Microsoft’s Small Business Server is a remarkable hit, said a research firm Monday as it released the results of a survey that claimed an astounding 86 percent of small- and mid-sized businesses either use the server bundle or are planning to deploy it.
Analyst: Microsoft Rules Another Market With Small Biz Server
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
Small business = reliant on resellers
Resellers = Microsoft sales network because they take a margin on the product and they have ongoing business applying patches and other security updates. And who would want to be in the position to explain to a client “no, it’s not Exchange but it’s just as good, no it’s not SQL server, it’s better etc….”. Not a lot of them understandably.
But Yankee group shows again a touching lack of market knowledge when saying that the linux world doesn’t have anything to match. All major Linux vendors have a matching product.
Marketing power is nowhere near though and that must make a difference when leaving a prospect’s premises, if you want to leave a bit of commercial documentation behind.
The resellers care only about the money. If a Novell or Red Hat solution would bring in money, they would sell them and recommend them.
Further, the researchers say that customers don’t care about the brand name either. They want value for money.
I think a Linux based SMS solution could be good value for money. But didn’t we hear Ballmer yell at a crowd of resellers a couple of weeks ago? Telling them Linux is a threat, dangerous, bad for business and that they can’t make money from it.
The resellers need to get out more. But I also think that they could’n just start selling Linux in stead of MS, because it requires a change in their own business model, that might also be a factor holding them back.
We build Small Business Servers everyday on Linux and BSD, guess what we replace right, Windows servers (200/2003/SMS) and mostly the customers had bought a box full of things they never even have used, its like Mike sas the resellers/deployers of that sort of software only care about money, most do not even know how to proper install and configure SMS. Bah.
its true – there are difinite weak points in OSS which expose themselves within a business context. guaranteed compatibility with MS office, task and calandering (eg exchange/outlook), nothing like MS Project (i know i use mr project and planner), no serious groupware (i[ve tried egroupware, phopgroupware, kroupware…), no dependable CRM (egh goldmine, siebel…)
t
Why would didio split the numbers for companies that use (3%) OSS en companies that plan to use OSS(11%), but not do this for M$…is this because the companies that plan to use M$-small business is far greater than those that use it already?
People often seem to forget that the type of solution which benefits you depends entirely on your needs.
Now in many, many cases, a Linux/Floss solution (even if not a 100% OS solution, then still substantial) will give you a BETTER solution. In other cases, M$ may give you a better solution. But these ‘other cases’ should compose a majority, while in reality we see a different picture (at least on home and corporate desktops).
The 86% numer seems far-fatched. Just like Windoze, it looks really over-hyped.
The problem is the installed windoze base creates an expectation pattern about how computers/software should be used to increase your productivity… Deploying a Linux/Unix file- and printserver instead of a Windoze server, will actually give an automatic boost in productivity, due to printers and file shares actually behaving like they are expected to behave. Or teaching staff not to send all of their text and comments ’embedded’ in a fscking word (.doc) – file!
oops, of course I meant to say: “these other cases should compose a MINORITY” …
I am not surprised that ppl don’t take the article seriously.
I wonder how long it takes before this comment will be distroyed.
“claimed an astounding 86 percent of small- and mid-sized businesses either use the server bundle or are planning to deploy it.”
So 86% of ALL small and mid-sized businesses use this product, even though plenty of SMB don’t even use computers, let alone servers. Hmm. Better consider me skeptical. Who would publish such extreme and unsubstantiated numbers?
“”Who knew this was going to be such as huge hit?” said Laura DiDio, the Yankee Group senior analyst who conducted the survey of some 500 small and mid-sized businesses, as well as resellers and consultants. ”
Oh! Well that explains a lot now, doesn’t it. DiDio and Yankee are notorious Microsoft and SCO shills. I wonder where they got this 500 company sample. Was it subscribers to Sunbelt Software’s Windows 2000 Newsletter again?
