Linux alternatives to Windows SBS part one

David M Williams
Thursday, 18 September 2008 18:54

Opinion and Analysis

I've claimed that Microsoft's Small Business Server (SBS) is hampered by its built-in limitations. These constraints have been designed in. Why would you opt for SBS when you could have it all using Linux? It's time to put my money where my mouth is. Here's what I look for in a Linux-based solution and starting today not one, but five, options to pick from.

I’m sure a company would find much greater benefit in the unencumbered standard releases of Windows Server and Exchange server. Of course, these packages cost money, and a lot of it.

So, it stands to reason SBS has a reason to exist; it’s cheap(er) – but as a result, it’s limited. It’s not the base product of the Windows Server line but instead a cut-down version to try and reach those who are not able, or do not wish, to pay Microsoft’s fee.

Frankly, I think you’d only choose SBS because you’re working to a specific budget. I don’t believe anyone chooses to buy SBS because of perceived feature advantages.

So why use SBS at all? There are free open source Linux alternatives which range from free to inexpensive – but without the same restrictions. Today and Sunday I’m going to tell you about Linux-based choices which free you from the shackles SBS imposes. I’ll begin with one today after some ground rules, and then four more next time.

Firstly, let's set a baseline so the expectations are managed. I've primarily referred to Windows Server and Exchange Server because these are, to my mind, the two major components being the server operating system and the mail and calendar system.

It's true SBS includes other elements; the higher tiers of the SBS (and new Essential Business Server, EBS) include SQL Server and ISA Server. The former is a database engine, the second a firewall and proxy engine.

I don't believe either of these is important for the purposes of this comparison. That's not to say Linux can't do what they can; far from it. Linux has MySQL - now owned by Sun Microsystems - as well as a legion of firewall and proxy tools.

The reason I assign them lesser importance in terms of comparison is threefold. First, they're not part of the base SBS product. You need to explicitly select and purchase a different product.

Second, SQL Server is not a product you just load and "use"; it serves as the data store for other applications. So, it is not really meaningful to compare two database systems per se when their usage is subject to something else.

Third, the reason to compare SBS with Linux is to emulate a degree of functionality provided by a largely "out-of-the-box" solution. I believe if you are working in, say, ISA Server then you ought to have the nous to configure a Linux-based firewall product. You've gone beyond the type of user who depends on a point-and-click step-through-the-wizard interface.

Here are some quick links to help you navigate around.

Page 1 – The baseline
Page 2 - What I expect from a Linux solution
Page 3 – A word on the money side
Page 4 – Option 1: ClarkConnect and reader feedback