same page although I was really recommending Windows 
2003 Server, not SBS. The problem with SBS is it wants to be the domain 
controller. You could always move the SQL Server engine to another machine 
should circumstances require it.

However, no way in the world would I run Exchange Server and Terminal Server 
on the same machine. No way, no how.

If you are going to purchase SBS, I would use that machine for the Domain 
Controller, SQL Server, and Exchange Server and I would at least have dual 
processors.

The hardware seems good but it all depends on how many SQL users, how many 
Exchange clients, how many Terminal Server users, etc.

"Olman" <Olman@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message 
news:1FFAFB62-A04B-4992-AFFF-0C14EC15CB5D@microsoft.com...
> Thanks,
> but only SBS would run as application server.
> After digging around I found answer, I guess:
> -SBS 2003 as Application server (PDC, SQL)
> -Server Standart as Terminal server ( possible with Exchange )
> and in future I going to install backup server.
> Only I am not shure what hardware I need. Now I have:
> Terminal Server - PE1850/2.8GHZ/4G/2x36Gb
> Application Server - PE2850/3.0GHZ/1G/3x146Gb
> Is it enought?
>
> "Charles Allen" wrote:
>
>> I do not believe it is possible to have two machines running Windows SBS
>> 2003 because each machine will want to be the domain controller.
>>
>> I think you'd be better off with:
>> Machine 1: Windows 2003 with Terminal Services
>> Machine 2: Windows 2003 with SQL Server. This machine can also be your
>> domain controller, file server, print server, etc. However, unless you 
>> have
>> a small amount of users, I don't recommend you run Exchange on it.
>>
>> "Olman" <Olman@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:2908E3AE-B28C-43C1-9D1A-125CF60B275F@microsoft.com...
>> > Our company is in process to implement Great Plains and MS Solutions
>> > Partner
>> > suggested  next configuration:
>> > 1 server - WS 2003 standart (Terminal Server)
>> > 2 server - WS 2003 Standart + SQL 2000.
>> > Is it possible to use on server 2 Small Business Server 2003 Premium ?
>> > What
>> > about problems with domain?
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> >
>>
>>
>> 


0
callen1071 (408)
2/9/2005 4:16:17 AM
Thank you,
you are right about circumstances.
By the way cost of system with two Standart Servers, SQL Server, CALs for 
Server, SQL, Exchange much higher then one Standart Server, SBS, CALs for SBS 
8(
We have less than 50 users, 15 of them will use Terminal sessions (Great 
Plains).
I am considering to move two small applications (MS Access) to ASP.NET+SQL
I know that we are don't plan to grow more than 75 users in nearest 3 years.
How you think, will SBS be enough for this environment?

Oleg

"Charles Allen" wrote:

> I think we're on the same page although I was really recommending Windows 
> 2003 Server, not SBS. The problem with SBS is it wants to be the domain 
> controller. You could always move the SQL Server engine to another machine 
> should circumstances require it.
> 
> However, no way in the world would I run Exchange Server and Terminal Server 
> on the same machine. No way, no how.
> 
> If you are going to purchase SBS, I would use that machine for the Domain 
> Controller, SQL Server, and Exchange Server and I would at least have dual 
> processors.
> 
> The hardware seems good but it all depends on how many SQL users, how many 
> Exchange clients, how many Terminal Server users, etc.
> 
> "Olman" <Olman@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message 
> news:1FFAFB62-A04B-4992-AFFF-0C14EC15CB5D@microsoft.com...
> > Thanks,
> > but only SBS would run as application server.
> > After digging around I found answer, I guess:
> > -SBS 2003 as Application server (PDC, SQL)
> > -Server Standart as Terminal server ( possible with Exchange )
> > and in future I going to install backup server.
> > Only I am not shure what hardware I need. Now I have:
> > Terminal Server - PE1850/2.8GHZ/4G/2x36Gb
> > Application Server - PE2850/3.0GHZ/1G/3x146Gb
> > Is it enought?
> >
> > "Charles Allen" wrote:
> >
> >> I do not believe it is possible to have two machines running Windows SBS
> >> 2003 because each machine will want to be the domain controller.
> >>
> >> I think you'd be better off with:
> >> Machine 1: Windows 2003 with Terminal Services
> >> Machine 2: Windows 2003 with SQL Server. This machine can also be your
> >> domain controller, file server, print server, etc. However, unless you 
> >> have
> >> a small amount of users, I don't recommend you run Exchange on it.
> >>
> >> "Olman" <Olman@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> news:2908E3AE-B28C-43C1-9D1A-125CF60B275F@microsoft.com...
> >> > Our company is in process to implement Great Plains and MS Solutions
> >> > Partner
> >> > suggested  next configuration:
> >> > 1 server - WS 2003 standart (Terminal Server)
> >> > 2 server - WS 2003 Standart + SQL 2000.
> >> > Is it possible to use on server 2 Small Business Server 2003 Premium ?
> >> > What
> >> > about problems with domain?
> >> >
> >> > Regards,
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> 
> 
> 
> 
0
olman (6)
2/9/2005 10:09:07 PM
Hi

Are the clients local or remote? Is there a reason to have users using GP 
via TS server.    We have many clients using SBS2003 on the following setup, 
bases on 20plus Great Plains users and PA module (TS cals are not included 
on SBS):

SBS2003 server (mid-point spec with 3GB RAM )
AD
Exhange
Sharepoints services  preinstalls by SBS wizard (Business Portal)

Windows 2003 Std Server (mid point spec)
SQL 2000 Std Edition  (License from SBS2003)

SBS2003 is good enought for up to 50 domain users (i think).


Regards

James




"Olman" <Olman@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message 
news:723FF4B4-FC63-45DC-81A6-1627A24804D6@microsoft.com...
> Thank you,
> you are right about circumstances.
> By the way cost of system with two Standart Servers, SQL Server, CALs for
> Server, SQL, Exchange much higher then one Standart Server, SBS, CALs for 
> SBS
> 8(
> We have less than 50 users, 15 of them will use Terminal sessions (Great
> Plains).
> I am considering to move two small applications (MS Access) to ASP.NET+SQL
> I know that we are don't plan to grow more than 75 users in nearest 3 
> years.
> How you think, will SBS be enough for this environment?
>
> Oleg
>
> "Charles Allen" wrote:
>
>> I think we're on the same page although I was really recommending Windows
>> 2003 Server, not SBS. The problem with SBS is it wants to be the domain
>> controller. You could always move the SQL Server engine to another 
>> machine
>> should circumstances require it.
>>
>> However, no way in the world would I run Exchange Server and Terminal 
>> Server
>> on the same machine. No way, no how.
>>
>> If you are going to purchase SBS, I would use that machine for the Domain
>> Controller, SQL Server, and Exchange Server and I would at least have 
>> dual
>> processors.
>>
>> The hardware seems good but it all depends on how many SQL users, how 
>> many
>> Exchange clients, how many Terminal Server users, etc.
>>
>> "Olman" <Olman@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:1FFAFB62-A04B-4992-AFFF-0C14EC15CB5D@microsoft.com...
>> > Thanks,
>> > but only SBS would run as application server.
>> > After digging around I found answer, I guess:
>> > -SBS 2003 as Application server (PDC, SQL)
>> > -Server Standart as Terminal server ( possible with Exchange )
>> > and in future I going to install backup server.
>> > Only I am not shure what hardware I need. Now I have:
>> > Terminal Server - PE1850/2.8GHZ/4G/2x36Gb
>> > Application Server - PE2850/3.0GHZ/1G/3x146Gb
>> > Is it enought?
>> >
>> > "Charles Allen" wrote:
>> >
>> >> I do not believe it is possible to have two machines running Windows 
>> >> SBS
>> >> 2003 because each machine will want to be the domain controller.
>> >>
>> >> I think you'd be better off with:
>> >> Machine 1: Windows 2003 with Terminal Services
>> >> Machine 2: Windows 2003 with SQL Server. This machine can also be your
>> >> domain controller, file server, print server, etc. However, unless you
>> >> have
>> >> a small amount of users, I don't recommend you run Exchange on it.
>> >>
>> >> "Olman" <Olman@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> >> news:2908E3AE-B28C-43C1-9D1A-125CF60B275F@microsoft.com...
>> >> > Our company is in process to implement Great Plains and MS Solutions
>> >> > Partner
>> >> > suggested  next configuration:
>> >> > 1 server - WS 2003 standart (Terminal Server)
>> >> > 2 server - WS 2003 Standart + SQL 2000.
>> >> > Is it possible to use on server 2 Small Business Server 2003 Premium 
>> >> > ?
>> >> > What
>> >> > about problems with domain?
>> >> >
>> >> > Regards,
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>>
>> 


0
2/10/2005 3:25:07 PM
Hi,
they are 50/50 - thank you, good point, on local network we don't need to 
use TS.
I like SBS - everything trought one CAL.
In case Windows 2003 Std Server I gues we would need:
-two of them
- CAL for every AD user
-SQL 2000
- CAL for every sql users (how many I don't know for Great Plains)
- Exchange Server
- CAL for every echange user
plus TS and CALs for it.