By the way, I will be installing two new Linux servers for an SMB within the next few weeks.
How is this suprising? IMO linux isn’t being marketed to the masses. Many purchasing decisions are made by people with no I.T knowledge and most of them still buy into a windows solution. Where there is perhaps a lot of room for growth, it seems to me, is in linux alternatives being better marketed by consultants who target the small to medium business.
Who wants to go explaining that it is not exchange or sql? My god, that is what sales people are supposed to feed on! SELL the product….make it sound cheaper and better, make the customer feel like they are in on something new and exciting, which is also compatible, well supported AND cheaper. How did AMD and the makers of the “IBM clones” make their bucks when they were LIKE their competitor but cheaper and/or better?
I am regularily goading my bosses to consider selling and supporting linux based systems that do the job of the MS small busines server. They are interested, but a little apprehensive when it comes to building up and commiting to the support infrastructure. Fear is perhaps a major part of what is holding Linux back from dominating this market. Especially when it would be managed by someone outside the company deploying it.
Small business server is a pretty sweet package… you guys might want to try it out before automatically disregarding the statistic. For the price, it’s hard *not* to recommend to a lot of the small businesses that I work with.
Guys, most of the money for resellers is in ongoing support. The trick many use is to field a product that breaks enough that the customer needs to keep them around and on a fat retainer, but that doesn’t break so often that the customers “lose the faith.”
If resellers sold a solid product that worked and required minimal post-sale support, they’d go out of business. I do limited contract work on the side marketing Linux-based solutions. I have a server that’s been in production at one client’s site for seven years with only a few hours of support each year. The client doesn’t want to bother upgrading it because it’s worked without flaw and only screwed up when they had other firms work on it. (Yes, the hardware is ready to fall apart, but until it does, they won’t upgrade.)
If you run a small business (like myself) with only a couple of people who is not working with computers but only use them as a tool you’d be surprised to see how few options really exist. Windows servers have always been very easy to set up and get running the way you want them too (and I hear 2k3 is even easier). We all know that Linux is just not a good option if you’re not a techie to use for server tasks (since it’s just not hardened by default and CLI is just not it for SMS people). Surely you COULD perhaps use OSX servers (haven’t tried) but I figure they also force you into doing some techie stuff to get working.
We considered Linux in my office, but it’s simply not that reliable for a non techie to handle if something goes wrong….
http://blog.informationweek.com/windows/archives/2004_04.html
“*In its first six months of availability, Small Business Server 2003 grew at “close to 190%” the rate of its predecessor, SBS 2000.”
First off, I’d like to state that I agree whole heartedly with dukeinlondon, and tech_user.
Linux simply doesn’t offer the software many of these businesses require. My father owns a small company which uses a Windows server. Linux, or even OS X for that matter, don’t offer the software his business requires, most of which tech_user mentioned.
It’s not _free_ software that we need, it’s existing software being available on alternate platforms using existing open standards (i.e. non-proprietary databases).
It doesn’t matter who funded this survey. Walk into any small business, I bet you’d find that 9 out of 10 businesses use a Windows server.
“500 small and mid-sized businesses, as well as resellers and consultants.”
This means this survey is totally bogus. No enough data and probably picked in some MS county.
I feel that I have to say this…
I am, for the most part, a linux and OSS advocate. I don’t like Microsoft’s business practices, and so I do not use any of their software at home (and try to avoid it in business when possible, although it is so entrenched that every now and then I am forced to use it).
However, I have to say that Windows SMB 2003 is one of the slickest packages I have ever seen. It is insanely easy to set up and administer (although I haven’t really had to support the system, I have heard that it doesn’t break as easily as the older iterations).
Novell Originally created a small buisness package. I guess they were not successfull in getting any momentum before MS did. Cost is always a factor. Plus the new technicians are all MSCEs.
Most of the people posting here on this topic have probablu zero experience with SBS 2003. The only thing they can come up with is to put $ where an S should be.
