SBS Server or Windows Server?
Marci
purchased Windows Small Business Server 2003. I own a financial services
company, have a 10 computer network, run multiple applications and store
large amounts of data. (We are currently converting stored docs to
electronic.) Recently we've been experiencing some issues that, according to
my IT (outside vendor, not an employee), indicate that my server is dying. He
is now informing me that we need to move to Windows Server, and to eliminate
Windows Small Business Server. He says that SBS does not permit another
server to be present (something about domain control), and that the entire
process for moving to a new network will take approximately 80 hours, as you
can't move from SBS direct to Windows Server. He says that simply purchasing
a larger server will not fix the problem. We also use Exchange - heavily. He
says that this might be a problem, as we will lose all but our basic Outlook
contacts. We have customized Outlook with multiple forms, etc. Gosh - am I
about to lose everything? What is the best route to go? I'd appreciate any
responses.
SuperGumby [SBS MVP]
If the server is dying there is a specific thing wrong with it. That thing
should be fixed.
It sounds like your IT consultant is living under the popular illusion that
you cannot have additional DC's (Domain Controllers) in an SBS network. He
is wrong. You can have additional servers, both Member Servers and DC's.
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/sbs/techinfo/overview/licensingfaq.mspx
Q.I want to have additional Windows-based servers in my Windows Small
Business Server 2003 domain. Do I need CALs for those servers?
A.Your Windows Small Business Server 2003 CALs cover you for any additional
Windows-based servers in the domain. You do not need to buy additional CALs
for them.
If the server 'dying' requires SBS to be moved to new hardware, one process
which can be used is
http://www.smallbizserver.net/Default.aspx?tabid=141
How do I move my server to new hardware?
and if that cannot, for some reason, be used, this one's bulletproof
www.sbsmigration.com
It would also be possible to move to Windows Server 2003 (nonSBS) + Exchange
Server without losing a single mail item.
"Marci" <Ma...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:79400F86-0F66-467B...@microsoft.com...
Merv Porter [SBS-MVP]
mechanical problems. Other than this, if it is providing an adequate
solution for your needs, you can do a "swing migration" to new hardware and
keep all existing Exchange and user data. You would need to reinstall your
3rd party applications on the new server and transfer any asscoaited data
tot he new server.
Almost all of this "migration" to new server hardware can be done "offline"
so that your business suffers the minimum of interruption.
Can I ask where you are located?
Not sure why he wants to move you away from SBS 2003. There may be a vaild
reason, but we'd need to have more details to make a good assessment of your
situtation. It may be that the IT consultant is just unfamiliar SBS and
feels more comfortable with having separate servers for the Wondows 2003
operating system, file and print needs and Exchange needs.
SBS can indeed have other domain controllers (servers that hold a copy of
your Active Directory - user account info) in its network. That's not a
limitation.
With the info you've provided so far, I see no reason to move away from SBS
2003.
--
Merv Porter [SBS MVP]
===================================
"Marci" <Ma...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:79400F86-0F66-467B...@microsoft.com...
Marci
I am located in West-Central PA. Very rural location, but we try to keep up
with technology. :) The IT says the problem is with the motherboard. I only
know we've had a few boot failures, etc., and messages that something is
"bad" (CMOS???). I just really wanted a second opinion on this because this
would mean major downtime, changes (which always include learning curves,
etc.) - a major upheaval in my business. This guy is a network admin for a
major corporation - maybe he is used to dealing with big companies?
Merv Porter [SBS-MVP]
motherboard or server?
And yes, it sounds like this IT person is used to working with the big boys
where you have server for each application.
--
Merv Porter [SBS MVP]
===================================
"Marci" <Ma...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:E9A9E6EA-EDEB-4E30...@microsoft.com...
Gregg Hill
to have no idea what SBS can do and how to migrate it.
If you only get the CMOS errors when you first boot, it is possible that you
have nothing more than a weak motherboard battery. Replace the battery, set
the CMOS where it should be, and then do a few reboots to see if the error
comes back.
If you need to go to new hardware, use the www.sbsmigration site already
recommended.
Gregg Hill
"Marci" <Ma...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:E9A9E6EA-EDEB-4E30...@microsoft.com...
Leonid S. Knyshov
news:79400F86-0F66-467B...@microsoft.com...