Oh, Sharepoint server! I guess it is not included in Standard Server.

Am I right?

"James" wrote:

> Hi
> 
> Are the clients local or remote? Is there a reason to have users using GP 
> via TS server.    We have many clients using SBS2003 on the following setup, 
> bases on 20plus Great Plains users and PA module (TS cals are not included 
> on SBS):
> 
> SBS2003 server (mid-point spec with 3GB RAM )
> AD
> Exhange
> Sharepoints services  preinstalls by SBS wizard (Business Portal)
> 
> Windows 2003 Std Server (mid point spec)
> SQL 2000 Std Edition  (License from SBS2003)
> 
> SBS2003 is good enought for up to 50 domain users (i think).
> 
> 
> Regards
> 
> James
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Olman" <Olman@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message 
> news:723FF4B4-FC63-45DC-81A6-1627A24804D6@microsoft.com...
> > Thank you,
> > you are right about circumstances.
> > By the way cost of system with two Standart Servers, SQL Server, CALs for
> > Server, SQL, Exchange much higher then one Standart Server, SBS, CALs for 
> > SBS
> > 8(
> > We have less than 50 users, 15 of them will use Terminal sessions (Great
> > Plains).
> > I am considering to move two small applications (MS Access) to ASP.NET+SQL
> > I know that we are don't plan to grow more than 75 users in nearest 3 
> > years.
> > How you think, will SBS be enough for this environment?
> >
> > Oleg
> >
> > "Charles Allen" wrote:
> >
> >> I think we're on the same page although I was really recommending Windows
> >> 2003 Server, not SBS. The problem with SBS is it wants to be the domain
> >> controller. You could always move the SQL Server engine to another 
> >> machine
> >> should circumstances require it.
> >>
> >> However, no way in the world would I run Exchange Server and Terminal 
> >> Server
> >> on the same machine. No way, no how.
> >>
> >> If you are going to purchase SBS, I would use that machine for the Domain
> >> Controller, SQL Server, and Exchange Server and I would at least have 
> >> dual
> >> processors.
> >>
> >> The hardware seems good but it all depends on how many SQL users, how 
> >> many
> >> Exchange clients, how many Terminal Server users, etc.
> >>
> >> "Olman" <Olman@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> news:1FFAFB62-A04B-4992-AFFF-0C14EC15CB5D@microsoft.com...
> >> > Thanks,
> >> > but only SBS would run as application server.
> >> > After digging around I found answer, I guess:
> >> > -SBS 2003 as Application server (PDC, SQL)
> >> > -Server Standart as Terminal server ( possible with Exchange )
> >> > and in future I going to install backup server.
> >> > Only I am not shure what hardware I need. Now I have:
> >> > Terminal Server - PE1850/2.8GHZ/4G/2x36Gb
> >> > Application Server - PE2850/3.0GHZ/1G/3x146Gb
> >> > Is it enought?
> >> >
> >> > "Charles Allen" wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> I do not believe it is possible to have two machines running Windows 
> >> >> SBS
> >> >> 2003 because each machine will want to be the domain controller.
> >> >>
> >> >> I think you'd be better off with:
> >> >> Machine 1: Windows 2003 with Terminal Services
> >> >> Machine 2: Windows 2003 with SQL Server. This machine can also be your
> >> >> domain controller, file server, print server, etc. However, unless you
> >> >> have
> >> >> a small amount of users, I don't recommend you run Exchange on it.
> >> >>
> >> >> "Olman" <Olman@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> >> news:2908E3AE-B28C-43C1-9D1A-125CF60B275F@microsoft.com...
> >> >> > Our company is in process to implement Great Plains and MS Solutions
> >> >> > Partner
> >> >> > suggested  next configuration:
> >> >> > 1 server - WS 2003 standart (Terminal Server)
> >> >> > 2 server - WS 2003 Standart + SQL 2000.
> >> >> > Is it possible to use on server 2 Small Business Server 2003 Premium 
> >> >> > ?
> >> >> > What
> >> >> > about problems with domain?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Regards,
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 
> 
> 
> 
0
olman (6)
2/10/2005 10:15:03 PM
James,
It sounds like you've done several TS installs of GP.  I tried installing it 
on Windows 2003 but keep getting Dexterity Errors because it can't find the 
dictionaries.  It is looking in C:PROGRA~1/MID1AC~1/GREATP~1/nnn.DIC instead 
of C:\Program Files\Microsoft Business Solutions\Great Plains.  Why?  Can you 
tell me how to fix this and where did it get MID1AC~1 ?
Thanks,
Ray

"Olman" wrote:

> Hi,
> they are 50/50 - thank you, good point, on local network we don't need to 
> use TS.
> I like SBS - everything trought one CAL.
> In case Windows 2003 Std Server I gues we would need:
> -two of them
> - CAL for every AD user
> -SQL 2000
> - CAL for every sql users (how many I don't know for Great Plains)
> - Exchange Server
> - CAL for every echange user
> plus TS and CALs for it.
> 
> Oh, Sharepoint server! I guess it is not included in Standard Server.
> 
> Am I right?
> 
> "James" wrote:
> 
> > Hi
> > 
> > Are the clients local or remote? Is there a reason to have users using GP 
> > via TS server.    We have many clients using SBS2003 on the following setup, 
> > bases on 20plus Great Plains users and PA module (TS cals are not included 
> > on SBS):
> > 
> > SBS2003 server (mid-point spec with 3GB RAM )
> > AD
> > Exhange
> > Sharepoints services  preinstalls by SBS wizard (Business Portal)
> > 
> > Windows 2003 Std Server (mid point spec)
> > SQL 2000 Std Edition  (License from SBS2003)
> > 
> > SBS2003 is good enought for up to 50 domain users (i think).
> > 
> > 
> > Regards
> > 
> > James
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > "Olman" <Olman@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message 
> > news:723FF4B4-FC63-45DC-81A6-1627A24804D6@microsoft.com...
> > > Thank you,
> > > you are right about circumstances.
> > > By the way cost of system with two Standart Servers, SQL Server, CALs for
> > > Server, SQL, Exchange much higher then one Standart Server, SBS, CALs for 
> > > SBS
> > > 8(
> > > We have less than 50 users, 15 of them will use Terminal sessions (Great
> > > Plains).
> > > I am considering to move two small applications (MS Access) to ASP.NET+SQL
> > > I know that we are don't plan to grow more than 75 users in nearest 3 
> > > years.
> > > How you think, will SBS be enough for this environment?
> > >
> > > Oleg
> > >
> > > "Charles Allen" wrote:
> > >
> > >> I think we're on the same page although I was really recommending Windows
> > >> 2003 Server, not SBS. The problem with SBS is it wants to be the domain
> > >> controller. You could always move the SQL Server engine to another 
> > >> machine
> > >> should circumstances require it.
> > >>
> > >> However, no way in the world would I run Exchange Server and Terminal 
> > >> Server
> > >> on the same machine. No way, no how.
> > >>
> > >> If you are going to purchase SBS, I would use that machine for the Domain
> > >> Controller, SQL Server, and Exchange Server and I would at least have 
> > >> dual
> > >> processors.
> > >>
> > >> The hardware seems good but it all depends on how many SQL users, how 
> > >> many
> > >> Exchange clients, how many Terminal Server users, etc.
> > >>
> > >> "Olman" <Olman@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> > >> news:1FFAFB62-A04B-4992-AFFF-0C14EC15CB5D@microsoft.com...
> > >> > Thanks,
> > >> > but only SBS would run as application server.
> > >> > After digging around I found answer, I guess:
> > >> > -SBS 2003 as Application server (PDC, SQL)
> > >> > -Server Standart as Terminal server ( possible with Exchange )
> > >> > and in future I going to install backup server.
> > >> > Only I am not shure what hardware I need. Now I have:
> > >> > Terminal Server - PE1850/2.8GHZ/4G/2x36Gb
> > >> > Application Server - PE2850/3.0GHZ/1G/3x146Gb
> > >> > Is it enought?
> > >> >
> > >> > "Charles Allen" wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> >> I do not believe it is possible to have two machines running Windows 
> > >> >> SBS
> > >> >> 2003 because each machine will want to be the domain controller.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> I think you'd be better off with:
> > >> >> Machine 1: Windows 2003 with Terminal Services
> > >> >> Machine 2: Windows 2003 with SQL Server. This machine can also be your
> > >> >> domain controller, file server, print server, etc. However, unless you
> > >> >> have
> > >> >> a small amount of users, I don't recommend you run Exchange on it.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> "Olman" <Olman@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> > >> >> news:2908E3AE-B28C-43C1-9D1A-125CF60B275F@microsoft.com...
> > >> >> > Our company is in process to implement Great Plains and MS Solutions
> > >> >> > Partner
> > >> >> > suggested  next configuration:
> > >> >> > 1 server - WS 2003 standart (Terminal Server)
> > >> >> > 2 server - WS 2003 Standart + SQL 2000.
> > >> >> > Is it possible to use on server 2 Small Business Server 2003 Premium 
> > >> >> > ?
> > >> >> > What
> > >> >> > about problems with domain?
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > Regards,
> > >> >> >
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> 
> > 
> > 
> > 
0
RayBarker (6)
5/5/2005 8:04:01 PM
Hi

You need to edit the Dynamics.set file and change the location of the Dic 
files  - example:

:C:Program Files/Microsoft Business Solutions/Great Plains/*.dic files.

Dynamics.set file is a launch file for Great Plains.

Sometimes users share the reports and forms.dic files on the network, 
double check if thats the case.

-- 
Regards

James[MVP]
Visit MBS Blog Central

http://mbscentral.blogs.com


"Ray Barker" <RayBarker@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message 
news:701752CC-2996-401F-B9BB-4202BA19EF83@microsoft.com...
> James,
> It sounds like you've done several TS installs of GP.  I tried installing 
> it
> on Windows 2003 but keep getting Dexterity Errors because it can't find 
> the
> dictionaries.  It is looking in C:PROGRA~1/MID1AC~1/GREATP~1/nnn.DIC 
> instead
> of C:\Program Files\Microsoft Business Solutions\Great Plains.  Why?  Can 
> you
> tell me how to fix this and where did it get MID1AC~1 ?
> Thanks,
> Ray
>
> "Olman" wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> they are 50/50 - thank you, good point, on local network we don't need to
>> use TS.
>> I like SBS - everything trought one CAL.
>> In case Windows 2003 Std Server I gues we would need:
>> -two of them
>> - CAL for every AD user
>> -SQL 2000
>> - CAL for every sql users (how many I don't know for Great Plains)
>> - Exchange Server
>> - CAL for every echange user
>> plus TS and CALs for it.
>>
>> Oh, Sharepoint server! I guess it is not included in Standard Server.
>>
>> Am I right?
>>
>> "James" wrote:
>>
>> > Hi
>> >
>> > Are the clients local or remote? Is there a reason to have users using 
>> > GP
>> > via TS server.    We have many clients using SBS2003 on the following 
>> > setup,
>> > bases on 20plus Great Plains users and PA module (TS cals are not 
>> > included
>> > on SBS):
>> >
>> > SBS2003 server (mid-point spec with 3GB RAM )
>> > AD
>> > Exhange
>> > Sharepoints services  preinstalls by SBS wizard (Business Portal)
>> >
>> > Windows 2003 Std Server (mid point spec)
>> > SQL 2000 Std Edition  (License from SBS2003)
>> >
>> > SBS2003 is good enought for up to 50 domain users (i think).
>> >
>> >
>> > Regards
>> >
>> > James
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > "Olman" <Olman@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> > news:723FF4B4-FC63-45DC-81A6-1627A24804D6@microsoft.com...
>> > > Thank you,
>> > > you are right about circumstances.
>> > > By the way cost of system with two Standart Servers, SQL Server, CALs 
>> > > for
>> > > Server, SQL, Exchange much higher then one Standart Server, SBS, CALs 
>> > > for
>> > > SBS
>> > > 8(
>> > > We have less than 50 users, 15 of them will use Terminal sessions 
>> > > (Great
>> > > Plains).
>> > > I am considering to move two small applications (MS Access) to 
>> > > ASP.NET+SQL
>> > > I know that we are don't plan to grow more than 75 users in nearest 3
>> > > years.
>> > > How you think, will SBS be enough for this environment?
>> > >
>> > > Oleg
>> > >
>> > > "Charles Allen" wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> I think we're on the same page although I was really recommending 
>> > >> Windows
>> > >> 2003 Server, not SBS. The problem with SBS is it wants to be the 
>> > >> domain
>> > >> controller. You could always move the SQL Server engine to another
>> > >> machine
>> > >> should circumstances require it.
>> > >>
>> > >> However, no way in the world would I run Exchange Server and 
>> > >> Terminal
>> > >> Server
>> > >> on the same machine. No way, no how.
>> > >>
>> > >> If you are going to purchase SBS, I would use that machine for the 
>> > >> Domain
>> > >> Controller, SQL Server, and Exchange Server and I would at least 
>> > >> have
>> > >> dual
>> > >> processors.
>> > >>
>> > >> The hardware seems good but it all depends on how many SQL users, 
>> > >> how
>> > >> many
>> > >> Exchange clients, how many Terminal Server users, etc.
>> > >>
>> > >> "Olman" <Olman@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> > >> news:1FFAFB62-A04B-4992-AFFF-0C14EC15CB5D@microsoft.com...
>> > >> > Thanks,
>> > >> > but only SBS would run as application server.
>> > >> > After digging around I found answer, I guess:
>> > >> > -SBS 2003 as Application server (PDC, SQL)
>> > >> > -Server Standart as Terminal server ( possible with Exchange )
>> > >> > and in future I going to install backup server.
>> > >> > Only I am not shure what hardware I need. Now I have:
>> > >> > Terminal Server - PE1850/2.8GHZ/4G/2x36Gb
>> > >> > Application Server - PE2850/3.0GHZ/1G/3x146Gb
>> > >> > Is it enought?
>> > >> >
>> > >> > "Charles Allen" wrote:
>> > >> >
>> > >> >> I do not believe it is possible to have two machines running 
>> > >> >> Windows
>> > >> >> SBS
>> > >> >> 2003 because each machine will want to be the domain controller.
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >> I think you'd be better off with:
>> > >> >> Machine 1: Windows 2003 with Terminal Services
>> > >> >> Machine 2: Windows 2003 with SQL Server. This machine can also be 
>> > >> >> your
>> > >> >> domain controller, file server, print server, etc. However, 
>> > >> >> unless you
>> > >> >> have
>> > >> >> a small amount of users, I don't recommend you run Exchange on 
>> > >> >> it.
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >> "Olman" <Olman@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> > >> >> news:2908E3AE-B28C-43C1-9D1A-125CF60B275F@microsoft.com...
>> > >> >> > Our company is in process to implement Great Plains and MS 
>> > >> >> > Solutions
>> > >> >> > Partner
>> > >> >> > suggested  next configuration:
>> > >> >> > 1 server - WS 2003 standart (Terminal Server)
>> > >> >> > 2 server - WS 2003 Standart + SQL 2000.
>> > >> >> > Is it possible to use on server 2 Small Business Server 2003 
>> > >> >> > Premium
>> > >> >> > ?
>> > >> >> > What
>> > >> >> > about problems with domain?
>> > >> >> >
>> > >> >> > Regards,
>> > >> >> >
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >>
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> >
>> >
>> > 


0
5/6/2005 9:50:17 AM
I have just noticed David reply to your prevouis post. hope all went well.