This makes me think that you are 12 years old and posting during a break from playing X-Bill.
@Anonymous (IP: —.tiscali.ch)
“This means this survey is totally bogus. No enough data and probably picked in some MS county.”
Do you realize how ridiculous it sounds to make a statement about “some MS county”?
What on earth is a ‘non techie’ person doing anywhere NEAR a server that fulfills a critical role for a company??? Every Joe Sixpack can set up a small network to play Quake with his buddies. Setting up a computer network for a business is a completely different thing.
It is a specialized and technical task and you need someone competent and technical to do it. This goes for any operating system at any point in time. There is no such thing as a shortcut to a secure and simple server that behaves exactly like you want it to. Either you get a feature-stripped black box that only does one thing moderately well, or an unstable and insecure monstrosity the likes of which are plentiful in the Windows world. This is simply not acceptable within a business scenario.
Personally I was able to learn how to set up and maintain FreeBSD. It’s quite spartan compared to Windows. I am by no means a genius of any sort, yet I managed to master a command line. If I can do it, anyone can.. and there is no forgiving anyone for being too lazy to learn (or for being too cheap to hire proper technicians). When your business comes crashing down around you because of a server failure, you’ll be sorry that you cut corners on your IT infrastructure and support.
What blows my mind is that folks on these boards routinely yell out for anti-trust to go and “fix” Microsoft. This is like infecting the population with Ebola to wipe out the flu.
We should all realize the Microsoft is far less of a threat than having the government nictitate to all of us how we should manage innovation, technology and how we move forward in a technological world
SBS has many advantages over Linux based Solutions. Its has superior hardware support, superior software support. Also system admins for Windows are cheaper than comparable Linux admins and thats only if you an find a good one. I have seen some I wouldnt let touch a keyboard. When asked I myself always recommend SBS. Now, you can deploy Open Source software on Small Business Server. Such as Apache, MySQL and a host of others so customers do have a choice. Apache does work very well on Server 2003 and Server 2000 among other MS operating systems.
<blockquote>We should all realize the Microsoft is far less of a threat than having the government nictitate to all of us how we should manage innovation, technology and how we move forward in a technological world.</blockquote>
Just like how AT&T was innovating before the government broke up their monopoly?
Do you remember the acoustic modems with sound cups that you had to put the reciever into because it was illegal to directly connect to AT&Ts phone lines?
Do you remember having to buy a phone from AT&T at exhorbitant prices with no choice in the style of phone you could get?
*sarcasm* Thank god the government didn’t step in and break up AT&T. Where would we be today if AT&T had been prevented from innovating and developing new technologies? I’m glad that AT&T never used their control of the market to overcharge its customers for unwanted, useless services and hardware while crushing competition. *sarcasm*
Innovation does not happen in a one sided market, without a healthy competative environment there is no impetus for a company to offer new products or to invest in improving older products.
“” “500 small and mid-sized businesses, as well as resellers and consultants.”
This means this survey is totally bogus. No enough data and probably picked in some MS county. ”
So, when the 500 Linux developers were asked three weeks ago on who was hacked or gotten a virus and 96 percent of them said that they had never been hacked then I guess it is safe to ignore that data too?
I don’t find it surprising. We’re talking small businesses here, they have no IT department. They’re looking for something that practically sets itself up. Whether or not Windows does that doesn’t matter, it has that reputation and they have a comfort level with it.
What’s a few thousand dollars if you don’t have to worry about wasting a weeks of work (if it’s a successful business, that’s worth more than a few thousand) and possibly losing clients over your database?
They just don’t seem to realize that they’d do just fine deploying Linux as quite a few vendors will pretty much setup your system for you, personally, at a fairly reasonable fee.
One must wonder why the small businessman so quickly trusts the big business? What does that say about small businesses?