To summarize, there is no need to move from SBS. SBS is a somewhat tricky
integrated platform that requires dedicating some time to learning it and
most IT consultants haven't done that. Moreover, as it includes Exchange, to
a lot of IT professionals that is a "black box". That being said, however,
please do me a favor and verify that your current backups are completing
successfuly. You can check this in the Configure Backup wizard. I recommend
keeping a copy of SystemState backup along with a session of Exchange backup
on an external hard disk that is usually kept offsite, in addition to
regular backups. Please attempt to restore that backup from scratch on a
barebones machine that is not connected to a production to familiarize
yourself with the process and to verify that you can in fact rely on that
backup should your primary server require a rebuild. Moreover, I would make
sure that I have a backup of those custom Outlook forms and add-ins as well.
To help manage your storage growth requirements, as digitized documents will
overwhelm your built-in storage, I would recommend a storage array. The SATA
technology should be sufficient for your long-term needs and within your
budget. I would keep the Exchange database on a RAID1 or RAID10, and the
document storage on a RAID5. You can use the built-in Sharepoint services to
help manage your paperless office documents. Contrary to your vendor's
statements, SBS will support:
1. Additional domain controllers (gives you additional peace of mind should
Active Directory fail on the SBS machine).
2. Direct attached and network storage (gives you more disk space without
requiring extra servers)
3. Seemless Exchange migration with zero data loss should you grow beyond
the I/O capabilities of your server (although that should be handled by a
disk array as the CPU utilization should not be that big of a deal for a
10-user company)
Replacing a motherboard is a simple procedure that takes less than 2 hours
for a qualified professional. I would try that first. :-) While you are at
it, see what the maximum amount of RAM your motherboard will support. I
typically configure these machines with 2GB of RAM and if you do not have
that much in it already, I would take this opportunity to add the extra
chips. SBS will happily consume additional RAM and reward you with higher
performance.
--
Leonid S. Knyshov, CEO
Crashproof Solutions, LLC - http://www.crashproofsolutions.com
MCP Exchange 2003/Small Business Server 2003, CCNA, SCSA 8
Microsoft Small Business Specialist Partner
![Susan Bradley, CPA aka Ebitz - SBS Rocks [MVP]'s profile photo](http://lh3.googleusercontent.com/a-/ALV-UjVWEHNriBiYPzXk-vgDPwHLgmiXqqoZ_BdoNm0rTxa-ZYFnAw=s40-c)
Susan Bradley, CPA aka Ebitz - SBS Rocks [MVP]
where you didn't think this sounded right and came to a forum of folks
that basically told you to go fire this person.
I am saddened that in the years since I went to Microsoft partners and
asked them about SBS 2000 and they tried to talk me out of it that there
are still partners who should not be in business... should not be
recommending solutions, do not have a clue about small business, and
continue to refuse to take the time to read or learn.
This is his job, his business, and the fact that this person is so
woefully undereducated when it comes to the means of utilizing
technology, in knowing what the things he is selling and supporting
does, is amazing to me.
Shame on him for holding himself out to be an IT consultant...and good
for you for knowing that this just didn't sound right.
Tom G.
news:79400F86-0F66-467B...@microsoft.com:
> I am not an IT, but didn't know where else to go for answers... A year
> ago I purchased Windows Small Business Server 2003. I own a financial
> services company, have a 10 computer network, run multiple
> applications and store large amounts of data. (We are currently
> converting stored docs to electronic.) R
We run 25 computers, store large amounts of data, run lots of applications
and have several users running remotely. We use SBS 2003. The only thing we
don't do is use the SBS box as an application server. If we start doing
that, we will use a 2nd box.
Get your hardware fixed and keep the SBS. I'd consider firing the IT guy
and put the savings into a really good, solid box.
--
Tom
Russ Grover
--
Russ Grover
Small Business IT Support
SBS Rocks!
Portland/Beaverton OR
Email: Sales at SBITS.Biz
Website: http://www.SBITS.Biz
"SuperGumby [SBS MVP]" <n...@your.nellie> wrote in message
news:ebo46lQ...@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
CO-DBA-SC-EL
motherboard? If that has not been done, try that first. Even "fresh"
batteries sometimes go bad. It's amazing how often a "bad" computer just has
a bad battery. Old fashioned obvious hardware debugging steps, like
reseating cards and connectors (with power cord unplugged, of course), hard
disk surface scans and diagnosis, and replacing the power supply are also
worth trying. Also, updating the BIOS is sometimes required to keep up with
software updates and patches.