-- 
Regards

James[MVP]
Visit MBS Blog Central

http://mbscentral.blogs.com

"Ray Barker" <RayBarker@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message 
news:701752CC-2996-401F-B9BB-4202BA19EF83@microsoft.com...
> James,
> It sounds like you've done several TS installs of GP.  I tried installing 
> it
> on Windows 2003 but keep getting Dexterity Errors because it can't find 
> the
> dictionaries.  It is looking in C:PROGRA~1/MID1AC~1/GREATP~1/nnn.DIC 
> instead
> of C:\Program Files\Microsoft Business Solutions\Great Plains.  Why?  Can 
> you
> tell me how to fix this and where did it get MID1AC~1 ?
> Thanks,
> Ray
>
> "Olman" wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> they are 50/50 - thank you, good point, on local network we don't need to
>> use TS.
>> I like SBS - everything trought one CAL.
>> In case Windows 2003 Std Server I gues we would need:
>> -two of them
>> - CAL for every AD user
>> -SQL 2000
>> - CAL for every sql users (how many I don't know for Great Plains)
>> - Exchange Server
>> - CAL for every echange user
>> plus TS and CALs for it.
>>
>> Oh, Sharepoint server! I guess it is not included in Standard Server.
>>
>> Am I right?
>>
>> "James" wrote:
>>
>> > Hi
>> >
>> > Are the clients local or remote? Is there a reason to have users using 
>> > GP
>> > via TS server.    We have many clients using SBS2003 on the following 
>> > setup,
>> > bases on 20plus Great Plains users and PA module (TS cals are not 
>> > included
>> > on SBS):
>> >
>> > SBS2003 server (mid-point spec with 3GB RAM )
>> > AD
>> > Exhange
>> > Sharepoints services  preinstalls by SBS wizard (Business Portal)
>> >
>> > Windows 2003 Std Server (mid point spec)
>> > SQL 2000 Std Edition  (License from SBS2003)
>> >
>> > SBS2003 is good enought for up to 50 domain users (i think).
>> >
>> >
>> > Regards
>> >
>> > James
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > "Olman" <Olman@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> > news:723FF4B4-FC63-45DC-81A6-1627A24804D6@microsoft.com...
>> > > Thank you,
>> > > you are right about circumstances.
>> > > By the way cost of system with two Standart Servers, SQL Server, CALs 
>> > > for
>> > > Server, SQL, Exchange much higher then one Standart Server, SBS, CALs 
>> > > for
>> > > SBS
>> > > 8(
>> > > We have less than 50 users, 15 of them will use Terminal sessions 
>> > > (Great
>> > > Plains).
>> > > I am considering to move two small applications (MS Access) to 
>> > > ASP.NET+SQL
>> > > I know that we are don't plan to grow more than 75 users in nearest 3
>> > > years.
>> > > How you think, will SBS be enough for this environment?
>> > >
>> > > Oleg
>> > >
>> > > "Charles Allen" wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> I think we're on the same page although I was really recommending 
>> > >> Windows
>> > >> 2003 Server, not SBS. The problem with SBS is it wants to be the 
>> > >> domain
>> > >> controller. You could always move the SQL Server engine to another
>> > >> machine
>> > >> should circumstances require it.
>> > >>
>> > >> However, no way in the world would I run Exchange Server and 
>> > >> Terminal
>> > >> Server
>> > >> on the same machine. No way, no how.
>> > >>
>> > >> If you are going to purchase SBS, I would use that machine for the 
>> > >> Domain
>> > >> Controller, SQL Server, and Exchange Server and I would at least 
>> > >> have
>> > >> dual
>> > >> processors.
>> > >>
>> > >> The hardware seems good but it all depends on how many SQL users, 
>> > >> how
>> > >> many
>> > >> Exchange clients, how many Terminal Server users, etc.
>> > >>
>> > >> "Olman" <Olman@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> > >> news:1FFAFB62-A04B-4992-AFFF-0C14EC15CB5D@microsoft.com...
>> > >> > Thanks,
>> > >> > but only SBS would run as application server.
>> > >> > After digging around I found answer, I guess:
>> > >> > -SBS 2003 as Application server (PDC, SQL)
>> > >> > -Server Standart as Terminal server ( possible with Exchange )
>> > >> > and in future I going to install backup server.
>> > >> > Only I am not shure what hardware I need. Now I have:
>> > >> > Terminal Server - PE1850/2.8GHZ/4G/2x36Gb
>> > >> > Application Server - PE2850/3.0GHZ/1G/3x146Gb
>> > >> > Is it enought?
>> > >> >
>> > >> > "Charles Allen" wrote:
>> > >> >
>> > >> >> I do not believe it is possible to have two machines running 
>> > >> >> Windows
>> > >> >> SBS
>> > >> >> 2003 because each machine will want to be the domain controller.
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >> I think you'd be better off with:
>> > >> >> Machine 1: Windows 2003 with Terminal Services
>> > >> >> Machine 2: Windows 2003 with SQL Server. This machine can also be 
>> > >> >> your
>> > >> >> domain controller, file server, print server, etc. However, 
>> > >> >> unless you
>> > >> >> have
>> > >> >> a small amount of users, I don't recommend you run Exchange on 
>> > >> >> it.
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >> "Olman" <Olman@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> > >> >> news:2908E3AE-B28C-43C1-9D1A-125CF60B275F@microsoft.com...
>> > >> >> > Our company is in process to implement Great Plains and MS 
>> > >> >> > Solutions
>> > >> >> > Partner
>> > >> >> > suggested  next configuration:
>> > >> >> > 1 server - WS 2003 standart (Terminal Server)
>> > >> >> > 2 server - WS 2003 Standart + SQL 2000.
>> > >> >> > Is it possible to use on server 2 Small Business Server 2003 
>> > >> >> > Premium
>> > >> >> > ?
>> > >> >> > What
>> > >> >> > about problems with domain?
>> > >> >> >
>> > >> >> > Regards,
>> > >> >> >
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >>
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> >
>> >
>> > 


0
5/6/2005 9:57:59 AM
Yes, thank you to both you and David.

