Question fornetwork admin......2014

[Oyeve]

I have a question for those network admins who manage smallish networks. Will you be going Windows 2008-10-XX next year or sticking with 2003?

I ask because I manage 5 servers all running server 2003 and feel that we can run this until they die. 2 servers are MySQL servers, 1 server is a dedicated comet/PDF server (textile industry SW), 1 server is a terminal server and the other is a standard file server. I also have an exchange 2010 server running on 2008.

Do you guys plan on migrating over because EOL is next year or are you staying put?

 

[seepy83]

Always migrate before support ends. Running outdated operating systems (and software in general) that are no longer supported and no longer receiving updates is a recipe for disaster.

 

[ScottMac]

Adding to the above: You need to test the migration first to see if your existing software is compatible with the new OS and have time to work out the bugs before anything becomes critical.

 

[Mushkins]

To add to all of the above, *never* run a production server "until it dies." Budget to replace every 5 or 6 years at most. Then you know when you need to have the money, and you avoid your business losing god knows how much money when John Smith was about to close a million dollar account but didnt have access to his documents because the old server finally crapped out and you couldn't recover from backup before he lost the client to another firm. Not to mention untold headaches from replacing a server while the current one is down for the count and you didnt have a backup DC to migrate AD from.

Small business IT is already held together by strings and duct tape enough, no reason to make more trouble than you're already dealing with.

 

[ScottMac]

Sometimes the cheapest network options are the most expensive.

The least expensive path doesn't always represent the best value.

... and the oft-quoted: "You get what you pay for"

... and to top it all off: "Failing to plan is planning to fail"

Murphy grew up and lives in the network; the absolute worst thing will happen exactly when it will do the most damage.

Mushkins nailed it.

 

[drebo]

Replacing a server before it fails is less than half the cost in labor and downtime than waiting until it fails. It's also much, much simpler.

Windows Server 2008 R2 is a great platform and is very mature at this point. Server 2012 is pretty decent and has some nice things going for it, despite the fact that Microsoft completely FUBARed the GUI.

I have no issues recommending and deploying either to my customers.

I am, however, going to start plastering "recommended replacement dates" on customer's servers. We have too many that are running 8+ year old servers and then wonder why they die or need constant maintenance.

 

[imagoon]

Last 3 companies I worked for... 1) retired 2003 entirely Was 2008R2 when I left. 2) Retired 2003, mix of 2008 / R2 when I left. 3) Mostly retired here with the random odd ball VM. Migration plans are in effect anyway.

There is zero good reasons to keep sitting on 2k3 at this point.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

I have a question for those network admins who manage smallish networks. Will you be going Windows 2008-10-XX next year or sticking with 2003?

I ask because I manage 5 servers all running server 2003 and feel that we can run this until they die. 2 servers are MySQL servers, 1 server is a dedicated comet/PDF server (textile industry SW), 1 server is a terminal server and the other is a standard file server. I also have an exchange 2010 server running on 2008.

Do you guys plan on migrating over because EOL is next year or are you staying put?

You should plan to move before support ends, especially with such a tiny installation that you have.

P.S. Aren't you an IT Director?