If the MB is actually bad (unfortunately a too frequent occurence these
days), a one for one swap with an identical MB model might fix the problem
(to be attempted only after doing a thoroughly verified, full back up of
course). Of course, the hard part may be to buy the same MB if you don't
have a spare.
If that doesn't do it then it is time to look for a knowledgeable IT, as
recommended by the other posters
C_O
"Marci" <Ma...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:E9A9E6EA-EDEB-4E30...@microsoft.com...
AllenM
"Marci" <Ma...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:79400F86-0F66-467B...@microsoft.com...
>I
> purchased Windows Small Business Server 2003. I own a financial services
> company, have a 10 computer network, run multiple applications and store
> large amounts of data. (We are currently converting stored docs to
> electronic.) Recently we've been experiencing some issues that, according
> to
> my IT (outside vendor, not an employee), indicate that my server is dying.
If your server is dying (hardware) what does migrating to Windows Server
2003 have to do with it? For a comapny of your size SBS is perfect for you.
I think your IT guy is dying and needs to be migrated to the unemployment
line.
>He is now informing me that we need to move to Windows Server, and to
>eliminate
> Windows Small Business Server. He says that SBS does not permit another
> server to be present (something about domain control), and that the entire
> process for moving to a new network will take approximately 80 hours, as
> you
> can't move from SBS direct to Windows Server.
Absolutely incorrect. Windows SBS Server can have other Windows 2003 servers
within the domain. What it cannot have is 2 SBS Servers in the same domain.
80 hours to do a migration from SBS to Windows 2003 server? First of all you
wouldn't want to do this. you are a small company and SBS is perfect for
you. Secondly sounds like he is trying to milk you for some very expensive
consulting time. An environment as small as yours should take no more than 1
day or at the most 1 weekend to migrate. and that would be from stratch with
new hardware.
>He says that simply purchasing a larger server will not fix the problem. We
>also use Exchange - heavily. He
> says that this might be a problem, as we will lose all but our basic
> Outlook
> contacts. We have customized Outlook with multiple forms, etc. Gosh - am I
> about to lose everything? What is the best route to go? I'd appreciate any
> responses.
Puchasing new hardware will definitely fix your hardware issues if you have
any. You will not lose any Exchange information and that includes Contacts
if you follow the proper procedures for Migrating Exchange to new hardware.
AllenM
"specific" on what the issues are that leads him to think your server is
dying. sounds very generic to me and I'm sure you will get a lot of the
Newsgroup people to agree that this IT guy has no clue to SBS and his
suggestion to downgrade and switch you over to Windows 2003 Server is simply
because he is familiar and comfortable with working in that environment. Ask
him if he is going to load Exchange, ISA and SQL server on this new Windows
2003 Server and if it will also be your print server. file server and where
is he going to put your company web at? If he says he will install them all
on the new server, fire him immediately.
"Marci" <Ma...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:79400F86-0F66-467B...@microsoft.com...
Marci
ask what "specifically" is wrong? I'm going to paste his response to me here
and maybe you can understand it. I can't. He says, "Bottom line is that you
need to get another box on your network. Both scenario's (SBS or Server
2003) do not require us to rebuild you network; therefore saving time and
money. You need redundancy no matter how you look at it. Even if you decide
to to keep SBS 2003, you still need Windows Server 2003 Software Licenses for
your remaining servers. Why not just implement Server 2003; take advantage
of it's ability, and have a much more redundant network. In my opinion, I
would not recommend keeping SBS because you have to many things wrong with
your current SBS Server to do the migration."
I'm not sure what is currently wrong with my SBS Server. Does this mean
anything to you folks?
Marci
Marci
I'm not sure I understand everything you've written - some of it is beyond
me. (I'm really not an IT, just someone looking to make the right decision
for my business.) Why is my IT concerned that we can't have two SBS on the
network? (He sent me clips from MS website that states that you cannot have
two SBS servers.) Do I need two? What is the difference between the SBS and
Windows Server that makes him so adamant that we switch? I've been happy with
how things are running (if it ain't broke, don't fix it.); I just bought SBS
last year -wasn't anticipating more expense right now; if i need another
"box", can't one just be added? Even if I need my "Main" server to be bigger,
can't we just move the SBS program to it?