*sarcasm* Thank god the government didn’t step in and break up AT&T. Where would we be today if AT&T had been prevented from innovating and developing new technologies? I’m glad that AT&T never used their control of the market to overcharge its customers for unwanted, useless services and hardware while crushing competition. *sarcasm*
How does the above pertain to the viability of SBS 2003 ? How can you even compare MS to AT&T. AT&T was a monoply due to ownership of physical infrastructure which gave it a captive market share.
MS has no physical infrastructure as such and is only a monoply because a majority of users choose to make it thier desktop OS.
With AT&T thier was no choice with MS there is. As far as that goes I live in Sprint territory and I have no choice but to use them for my local phoen company, but I can use Linux, BSD, OSX etc etc on my PC.
I really don’t see what you are complaining about or why.
“What’s a few thousand dollars if you don’t have to worry about wasting a weeks of work (if it’s a successful business, that’s worth more than a few thousand) and possibly losing clients over your database?”
SBS 2003 Standard is $600.00 with five CALS and Premium is around $1500.
@anonymous
“Windows servers have always been very easy to set up and get running the way you want them too (and I hear 2k3 is even easier). ”
This has gotta be a windup, surely you mean “always easy to follow the clicks to an insecure box”. Then of course the settings go back to default spontaneously on occasion.
We all know that Linux is just not a good option if you’re not a techie to use for server tasks (since it’s just not hardened by default and CLI is just not it for SMS people).
and SBS is ????
“and SBS is ????”
If you are refering to hardened by default, I would suggest you download an eval of SBS 2003 and find out for yourself, that it is hardened by default.
“So, when the 500 Linux developers were asked three weeks ago on who was hacked or gotten a virus and 96 percent of them said that they had never been hacked then I guess it is safe to ignore that data too?”
No you can’t ignore that, because it’s a question asked to a certain community. We know that 100% of them use Linux, we want to know if they had viruses.
In today’s bogus survey, it’s said that “86 percent of small- and mid-sized businesses either use the server bundle or are planning to deploy it.”
As if this survey was representative of how generally SME behave…It would take a lot more data to get a real representation.
What they could have said was that 86% of the SME that used MS software before, either use the server bundle or are planning to deploy it. That would make sense. They feel at home.
“What they could have said was that 86% of the SME that used MS software before, either use the server bundle or are planning to deploy it. That would make sense. They feel at home.”
Guess what, probably +95% of SMB’s have used MS software before. So the percentage would be around 84% instead of 86%. I bet you are only going to complain 2% less because of this aren’t you?
” In today’s bogus survey, it’s said that “86 percent of small- and mid-sized businesses either use the server bundle or are planning to deploy it.”
Thats a two faced answer because this “bogus” survey as you called it was also asked of a certain community and group, small to medium sized businesses, just like the Linux question was asked to a certain group of users.
” As if this survey was representative of how generally SME behave…It would take a lot more data to get a real representation. ”
This was not a survey of the permormance os SBS 2003, this was a survery of how many companies are using it, how many companies are going to use it. I find this type of survey more straight up and honest than the survey done with Linux developers a couple of weeks ago.
…if these SB2003 users are essentially being handed turnkey systems, I wonder how many of these SB2003 machines I’m going to have to fend off viruses from?
an astounding 86 percent of small and mid-sized business either paid taxes or were planning to pay them.
“It clearly shows taxes are a remarkable hit [among SMS]” stated JiJio.
“…I wonder how many of these SB2003 machines I’m going to have to fend off viruses from?”
An astounding 86 percent?
I work for a medium size tax accounting firm. We have about 10 workstations running XP Pro and two servers; a Linux based mail and printer server and an application server running SBS 2003.
Why? Our firm must comply with Australian Federal Laws regarding data integrity and security. Moreover, the tax return processing application is not officially supported on non-MS Windows environment. At the end of the day, were stuck with MS Windows – and a subscription to Norton AntiVirus.
Yes, Linux is alot cheaper. Unfortunately, there are no sensible and legal alternatives for our firm… yet!