"James[MVP]" wrote:

> I have just noticed David reply to your prevouis post. hope all went well.
> 
> -- 
> Regards
> 
> James[MVP]
> Visit MBS Blog Central
> 
> http://mbscentral.blogs.com
> 
> "Ray Barker" <RayBarker@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message 
> news:701752CC-2996-401F-B9BB-4202BA19EF83@microsoft.com...
> > James,
> > It sounds like you've done several TS installs of GP.  I tried installing 
> > it
> > on Windows 2003 but keep getting Dexterity Errors because it can't find 
> > the
> > dictionaries.  It is looking in C:PROGRA~1/MID1AC~1/GREATP~1/nnn.DIC 
> > instead
> > of C:\Program Files\Microsoft Business Solutions\Great Plains.  Why?  Can 
> > you
> > tell me how to fix this and where did it get MID1AC~1 ?
> > Thanks,
> > Ray
> >
> > "Olman" wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >> they are 50/50 - thank you, good point, on local network we don't need to
> >> use TS.
> >> I like SBS - everything trought one CAL.
> >> In case Windows 2003 Std Server I gues we would need:
> >> -two of them
> >> - CAL for every AD user
> >> -SQL 2000
> >> - CAL for every sql users (how many I don't know for Great Plains)
> >> - Exchange Server
> >> - CAL for every echange user
> >> plus TS and CALs for it.
> >>
> >> Oh, Sharepoint server! I guess it is not included in Standard Server.
> >>
> >> Am I right?
> >>
> >> "James" wrote:
> >>
> >> > Hi
> >> >
> >> > Are the clients local or remote? Is there a reason to have users using 
> >> > GP
> >> > via TS server.    We have many clients using SBS2003 on the following 
> >> > setup,
> >> > bases on 20plus Great Plains users and PA module (TS cals are not 
> >> > included
> >> > on SBS):
> >> >
> >> > SBS2003 server (mid-point spec with 3GB RAM )
> >> > AD
> >> > Exhange
> >> > Sharepoints services  preinstalls by SBS wizard (Business Portal)
> >> >
> >> > Windows 2003 Std Server (mid point spec)
> >> > SQL 2000 Std Edition  (License from SBS2003)
> >> >
> >> > SBS2003 is good enought for up to 50 domain users (i think).
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Regards
> >> >
> >> > James
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > "Olman" <Olman@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> > news:723FF4B4-FC63-45DC-81A6-1627A24804D6@microsoft.com...
> >> > > Thank you,
> >> > > you are right about circumstances.
> >> > > By the way cost of system with two Standart Servers, SQL Server, CALs 
> >> > > for
> >> > > Server, SQL, Exchange much higher then one Standart Server, SBS, CALs 
> >> > > for
> >> > > SBS
> >> > > 8(
> >> > > We have less than 50 users, 15 of them will use Terminal sessions 
> >> > > (Great
> >> > > Plains).
> >> > > I am considering to move two small applications (MS Access) to 
> >> > > ASP.NET+SQL
> >> > > I know that we are don't plan to grow more than 75 users in nearest 3
> >> > > years.
> >> > > How you think, will SBS be enough for this environment?
> >> > >
> >> > > Oleg
> >> > >
> >> > > "Charles Allen" wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > >> I think we're on the same page although I was really recommending 
> >> > >> Windows
> >> > >> 2003 Server, not SBS. The problem with SBS is it wants to be the 
> >> > >> domain
> >> > >> controller. You could always move the SQL Server engine to another
> >> > >> machine
> >> > >> should circumstances require it.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> However, no way in the world would I run Exchange Server and 
> >> > >> Terminal
> >> > >> Server
> >> > >> on the same machine. No way, no how.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> If you are going to purchase SBS, I would use that machine for the 
> >> > >> Domain
> >> > >> Controller, SQL Server, and Exchange Server and I would at least 
> >> > >> have
> >> > >> dual
> >> > >> processors.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> The hardware seems good but it all depends on how many SQL users, 
> >> > >> how
> >> > >> many
> >> > >> Exchange clients, how many Terminal Server users, etc.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> "Olman" <Olman@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> > >> news:1FFAFB62-A04B-4992-AFFF-0C14EC15CB5D@microsoft.com...
> >> > >> > Thanks,
> >> > >> > but only SBS would run as application server.
> >> > >> > After digging around I found answer, I guess:
> >> > >> > -SBS 2003 as Application server (PDC, SQL)
> >> > >> > -Server Standart as Terminal server ( possible with Exchange )
> >> > >> > and in future I going to install backup server.
> >> > >> > Only I am not shure what hardware I need. Now I have:
> >> > >> > Terminal Server - PE1850/2.8GHZ/4G/2x36Gb
> >> > >> > Application Server - PE2850/3.0GHZ/1G/3x146Gb
> >> > >> > Is it enought?
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > "Charles Allen" wrote:
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >> I do not believe it is possible to have two machines running 
> >> > >> >> Windows
> >> > >> >> SBS
> >> > >> >> 2003 because each machine will want to be the domain controller.
> >> > >> >>
> >> > >> >> I think you'd be better off with:
> >> > >> >> Machine 1: Windows 2003 with Terminal Services
> >> > >> >> Machine 2: Windows 2003 with SQL Server. This machine can also be 
> >> > >> >> your
> >> > >> >> domain controller, file server, print server, etc. However, 
> >> > >> >> unless you
> >> > >> >> have
> >> > >> >> a small amount of users, I don't recommend you run Exchange on 
> >> > >> >> it.
> >> > >> >>
> >> > >> >> "Olman" <Olman@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> > >> >> news:2908E3AE-B28C-43C1-9D1A-125CF60B275F@microsoft.com...
> >> > >> >> > Our company is in process to implement Great Plains and MS 
> >> > >> >> > Solutions
> >> > >> >> > Partner
> >> > >> >> > suggested  next configuration:
> >> > >> >> > 1 server - WS 2003 standart (Terminal Server)
> >> > >> >> > 2 server - WS 2003 Standart + SQL 2000.
> >> > >> >> > Is it possible to use on server 2 Small Business Server 2003 
> >> > >> >> > Premium
> >> > >> >> > ?
> >> > >> >> > What
> >> > >> >> > about problems with domain?
> >> > >> >> >
> >> > >> >> > Regards,
> >> > >> >> >
> >> > >> >>
> >> > >> >>
> >> > >> >>
> >> > >>
> >> > >>
> >> > >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > 
> 
> 
> 
0
RayBarker (6)
5/9/2005 7:08:04 PM
You should setup the client in install mode.

Then make sure you reboot the machine and login as the same account you 
installed it with.
/:>


"James[MVP]" wrote:

> Hi
> 
> You need to edit the Dynamics.set file and change the location of the Dic 
> files  - example:
> 
> :C:Program Files/Microsoft Business Solutions/Great Plains/*.dic files.
> 
> Dynamics.set file is a launch file for Great Plains.
> 
> Sometimes users share the reports and forms.dic files on the network, 
> double check if thats the case.
> 
> -- 
> Regards
> 
> James[MVP]
> Visit MBS Blog Central
> 
> http://mbscentral.blogs.com
> 
> 
> "Ray Barker" <RayBarker@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message 
> news:701752CC-2996-401F-B9BB-4202BA19EF83@microsoft.com...
> > James,
> > It sounds like you've done several TS installs of GP.  I tried installing 
> > it
> > on Windows 2003 but keep getting Dexterity Errors because it can't find 
> > the
> > dictionaries.  It is looking in C:PROGRA~1/MID1AC~1/GREATP~1/nnn.DIC 
> > instead
> > of C:\Program Files\Microsoft Business Solutions\Great Plains.  Why?  Can 
> > you
> > tell me how to fix this and where did it get MID1AC~1 ?
> > Thanks,
> > Ray
> >
> > "Olman" wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >> they are 50/50 - thank you, good point, on local network we don't need to
> >> use TS.
> >> I like SBS - everything trought one CAL.
> >> In case Windows 2003 Std Server I gues we would need:
> >> -two of them
> >> - CAL for every AD user
> >> -SQL 2000
> >> - CAL for every sql users (how many I don't know for Great Plains)
> >> - Exchange Server
> >> - CAL for every echange user
> >> plus TS and CALs for it.
> >>
> >> Oh, Sharepoint server! I guess it is not included in Standard Server.
> >>
> >> Am I right?
> >>
> >> "James" wrote:
> >>
> >> > Hi
> >> >
> >> > Are the clients local or remote? Is there a reason to have users using 
> >> > GP
> >> > via TS server.    We have many clients using SBS2003 on the following 
> >> > setup,
> >> > bases on 20plus Great Plains users and PA module (TS cals are not 
> >> > included
> >> > on SBS):
> >> >
> >> > SBS2003 server (mid-point spec with 3GB RAM )
> >> > AD
> >> > Exhange
> >> > Sharepoints services  preinstalls by SBS wizard (Business Portal)
> >> >
> >> > Windows 2003 Std Server (mid point spec)
> >> > SQL 2000 Std Edition  (License from SBS2003)
> >> >
> >> > SBS2003 is good enought for up to 50 domain users (i think).
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Regards
> >> >
> >> > James
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > "Olman" <Olman@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> > news:723FF4B4-FC63-45DC-81A6-1627A24804D6@microsoft.com...
> >> > > Thank you,
> >> > > you are right about circumstances.
> >> > > By the way cost of system with two Standart Servers, SQL Server, CALs 
> >> > > for
> >> > > Server, SQL, Exchange much higher then one Standart Server, SBS, CALs 
> >> > > for
> >> > > SBS
> >> > > 8(
> >> > > We have less than 50 users, 15 of them will use Terminal sessions 
> >> > > (Great
> >> > > Plains).
> >> > > I am considering to move two small applications (MS Access) to 
> >> > > ASP.NET+SQL
> >> > > I know that we are don't plan to grow more than 75 users in nearest 3
> >> > > years.
> >> > > How you think, will SBS be enough for this environment?
> >> > >
> >> > > Oleg
> >> > >
> >> > > "Charles Allen" wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > >> I think we're on the same page although I was really recommending 
> >> > >> Windows
> >> > >> 2003 Server, not SBS. The problem with SBS is it wants to be the 
> >> > >> domain
> >> > >> controller. You could always move the SQL Server engine to another
> >> > >> machine
> >> > >> should circumstances require it.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> However, no way in the world would I run Exchange Server and 
> >> > >> Terminal
> >> > >> Server
> >> > >> on the same machine. No way, no how.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> If you are going to purchase SBS, I would use that machine for the 
> >> > >> Domain
> >> > >> Controller, SQL Server, and Exchange Server and I would at least 
> >> > >> have
> >> > >> dual
> >> > >> processors.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> The hardware seems good but it all depends on how many SQL users, 
> >> > >> how
> >> > >> many
> >> > >> Exchange clients, how many Terminal Server users, etc.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> "Olman" <Olman@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> > >> news:1FFAFB62-A04B-4992-AFFF-0C14EC15CB5D@microsoft.com...
> >> > >> > Thanks,
> >> > >> > but only SBS would run as application server.
> >> > >> > After digging around I found answer, I guess:
> >> > >> > -SBS 2003 as Application server (PDC, SQL)
> >> > >> > -Server Standart as Terminal server ( possible with Exchange )
> >> > >> > and in future I going to install backup server.
> >> > >> > Only I am not shure what hardware I need. Now I have:
> >> > >> > Terminal Server - PE1850/2.8GHZ/4G/2x36Gb
> >> > >> > Application Server - PE2850/3.0GHZ/1G/3x146Gb
> >> > >> > Is it enought?
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > "Charles Allen" wrote:
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >> I do not believe it is possible to have two machines running 
> >> > >> >> Windows
> >> > >> >> SBS
> >> > >> >> 2003 because each machine will want to be the domain controller.
> >> > >> >>
> >> > >> >> I think you'd be better off with:
> >> > >> >> Machine 1: Windows 2003 with Terminal Services
> >> > >> >> Machine 2: Windows 2003 with SQL Server. This machine can also be 
> >> > >> >> your
> >> > >> >> domain controller, file server, print server, etc. However, 
> >> > >> >> unless you
> >> > >> >> have
> >> > >> >> a small amount of users, I don't recommend you run Exchange on 
> >> > >> >> it.
> >> > >> >>
> >> > >> >> "Olman" <Olman@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> > >> >> news:2908E3AE-B28C-43C1-9D1A-125CF60B275F@microsoft.com...
> >> > >> >> > Our company is in process to implement Great Plains and MS 
> >> > >> >> > Solutions
> >> > >> >> > Partner
> >> > >> >> > suggested  next configuration:
> >> > >> >> > 1 server - WS 2003 standart (Terminal Server)
> >> > >> >> > 2 server - WS 2003 Standart + SQL 2000.
> >> > >> >> > Is it possible to use on server 2 Small Business Server 2003 
> >> > >> >> > Premium
> >> > >> >> > ?
> >> > >> >> > What
> >> > >> >> > about problems with domain?
> >> > >> >> >
> >> > >> >> > Regards,
> >> > >> >> >
> >> > >> >>
> >> > >> >>
> >> > >> >>
> >> > >>
> >> > >>
> >> > >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > 
> 
> 
> 
0
2/10/2006 8:35:26 AM
Ray, did you ever get an answer to your actual question?  The question being, 
where does MID1AC~1 come from?  I've found that on some of the XP computers 
that were setup by my predecessor, you can actually browse to MID1AC~1 from 
the command prompt and get to the files in the "Microsoft Business Solutions" 
folder.  There's no folder on those computers named anything close to 
MID1AC~1 though.  I'm confused.
-- 
Hos


"Ray Barker" wrote:

> James,
> It sounds like you've done several TS installs of GP.  I tried installing it 
> on Windows 2003 but keep getting Dexterity Errors because it can't find the 
> dictionaries.  It is looking in C:PROGRA~1/MID1AC~1/GREATP~1/nnn.DIC instead 
> of C:\Program Files\Microsoft Business Solutions\Great Plains.  Why?  Can you 
> tell me how to fix this and where did it get MID1AC~1 ?
> Thanks,
> Ray
> 
> "Olman" wrote:
> 
> > Hi,
> > they are 50/50 - thank you, good point, on local network we don't need to 
> > use TS.
> > I like SBS - everything trought one CAL.
> > In case Windows 2003 Std Server I gues we would need:
> > -two of them
> > - CAL for every AD user
> > -SQL 2000
> > - CAL for every sql users (how many I don't know for Great Plains)
> > - Exchange Server
> > - CAL for every echange user
> > plus TS and CALs for it.
> > 
> > Oh, Sharepoint server! I guess it is not included in Standard Server.
> > 
> > Am I right?
> > 
> > "James" wrote:
> > 
> > > Hi
> > > 
> > > Are the clients local or remote? Is there a reason to have users using GP 
> > > via TS server.    We have many clients using SBS2003 on the following setup, 
> > > bases on 20plus Great Plains users and PA module (TS cals are not included 
> > > on SBS):
> > > 
> > > SBS2003 server (mid-point spec with 3GB RAM )
> > > AD
> > > Exhange
> > > Sharepoints services  preinstalls by SBS wizard (Business Portal)
> > > 
> > > Windows 2003 Std Server (mid point spec)
> > > SQL 2000 Std Edition  (License from SBS2003)
> > > 
> > > SBS2003 is good enought for up to 50 domain users (i think).
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Regards
> > > 
> > > James
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > "Olman" <Olman@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message 
> > > news:723FF4B4-FC63-45DC-81A6-1627A24804D6@microsoft.com...
> > > > Thank you,
> > > > you are right about circumstances.
> > > > By the way cost of system with two Standart Servers, SQL Server, CALs for
> > > > Server, SQL, Exchange much higher then one Standart Server, SBS, CALs for 
> > > > SBS
> > > > 8(
> > > > We have less than 50 users, 15 of them will use Terminal sessions (Great
> > > > Plains).
> > > > I am considering to move two small applications (MS Access) to ASP.NET+SQL
> > > > I know that we are don't plan to grow more than 75 users in nearest 3 
> > > > years.
> > > > How you think, will SBS be enough for this environment?
> > > >
> > > > Oleg
> > > >
> > > > "Charles Allen" wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> I think we're on the same page although I was really recommending Windows
> > > >> 2003 Server, not SBS. The problem with SBS is it wants to be the domain
> > > >> controller. You could always move the SQL Server engine to another 
> > > >> machine
> > > >> should circumstances require it.
> > > >>
> > > >> However, no way in the world would I run Exchange Server and Terminal 
> > > >> Server
> > > >> on the same machine. No way, no how.
> > > >>
> > > >> If you are going to purchase SBS, I would use that machine for the Domain
> > > >> Controller, SQL Server, and Exchange Server and I would at least have 
> > > >> dual
> > > >> processors.
> > > >>
> > > >> The hardware seems good but it all depends on how many SQL users, how 
> > > >> many
> > > >> Exchange clients, how many Terminal Server users, etc.
> > > >>
> > > >> "Olman" <Olman@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> > > >> news:1FFAFB62-A04B-4992-AFFF-0C14EC15CB5D@microsoft.com...
> > > >> > Thanks,
> > > >> > but only SBS would run as application server.
> > > >> > After digging around I found answer, I guess:
> > > >> > -SBS 2003 as Application server (PDC, SQL)
> > > >> > -Server Standart as Terminal server ( possible with Exchange )
> > > >> > and in future I going to install backup server.
> > > >> > Only I am not shure what hardware I need. Now I have:
> > > >> > Terminal Server - PE1850/2.8GHZ/4G/2x36Gb
> > > >> > Application Server - PE2850/3.0GHZ/1G/3x146Gb
> > > >> > Is it enought?
> > > >> >
> > > >> > "Charles Allen" wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> >> I do not believe it is possible to have two machines running Windows 
> > > >> >> SBS
> > > >> >> 2003 because each machine will want to be the domain controller.
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> I think you'd be better off with:
> > > >> >> Machine 1: Windows 2003 with Terminal Services
> > > >> >> Machine 2: Windows 2003 with SQL Server. This machine can also be your
> > > >> >> domain controller, file server, print server, etc. However, unless you
> > > >> >> have
> > > >> >> a small amount of users, I don't recommend you run Exchange on it.
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> "Olman" <Olman@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> > > >> >> news:2908E3AE-B28C-43C1-9D1A-125CF60B275F@microsoft.com...
> > > >> >> > Our company is in process to implement Great Plains and MS Solutions
> > > >> >> > Partner
> > > >> >> > suggested  next configuration:
> > > >> >> > 1 server - WS 2003 standart (Terminal Server)
> > > >> >> > 2 server - WS 2003 Standart + SQL 2000.
> > > >> >> > Is it possible to use on server 2 Small Business Server 2003 Premium 
> > > >> >> > ?
> > > >> >> > What
> > > >> >> > about problems with domain?
> > > >> >> >
> > > >> >> > Regards,
> > > >> >> >
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
0
Hos (1)
3/19/2007 6:38:08 PM
Reply:

Similar Artilces:

Our exchange server is the domain controller too.i want to seperate them!??!!??!
Hi in our company we implement Exchange server as pilot.when i install it, i creat the domain controller on this. But we had a main domain cntroller before.now i want this exchange server to use the resource of our main domain controller.what should i do? Thanks Mina On 11 Mar 2006 21:09:33 -0800, "Mina" <mabbasi@gmail.com> wrote: >Hi >in our company we implement Exchange server as pilot.when i install it, >i creat the domain controller on this. But we had a main domain >cntroller before.now i want this exchange server to use the resource of >our main domain c...

dissapearing spreadsheet- excel 2003
Something awful has happened. I just finished a massive spreadsheet down to the last detail. Everything balanced out, it was perfect. I was ready to print the final draft. I wanted to take out the grid lines and the a-z and 123.. borders so I was looking at various commands on the tool bar. I got to the "insert' heading and clicked on "worksheet" to see what it was. Everything is now gone....... I am sick. Please tell me how to get the spreadsheet back. I have tried to open the one I want from the saved files but nothing but a blank worksheet comes up. While looking thru t...

Publisher 2003 Catologue Merge
http://home.a03.itscom.net/tsuzu/programing/en/ Here is a real winner that popped up today on www.nonags.com This is the perfect tool for the Publisher 2003 Catalogue Merge. This program will automatically list all the picture files in a folder to use with a Publisher 2003 Catalogue Merge. Does exactly what you want, has all the options you need, including sort, file extension you want etc. etc. Just a magic little program with all the needs and requirements. It will be so easy for users just to copy the path information to their database/CSV file whatever - simple I think if I sat down a...

Archiving the Outlook 2003 Calendar
My archive utility seems to be only working sporadically. When I attempt to archive my calendar, sometimes it works and I get a .pst file that is 2,000 kb (+). At other times it creates a .pst file that is only 265 kb in size and contains on data. Is there anything I can do to alleviate this? I'm asking that it archive items older than the current date (but I've also tried archiving items older than yesterday and had similar results). Sometimes it works fine, sometimes it doesn't. Any suggestions will be appreciated. ...

SBS 2003 to SBS 2008 migration headache!
Hi folks, Hoping someone can help me :( After spending yesterday prepping the source server- running both SBS 2003 Best Practices Analyzer and Exchange Best Practices Analyzer (and resolving all issues until they both came back clean), full backup, Migration Prep Tool, answer file etc I was finally ready to get going with the destination server today. I was very thorough with the documentation, taking it all step by step. All looked well, until it seemed to hang on what looked to be a final step. I don't recall getting the replication delay pop-up that I've seen m...

Outlook 2003 hangs when downloading POP3 messages
Hi all I'm having a problem with my Outlook 2003, I can also re-create the exact same problem with Outlook Express 6. But my ISP won't accept responsibility for the problem (apparently it works for them - how many times have you heard that hey). For the last three days, I've had a problem that when I perform a Send/Recieve outlook starts downloading messages, then will stop when downloading one of them. At this point nothing will happen until I cancel the download. The only message that I can see is "Downloading message <n> of <n> (<x>Kb of <x&g...

Exchange 2003 OWA #3
I am having a problem receiving certin attachments using Outlook web access 2003 ( owa ) I Can receive .zip , .pdf , and even .rar files with no problems... how ever when i receive an Microsoft Access file ( .mdb ) it says " Access to the following potentially unsafe attachments has been blocked: Filename.mdb" This is also happening when I try to receive a .xml file. I have been searching all over for info on this and can't find any... any help here would be greatly appreciated... Our server setup just incase you need it is... Win 2k server running exchange ...

Print Server
does Microsoft have a tool to copy printers from a print server to another server. I want to be able to use the 2d server as a backup server. "sowbug" <sowbug@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:6307D40A-CD8E-4B68-9F10-62E016FED2D9@microsoft.com... > does Microsoft have a tool to copy printers from a print server to another > server. I want to be able to use the 2d server as a backup server. Ask in a server or administration group. This group is for Visual Basic. ...

OWA setup on SBS 2003
Hi, I can't access OWA on an SBS 2003 server, for any user. Not sure what is stopping it - is it ISA settings? I've checked in Active Directory Users and Domains under the user and they are permitted to use OWA. Also tried to connect using Sever Activesync and a smart phone, but that failed too. Hope you can help. Neil Hi, Could be ISA server stopping OWA from functioning, could also be a lot of other things (like permisions on folders, web site etc). What happens when you try to access OWA? Leif "Neil G Jarman" <neil@tNOiSPAMvPLEASEy.co.uk> wrote in mes...

Excel 2003 Slow
Have any other users of Excel 2003 found it really slow when entering data into cells. I know 2 others users who have the same problem and we are being slowly driven mad with frustration. Is there some option we can deselect somewhere that will speed things up? No comments have come in about this, so I don't know how many others have the same problem I wrote about below a few days ago. However I have found a way round it - to uninstall Excel 2003 and install Excel XP instead. Now I can enter data in cells at my usual speed. I'd still really like to know what causes the slowness ...

NT Backup with Exchange 2003
I am not sure whether or not my backup is actually performing. I have selected the Exchange Server to be backup up to a file, but when I go to restore, and I catalog the file and look at the Mailbox Store it reads 'no entries found'. Is this normal? This is with Server 2000 Standard and Exchange 2003 Here is what is in the log: Backup Status Operation: Backup Active backup destination: File Media name: "Media created 7/27/2004 at 1:05 AM" Backup of "CRAZYJUMPER\Microsoft Information Store\First Storage Group" Backup set #1 on media #1 Backup descriptio...