Chad A. Gross [SBS-MVP]
No, that really doesn't tell us anything. Bottom line is that I would want
specific reasons for why he wants you to move to another server, and what
redundancy he thinks you need. If he thinks you need another domain
controller, ask him why . . . and ask him how having more than one domain
controller complicates a disaster recovery?
When installed on proper server-grade hardware, I have complete faith in
SBS. I have several dozen clients all running SBS, and only a few have an
additional domain controller (and that is for very specific reasons). I
have clients who are on their second and third SBS boxes . . . and these
same customers have only ever had one server.
Personally, for a 10 user firm - I think an additional DC is overkill.
--
Chad A. Gross [SBS-MVP]
SBS ROCKS!
www.msmvps.com/blogs/cgross
www.mobitech.biz
"Marci" <Ma...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:FD035A23-FD99-4388...@microsoft.com...
Susan Bradley, CPA aka Ebitz - SBS Rocks [MVP]
controller here.
Chad A. Gross [SBS-MVP]
--
Chad A. Gross [SBS-MVP]
SBS ROCKS!
www.msmvps.com/blogs/cgross
www.mobitech.biz
"Marci" <Ma...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:307BF419-888C-4C66...@microsoft.com...
> Leonid,
> I'm not sure I understand everything you've written - some of it is beyond
> me. (I'm really not an IT, just someone looking to make the right decision
> for my business.) Why is my IT concerned that we can't have two SBS on the
> network? (He sent me clips from MS website that states that you cannot
> have
> two SBS servers.)
Because he is right that you can't have two SBS servers on the network. The
reason for this is that SBS presents such a great value to the small
business that Microsoft put some restrictions on it to make sure that big
business couldn't buy SBS and get it to work in their larger networks. One
of the results of those restrictions is that you can't have two SBS servers
on the same network. Effectively, SBS has to be 'king of the hill' for your
network, so if you have two, they will fight for the top position, and it
just gets ugly :^)
> Do I need two?
Maybe. Maybe not. If you have a LOB app or anything else where you need a
Terminal Server or Citrix server, then yes - you would want a second server.
If however, the desire for a second server is simply for an extra domain
controller (e.g. redundancy) - then I would say that the extra
administration costs of buying the second server, setting up this redundancy
and maintaining it outweigh the benefits.
> What is the difference between the SBS and Windows Server that makes him
> so adamant that we switch?
I don't know why he wants you to move away from SBS. Quite frankly, Windows
Server 2003 Std costs more than SBS 2003 Std, and gives you less
functionality. SBS gives you Exchange, all of the adminstration wizards,
and Remote Web Workplace, in addition to Windows Server and Sharepoint
Services (companyweb). Sure, you could install Exchange on top of Windows
server, but why would you pay so much more for the same functionality? And
you can't get Remote Web Workplace anywhere else - SBS is the only product
where that functionality is currently available. If I had to take a guess,
I would say it is a comfort level recommendation. Coming from a larger
company, he doesn't have experience with SBS, only with Windows Server.
That's what he knows - so that's what he wants you to use, because it will
make his job easier, even if it isn't the best solution for you.
> I've been happy with
> how things are running (if it ain't broke, don't fix it.); I just bought
> SBS
> last year -wasn't anticipating more expense right now; if i need another
> "box", can't one just be added? Even if I need my "Main" server to be
> bigger,
> can't we just move the SBS program to it?
Yes. You can add Windows 2003 servers to your SBS network, although in most
scenarios it isn't necessary. And yes, if you do have a irrecoverable
hardware problem, you can get a bigger server and move your SBS installation
from the current box to the new box. And personally, I think 80 hours to
move is a little on the high side . . . but then again, I haven't seen
your installation . . .
If you want a second opinion, I would be happy to take a look at your server
remotely . . .
Marci
I would very much like a second opinion. I just don't know enough to make a
determination on this. It's late now, but send me info on what i need to do
to let you take a look, and I will do what I need to do. And thank you all
for the info.
