Cannot decide between 1U servers for growing company
-
@ntoxicator said:
I understand and i see that as issue moving forward
Just every employee uses outlook. Its very common to have employee's shifted from one workstation to another. So having data saved locally on a workstation here is a nope.
OWA for the win! Stop using Outlook and this problem goes away. Then you could do home folders and document redirection (which can have its own issue) to solve the other common uses for roaming profiles.
-
I know I push OWA here as much as possible. Users are not the brightest and often complain 'we dont like the webmail'
Already paying Office365 hosted Exchange.
-
I think home folders would create entire new issue. I'm just not familiar and experience with it. Always done roaming profiles & folder redirection.
-
@ntoxicator said:
Busy man!!!
Good stuff.
You're right on about your concerns about growth and up-scaling . I really like what Scale has to offer.
As yes, I would be limited to Synology Rackstation NAS... As RAID-10 array i CANNOT add more disks for additional storage. So that means I cannot grow the volumes any larger than the current 'shelf'
Synology is great gear, don't get me wrong. Just looks like the wrong use case for it. We have a Synology ourselves and love it. They are really excellent for backups or for certain classes of NAS file serving - like really excellent as a UNIX home directory server.
-
@ntoxicator said:
I understand and i see that as issue moving forward
Just every employee uses outlook. Its very common to have employee's shifted from one workstation to another. So having data saved locally on a workstation here is a nope.
Outlook profiles should never ever be on the network. PSTs and OSTs are never suppose to be there. Microsoft even states this.
-
@ntoxicator said:
I understand and i see that as issue moving forward
Just every employee uses outlook. Its very common to have employee's shifted from one workstation to another. So having data saved locally on a workstation here is a nope.
At some point it is worth going to management and users and saying "here is the cost of using Outlook" and lay out the technical impacts and the financial ones and let them decide. Make it their decision, not yours, to live with the problems that it brings and the cost that it incurs to do right. If they want it, fine.
And consider letting users choose individually. I choose OWA and get a far superior experience.
-
@ntoxicator said:
I know I push OWA here as much as possible. Users are not the brightest and often complain 'we dont like the webmail'
Already paying Office365 hosted Exchange.
That's what we use, too.
-
Tell me what route you would go them? I suppose Im out of touch
yes. I've read that microsoft advises against PST and OST files being on roaming profile (AppData). I can do away with this
Just comes down to issue of migrating a user to a new desktop computer. Management does not understand the issues. Tell me 'Just make it work, fast, and a gun to my head'. So alot of times employee's or an entire group of employee's will be shifted from one part of the office to another.
So either, move entire workstation + desk phone. Or just move their IP phone and they sit at another computer and login and all set.
Yes.. .OWA would fix that. We use Office365 hosted exchange, So OWA is already there
But what would you do for Hypervisor and storage needs? In this case. As I know the Synology does has limitations. HPStorage Works? What other storage devices? FreeNAS with ZFS.. Hell no (in my head)
As will need Domain Controller, & Multiple Terminal Servers. Also have a few linux VM's doing some intranet web hosting.
-
@ntoxicator said:
Just comes down to issue of migrating a user to a new desktop computer. Management does not understand the issues. Tell me 'Just make it work, fast, and a gun to my head'. So alot of times employee's or an entire group of employee's will be shifted from one part of the office to another.
Then you tell them "if you want it to work you use OWA". Don't let them make technical decisions without accepting the responsibility. If they want Outlook at any cost, fine, but make it clear you had nothing to do with the decision or consequences. If they want something that works, present an option and let them decide not to do it.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@ntoxicator said:
Just comes down to issue of migrating a user to a new desktop computer. Management does not understand the issues. Tell me 'Just make it work, fast, and a gun to my head'. So alot of times employee's or an entire group of employee's will be shifted from one part of the office to another.
Then you tell them "if you want it to work you use OWA". Don't let them make technical decisions without accepting the responsibility. If they want Outlook at any cost, fine, but make it clear you had nothing to do with the decision or consequences. If they want something that works, present an option and let them decide not to do it.
You're 100% right. This has been an issue for me. As I try and make a plan and lay things out and always get shot down. So the current setup is due to earlier budget constraints, not planning for future growth and other variables. As our CEO has prior IT knowledge and IT background prior to this company. So essentially, likes to make end-game decisions. Which cripples everything.
I've been looking for other IT Job Opportunities
-
@ntoxicator said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@ntoxicator said:
Just comes down to issue of migrating a user to a new desktop computer. Management does not understand the issues. Tell me 'Just make it work, fast, and a gun to my head'. So alot of times employee's or an entire group of employee's will be shifted from one part of the office to another.
Then you tell them "if you want it to work you use OWA". Don't let them make technical decisions without accepting the responsibility. If they want Outlook at any cost, fine, but make it clear you had nothing to do with the decision or consequences. If they want something that works, present an option and let them decide not to do it.
You're 100% right. This has been an issue for me. As I try and make a plan and lay things out and always get shot down. So the current setup is due to earlier budget constraints, not planning for future growth and other variables. As our CEO has prior IT knowledge and IT background prior to this company. So essentially, likes to make end-game decisions. Which cripples everything.
I've been looking for other IT Job Opportunities
If he wants to make decisions - fine, as long as he understands the consequences of those decisions.
-
@ntoxicator said:
What other storage devices? FreeNAS with ZFS.. Hell no (in my head)
Never...
http://www.smbitjournal.com/2014/05/the-cult-of-zfs/
http://www.smbitjournal.com/2015/07/the-jurassic-park-effect/
-
So you suggest the HC Scale products them as direct replacement model as to what I currently have going on? Skip the 1U/2U servers and NAS storage?
-
@ntoxicator said:
So you suggest the HC Scale products them as direct replacement model as to what I currently have going on? Skip the 1U/2U servers and NAS storage?
I would highly suggest them as a starting point and having a discussion with them. They look to be a great fit for your needs. Not the only one, but very well suited in this case.
Disclosure: My tag gives away that I work for a service provider. That's @ntg and we are a partner with Scale. So I might be biased towards them a bit
Always a risk with advice. But we work with tons of providers too and use several internally ourselves. These days XenServer, Scale and Hyper-V tend to be the most common "go to" platforms in the SMB. For your needs, Scale seems like an excellent fit. You are big enough and your "scale" needs over time make their "node" growth model very good for you. -
@ntoxicator said:
So essentially, likes to make end-game decisions. Which cripples everything.
I've been looking for other IT Job Opportunities
When you have a company that is like that, often there is little else to be done. Doesn't mean to jump ship recklessly, but it does mean that staying long term probably isn't the best career move.
-
NTG is a Scale partner so if you have any questions we would be happy to answer them for you.
-
And the OWA doesn't store any personal files/cookies/data on the machine?
Or do you always use incognito?
-
If I can get all our employee's to switch to OWA, this would be big savings in network storage (due to OST file growth). Also cost on Office subscription / purchase price as OWA is already there at no added cost.
-
@Dashrender said:
Talking about local storage - using OWA also means not OST/PST files - no less thing to worry about encrypting your drive over.
See the post riiiiiiight below yours.
-
@ntoxicator said:
If I can get all our employee's to switch to OWA, this would be big savings in network storage (due to OST file growth). Also cost on Office subscription / purchase price as OWA is already there at no added cost.
Yes, in theory you could show big financial advantages (both up front and for forever) and additionally show improvements on the technical side with the network improvements, people being able to work more easily, investing in the future rather than in technical debt, etc.
