Windows 2003 Server for Small size users & should/Can they continue after EOL

Hi Everyone,

I want to put a question to you.

I have a few small customers and when i say small 1-5 that are struggling to find money in there business at the moment to move to the new 2012 platform and don't see the need as there currently 2003 platforms are doing the job they require.

I have advised them many times that Windows 2003 is going EOL and there will be no more security patches updates after that time.

My question is, in your opinion if it is doing the job they need, what are the direct security or performance implications of leaving them on that platform.

Please give me your advise

will they survive for a little longer

Adam



There have already been several instances where 2003 's aging architecture has made making certain patches too costly and Microsoft has chosen not to do so. This has broken certain interoperabilities between 2003 and win7/8. This trend will only accelerate.

For a 1-5 person business, essentials is incredibly affordable as are small business hardware servers such as the HP Microserver. I can honestly say that any business that can't come up with the money for such a small investment probably can't afford me (or I wouldn't trust them to not stiff me.)

I think it is incredibly irresponsible to continue running 2003 after EOL. I'd never let my clients think it was okay, and I'd "fire" any client that insisted. The liability to me, my own business, and my reputation would be to great if an incident did occur.



There have already been several instances where 2003 's aging architecture has made making certain patches too costly and Microsoft has chosen not to do so. This has broken certain interoperabilities between 2003 and win7/8. This trend will only accelerate.

For a 1-5 person business, essentials is incredibly affordable as are small business hardware servers such as the HP Microserver. I can honestly say that any business that can't come up with the money for such a small investment probably can't afford me (or I wouldn't trust them to not stiff me.)

I think it is incredibly irresponsible to continue running 2003 after EOL. I'd never let my clients think it was okay, and I'd "fire" any client that insisted. The liability to me, my own business, and my reputation would be to great if an incident did occur.



I would agree with Cliff. There are plenty of bad guys just waiting for your customers to be exposed.
You can get a Dell with Server Essentials 2012 for just over a grand. HP microserver will run about the same.
And if your same customer is running XP machines still...those need to go as well.



Agree 100% with the two comments above, another point if you remain on 2003 I would make sure you have a complete backup solution...it's just a matter of time before the server is dead and you have to rely on disaster recovery options. At this point "if / when" the server fails they will look back and realize they could probably have saved a substantial amount of money buying a new server. Disaster recover is NEVER cheap.



Thanks



Share this

Related Posts

There was an error in this gadget