"Chad A. Gross [SBS-MVP]" wrote:
Chad A. Gross [SBS-MVP]
Contact me directly via email: cgross at mobitech dot biz
--
Chad A. Gross [SBS-MVP]
SBS ROCKS!
www.msmvps.com/blogs/cgross
www.mobitech.biz
"Marci" <Ma...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:CC0ECC42-F3B6-4B6E...@microsoft.com...
Gregg Hill
referring to Client Access Licenses. If you add a Windows Server 2003
computer to the network, per the current Microsoft stance (still under
discussion with Microsoft and myself), you need the OS to be licensed (which
may be what he meant) and you need one SBS 2003 CAL for that server to be
licensed to connect to the SBS 2003 server.
Other than that, your SBS 2003 CALs cover your users or devices accessing
other servers in the network.
Gregg Hill
"Marci" <Ma...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:FD035A23-FD99-4388...@microsoft.com...
/kj
on my network", what "redundancy", how W2003 server is going to achieve
that, and specific details of what was "wrong" with my SBS server, and just
what "migration" is being proposed.
/kj
"Gregg Hill" <bo...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:u0elEbjJ...@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
Leonid S. Knyshov
> Leonid,
> I'm not sure I understand everything you've written - some of it is beyond
> me. (I'm really not an IT, just someone looking to make the right decision
> for my business.) Why is my IT concerned that we can't have two SBS on the
> network? (He sent me clips from MS website that states that you cannot
> have
> two SBS servers.) Do I need two? What is the difference between the SBS
> and
> Windows Server that makes him so adamant that we switch? I've been happy
> with
> how things are running (if it ain't broke, don't fix it.); I just bought
> SBS
> last year -wasn't anticipating more expense right now; if i need another
> "box", can't one just be added? Even if I need my "Main" server to be
> bigger,
> can't we just move the SBS program to it?
>
Hi Marci,
What I wrote is a basic summary of a typical procedure we follow before we
do any major changes to the system, such as a motherboard replacement.
You have no reason to switch from using SBS2003 and the information that is
being presented to you is frankly irrelevant. This product requires
additional training beyond the standard Windows 2003 Server, which is why
you are encountering resistance. My argument is that the individual who
supports this backoffice-in-a-box product has to actually be more skilled
than someone who typically runs larger networks. :-) This is primarily due
to Exchange and Sharepoint, that are typically delegated to more senior
staff. This point is not made clear, which is why quite a few of us in this
group have to fix a lot of issues that happen because someone didn't use the
SBS way to get something done and tried something different instead. For the
record, tiny networks like yours can be migrated in under 8 hours when we
have to do that. In your case, there is absolutely no reason for any
migrations to take place.
There are no technical restrictions that affect your situation regarding
additional domain controllers, which is all you need to know. I think this
opinion so far has been confirmed by more than 5 of us, so it should be
true. ;-)
If disaster strikes, Microsoft will support you to bring you back on your
feet. It's actually very cost-effective, by the way. Whomever you choose to
support your server should be a Small Business Specialist (MVPs are) who has
passed exam 70-282. A large portion of that exam has to do with using the
SBS wizards properly. If someone attempts to do something on an SBS server
that we typically do manually on regular servers, that actually can have
adverse effect on the SBS machine. You can find a local SBS specialist at
http://www.microsoft.com/smallbusiness/partner/vendorsearch.mspx. There are
relatively few of us per given area, so it should be pretty obvious. You can
also choose to work with someone from this group as well.
--
Leonid S. Knyshov, CEO
Crashproof Solutions, LLC - http://www.crashproofsolutions.com
MCP Exchange 2003/Small Business Server 2003, CCNA, SCSA 8, NCIE
AllenM
Well Im sure by now form all the responses you are getting it may be getting
a bit confusing here for you. So let me break down what the consensus is
from the responses you have received.
1. Fire the IT guy. A majority consensus.
2. If there is a hardware issue with your current server (i.e. motherboard)
you do not have to get another server and switch to Windows 2003 Server.
Depending on how old your server is you may still be under warranty to have
your issues resolved at no expense. If not get a person who is hardware
knowledge to do the work
3. You are a perfect shop to be using SBS 2003. Stay with it and hire a
consultant who is SBS "savvy".
