A question regarding what Linux can do for SMB's..

I run my own business and for the most part only deal in the realm of small PC repairs and minor networking issues. Recently however, I received a call from a third party I.T. company who needed an onsite technician to troubleshoot a Windows 2003 Server that refused to boot at a local hotel.

I have dealt with Windows servers before in school and I'm not one to turn down work so I took on the job. Long story short I fixed the server (reloaded OS and connected users to the new domain.)

Looking back, all this server did was provide a domain for user authentication, operated as a basic file server for roughly 15 users and implement basic networking services (DHCP, DNS etc.)

Surely all these services can be provided under Linux? I ask because I'm thinking about purchasing a few servers and offering a kind of server package for SMB's. Ofcourse I would run Linux on these servers.

To wrap up. Can Linux truly provide the services a small business needs to function? What are some common services SMB's require and in what situations would you opt for a Windows server instead of Linux?

6 of one and half a dozen of the other is the answer.

The total cost of ownership along with applications used and training of all staff needs to be considered.

Some of the services that MS offers can not be replicated. Many specialized windows applications have no opensourced option.


Only you can decide the choice.

I should clarify that I was inquiring about the functionality of Linux as a server for SMB's not a desktop. Implementing Linux as a Desktop in a small business would be next to impossible.

But if all the users are doing is working with Microsoft Office apps locally and storing data on the server, surely this would be a great oppurtunity to use Linux as a storage/DHCP/DNS server? Seems easy enough to implement Samba and basic networking services.

At what point does using a Microsoft server make the life of a sys admin easier?

In server, I will opt for linux in everything I do except for Active Directory Server from MS.

Definitely do-able.

Basically, anything that uses Industry std protocols should be do-able

The stumbling block is MS-specific share-able services, particularly Exchange+calendaring.
However, there are some FOSS 'equivalents'; eg zimbra is pretty popular, but you should research carefully before choosing a replacement.

Just don't tell the users is it Linux

As soon as someone insist on AD or has an application which requires MSSQL you are stuck. I don't use AD and I installed a VM to run the one and only MSSQL server needed.

For mail I use dovecot with Tbird clients and users are happy. Calendar could be a problem, but Google does anything to break up such a vendor lock-in.

DNS/DHCP/Firewall run on a separate machine, but also Linux of course.

My idea is that on the MS server platforms >= 2008 too many things are "simplified", beautified, virtualized and GUI-fied and MSCE required. For a normal educated person (like me) it doesn't make any sense anymore. Linux OTOH stays simple as it was, no frills, much hand-work, transparant etc.

jlinkels

It's pretty easy to get going with a Small Business Server in Linux, there is Zentyal and Clear OS but to name a couple.