Outlook and Office 2003
Outlook hangs when trying to attach files via the paperclip icon and excel and word hang when moving up through the directory structure while I am trying to "open" or "save as". Has anyone come across these problems and are there any fixes/work arounds? I really don't want to reinstall 2000! Thanks Ian Is this from local or network drives? If network drives, pure Microsoft world or are you living in a mixed world of Novell, Unix, .etc and Microsoft? FWIW, I've seen Microsoft Office applications hang in the file open/save dialog and living in a Novell/Mic...

Unable to add an e-mail address to an existing contact in Outlook 2003
When I try to add an address to one of my contacts it dissapears as soon as I enter it and tab to the next field. I've tried "enter" too. I've tried detect and repair, I've looked in newsgroups for a similar problem, but I'm not seeing it. Any help out there for this problem? Thanks, Eric Where are you trying to add it in the contact record? --� Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook] Post all replies to the group to keep the discussion intact. After searching google.groups.com and finding no answer: Eric Feinstein <erc1@nospamhotmail.com> asked: | When I try to a...

Tool available to install Exchange SP2 on SBS 2008
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=ffd2fe61-9278-489e-9b96-3816394c9cb6&displayLang=en Works great. Note you need to download and extract Exchange SP2 before running the tool. -- Kerry Brown MS-MVP - Windows Desktop Experience: Systems Administration http://www.vistahelp.ca/phpBB2/ I hope I'm not the only one who read your post? I'll just post now even though I read this the day you posted. Thanks for the much needed info, Kerry Russ :) -- Russell Grover - SBITS.Biz [SBS-MVP] Microsoft Gold Certified Partner Microsoft Certifi...

Tidying up 5.5 pre 2003?
OK I'm going to spend some time tomorrow tidying up our 5.5 directory ready for when I start migrating us to 2003. So far I'm planning on: Getting rid of all old/unnecessary mailboxes (duh!) Setting all resource mailboxes to no Primary NT account, users have access via the permissions tab (assuming ADC will create disabled domain account). Setting ex-employee mailboxes so that their already disabled domain account is the primary account, again their manager has access via the permissions tab. Is there anything obvious that I'm missing? TIA, Paul -- paul@spamcop.net Pau...

Ms Outlook 2003 #5
Hi. I have Vista Home Edition. I am trying to set up my mail accounts with Microsoft Outlook 2003 in Vista. When I put all the details and I test the setting it asks me to verify the E mail address. I know its correct as it works ok in Windows mail Is Outlook 2003 able to work in Vista or do I have a setting wrong??? Outlook 2003 works fine in Windows Vista. Did you check your email = address as suggested? --=81 Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook] Post all replies to the group to keep the discussion intact. All unsolicited mail sent to my personal account will be deleted without reading. =...

Migrating AD Back to SBS
We had a domain which was working in a SBS2003 normally but since we had to change the hardware we added a second DC which is a windows 2008 and transferred all the roles to it, and let it working alone. Everything is fine now with the win2008 as a only Domain Controller We now have to reinstall back the SBS2003 and transfer everything to it from the win2008, is that possible? is there any how-to or best practices? As it seems that all i can do is start a new domain from scratch. Thanks, Chris There is an official MS document for adding SBS 2003 to a Server 2003 domain, but...

MSN messenger and Exchange 2003
Hi, Is it possible to use MSN messenger connect to Exchange 2003, so that staffs can talk to each other witin the Exchange 2003 environment ? If it's possible, how exactly can that be done ? I am trying to find some step by step doco but with no luck so far... Is this setup recommended or it's something that better to avoid ? TIA Steven You can do it with Exchange 2000, but microsoft have shifted it to Live communication server fro 2003. Its like an internal msn. "Steven Wong" <sazabi75@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:eSL4s6uJGHA.2300@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...

Outlook 2003 won't shutdown
On one users computer I can't get Outlook 2003 to shutdown completely. After closing the app the icon stays in the taskbar and won't go away. When you try and right click on the icon you get nothing and when you double left click it pops up a baloon that reads... Outlook is not rsponding. If your are using and Exchange server e-mail account, you can cancel pending server requests by clicking the Outlook icon in the notifications area, and then clicking Cancel Server Request on the shortcut menu. After this the only way to close it is to go into Task Manager and end task out the OUTLO...

Office pro 2003
Office pro 2003 - Works 2004, Publisher 2003, Plus! Digital Media Ed OFFICE SYSTEM PROFESSIONAL V2003 (c) MICROSOFT [5 CDs] CD1=OFFICE 11 CD2=FRONTPAGE 2003 CD3=VISIO 2003 PRO CD4=PROJECT 2003 PRO CD5=ONENOTE 2003 SN: OFFICE11: GWH28-DGCMP-P6RC4-6J4MT-3HFDY SN: for REST: WFDWY-XQXJF-RHRYG-BG7RQ-BBDHM Microsoft Office Publisher 2003 Microsoft Works Suite 2004 [5 cdS] SN:QTXM8-56C9R-XQPRT-CTJJ8-PPGGD Plus! Digital Media Edition (c) Microsoft 12 337 we will help You to find any software which need Yo...

Launching specific spreadsheet from Desktop in Excel 2003
Excel 2003 SP3 WinXP Pro SP2 How do I launch a specific spreadsheet using Excel 2003 from the Desktop? Obviously, I can launch Excel but I can't determine the syntax for a specific spreadsheet. I've tried "c:\Program Files\Microsoft Office ...\Excel.exe" 'C:\MyExcel\Documents\LaunchIt.xls' and a variety of iterations. Any direction or guidance appreciated. Eventually, I'd like to set my "Most Frequently Used" documents as icons on the Desktop. TIA, Tom Tom With Excel open, go to File>Open and right-click on the file you need a shortcut to. Se...

Let me add personal bullets in Publisher 2003
I would like to add a personal bullet into my document in Publisher 2003 like I can in Word 2003 ---------------- This post is a suggestion for Microsoft, and Microsoft responds to the suggestions with the most votes. To vote for this suggestion, click the "I Agree" button in the message pane. If you do not see the button, follow this link to open the suggestion in the Microsoft Web-based Newsreader and then click "I Agree" in the message pane. http://www.microsoft.com/office/community/en-us/default.mspx?mid=92bb8625-046e-41bd-83b2-cc047f45762d&dg=microsoft.publi...

Outlook 2003 hangs
I have installed Office 2003 with Outlook. Outlook hangs almoxt all th time and the only way I can get it to work is to reinstall it. I am running Win 2K pro, P$, 1.6 GHz, 512MB RAM. All W2K updates ar current. Can someone clue me in on how to make this run on W2K or do have to go to XP, which I don't want to. Thanks, Dav ----------------------------------------------- ~~ Message posted from http://www.ExcelTip.com ~~View and post usenet messages directly from http://www.ExcelForum.com ...

Leaving mail on server
I have upgraded Outlook to 2003. In Outlook 2002 there was a setting to leave mail on the server for a certin period of time. I can'y find this feature in 2003. It it there? Thanks Tools->Email Accounts->View or Change->Highlight your account->Change->More Settings->Advanced. --� Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook] Post all replies to the group to keep the discussion intact. After searching google.groups.com and finding no answer: Richard <richard@raymondsboats.com> asked: | I have upgraded Outlook to 2003. In Outlook 2002 there was a setting | to leave mail on the s...

Profile migration problems (outlook 2003)
Hello, I have a computer that arrived from a different domain to ours. I had to migrate a user profile from that domain. Since he only wanted his Outlook (2003) data, I just copied the PST file to the new user's directory. Unfortunately, when I imported the PST file, there were no Contacts, Calendar and Tasks. Mail, along with all the folders he created were transfered perfectly. I can't logon the old user, because the computer no longer belongs to the old domain. (If I could logon I'd export them to a csv file or something....) My question is: Where are the Contacts etc......