4. The only reason you would have a need for another server (Windows 2003
server) in your existing SBS domain would be as an application server or
file server. You will not have to purchase any extra CAL's. If you buy
another server with Windows 2003 Server it will be legally licensed to use
in your SBS network. You do not want to be running applications on your SBS
server so you may want to consider this seeing how you run several
applications and store large amounts of data.
5. Being a small shop it is not economically feasable for you to buy another
server just for redundancy. A smart IT guy would know how to apply a RAID
fault tolerance for your existing server. I would suggest you have some type
of tape backup or perhaps another external device to do your backups.
Hope all this helps.
"Marci" <Ma...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:FD035A23-FD99-4388...@microsoft.com...
Marci
Funny you should mention that. I just requested from my IT that he give me
specific reasons for 1) purchasing a new server and 2) eliminating SBS. His
reasons were exactly what you just stated. He said my current server has "no
redundancy", and that I am "running too many services on one server." The
thing is, I DO have another server that he just charged me to set up two
months ago. I thought THAT was supposed to run the services or applications.
It runs Windows Server 2000. He aslo is now warning me that I do not have an
option. My server will fail and I will have no network functionality at all.
I do have an external hard drive that I had assumed was performing backups.
This whole thing is driving me nuts. I just want to do something simple -
like tax returns.
Merv Porter [SBS-MVP]
These are two separate issues here:
1) According to the tech, the SBS server may fail. This needs to be
diagnosed and remedied ASAP. Make sure you have fully nightly backups of
the SBS server beginning tonight. As you well know, you're entering tax
season and you don't need to lose any data due to not having good backups.
Since this is probably your busiest time of year, I'd "fix" the server very
soon and then worry about "moving away from SBS" later this summer.
2) "... You have too many services on the SBS server". This may or may not
be true but is a separate issue from "failing" hardware. This is a capacity
planning issue and needs to be carefully approached.
As others have said, you need a second opinion. If you can get your tech to
write down (email you) specifically what he has in mond, that would be a
good start.
--
Merv Porter [SBS MVP]
===================================
"Marci" <Ma...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:939E5F1B-5E43-4F97...@microsoft.com...
Gregg Hill
Prior to doing Allen's recommended step 1, make sure you have the
administrator password to the server. Then in rapid succession, change the
admin password and any other passwords he may know, FIRE YOUR IdioT GUY, and
find another one to administer your network. There are plenty of competent
SBS folks out here!
Gregg Hill
"Marci" <Ma...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:939E5F1B-5E43-4F97...@microsoft.com...
AllenM
Can you tell the group what type of servers you have? Make and model? How
old? How many hardrives and the capacity? Is there a RAID controller card in
the system or an onboard one? If yes, is it dual channel? << This is
important to be able to determine if and what level RAID fault tolerance can
be applied to the system. Get me these answers from your soon to be fired IT
guy and specifically what is wrong with the server and how he determined
that. From there we can suggest what "we" would do if we were your IT guy.
Good luck.
"Marci" <Ma...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:939E5F1B-5E43-4F97...@microsoft.com...
SuperGumby [SBS MVP]
| Products Released | General Availability Date | Mainstream Support Retired | Extended Support Retired | Service Pack Retired | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Windows 2000 Server |
2000-03-31T00:00:00 31/03/2000 |
2005-06-30T00:00:00 30/06/2005 |
2010-06-30T00:00:00 30/06/2010 |
Not Applicable |
Les Connor [SBS Community Member - SBS MVP]
--
Les Connor [SBS Community Member - SBS MVP]
-----------------------------------------------------------
SBS Rocks !
----------------------
"Tell me and I'll forget. Show me and I'll remember. Involve me and I'll understand." - Confucius
"SuperGumby [SBS MVP]" <n...@your.nellie> wrote in message news:%232%23IKk1J...@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
Chad A. Gross [SBS-MVP]
Marci has contact info for a couple SBSers within driving distance . . .
--
Chad A. Gross [SBS-MVP]
SBS ROCKS!
www.msmvps.com/blogs/cgross
www.mobitech.biz
"Les Connor [SBS Community Member - SBS MVP]" <les.c...@DEL.cfive.ca>
wrote in message news:%23O%23R0F2J...@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...