Sharepoint 2016 : holy cow that price

Forums › IT Pro and developers › Sharepoint 2016 : holy cow that price

1101

2077 posts

Uber Geek

#208362 8-Feb-2017 16:25

Hi Guys

Small Business still on SBS2008. Time for an upgrade

Ideally would be Server 2016 + exchange + sharepoint , (to keep email inhouse)

1 small issue : the cost of sharepoint 2016 (since there is no free bundle as part of SBS)
$10k+ . Thats one hell of a hit, for a domain with a dozen or so users

So Im looking at options that arnt the Cloud (although that will be an option to consider)

1 option: the free Sharepoint Foundation
Will Sharepoint Foundation 2013 install & run on Server2016 ?
Would they need to instead go to Server2012 & install Sharepoint Foundation on that
Exchange + sharepoint + SQL(for sharepoint) on the 1 server : too much ? asking for issues ?

Other options ?
Cheers

1 | 2

1308 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#1717268 8-Feb-2017 16:34

Whats the driver to keep it in house? Wouldn't 365 for Mail and Sharepoint be the best way to go for SMB?

365 E3 @ $20 per user per month would be $2880 a year for all mail, Office, Sharepoint, Lync/skype, OneDrive etc. Most SMB would surely prefer that Opex, hosted model to blowing a chunk of CapEx on a depreciating sofware asset and the servers to run it on.

1101

2077 posts

Uber Geek

#1717276 8-Feb-2017 16:45

Item:

Whats the driver to keep it in house? Wouldn't 365 for Mail and Sharepoint be the best way to go for SMB?

The manager would prefer to keep it all in house.
If thats no longer a reasonable option due to sharepoint costs , then 365 may be the best solution.

Just looking at options .
For a number of reasons, they need a in house Server regardless . The cost of a new server isnt an issue

Item

1308 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#1717283 8-Feb-2017 16:55

1101:

Item:

Whats the driver to keep it in house? Wouldn't 365 for Mail and Sharepoint be the best way to go for SMB?

The manager would prefer to keep it all in house.
If thats no longer a reasonable option due to sharepoint costs , then 365 may be the best solution.

Just looking at options .

IMHO, IAAS or SAAS or a combination thereof is almost always the best way to go these days in terms of cost, resilience, performance, scaleability and security.

As far as the "preferring to keep it in house" is concerned: If the data is particularly and unusually sensitive or if internet services are terminally poor and unreliable then there may better options, but IME top-tier cloud services are still almost always more secure than whatever in-house systems SMBs are prepared to pay for and manage! The obstacle is usually unraveling the reasons behind "preferring to keep it in house" which often amount to nothing more than a vague sense of mistrust or unease about their precious data being "in the cloud" rather than on a grey box under the desk in the cleaning cupboard.

Other Opinions are of course available and valid...

macuser

2120 posts

Uber Geek

#1717323 8-Feb-2017 18:13

Hi there

Are you currently working with a Microsoft partner? I'm guessing you're the internal IT person for your business.

If you're wanting some options (and hopefully better pricing on this software) I'm happy to take a look. I work for a Microsoft Partner managed service provider.

Send me a PM if interested and I can see what I can do.

As suggested above by item, Office 365 is likely a better fit due to being able to avoid that upfront cost, but if you've got to have it on prem, I can check if you can have it for less - or advise you on Office 365 solutions (though item knows what he's talking about).

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
67081 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#1717349 8-Feb-2017 19:11

Office 365 will probably be cheaper when you factor infrastructure costs (hardware, software, operating system, storage, local backup storage, remove backup storage, etc, etc)...

Inphinity

2565 posts

Uber Geek

#1717495 9-Feb-2017 09:04

For a small business with relatively mainstream needs, I wouldn't even bother looking at in-house solutions these days.

gehenna

6283 posts

Uber Geek

Moderator

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1717500 9-Feb-2017 09:25

1101:

The manager would prefer to keep it all in house.

In my experience that's a manager who doesn't know much about what s/he is talking about. Refer him/her to the GCIO paper on cloud services and data sovereignty. Your best option is SharePoint Online.

jnimmo

What does this tag do
1026 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#1717510 9-Feb-2017 09:45

Yeah - afraid to say there really is no viable option to run this in house, it just doesn't stack up - for the licensing alone let alone support costs and maintenance!

1101

2077 posts

Uber Geek

#1717571 9-Feb-2017 11:03

just 1 point

the company HAS TO have a server based local network
They have to run a server for a few specific applications (actually running 2 servers at the mo)

The older server is due for due for replacement. It will be replaced regardless.
So no huge hardware & maintenance savings in using the cloud

Obviously sharepoint 2016 is out of the question , just due to costs.
Cheers

timmmay

15923 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

#1717581 9-Feb-2017 11:39

gehenna:

In my experience that's a manager who doesn't know much about what s/he is talking about. Refer him/her to the GCIO paper on cloud services and data sovereignty. Your best option is SharePoint Online.

That paper, from memory, says it's allowed for government and it's secure, not that it's cheaper. In many cases cloud solutions (in the wider sense, not office specifically) are more expensive, but tend to have significant advantages in terms of ease of installation, no servers, managed backups and DR, etc. Security is a typical management concern when they don't understand IT or are very risk adverse.

MikeAqua

5674 posts

Uber Geek

#1717583 9-Feb-2017 11:42

If someone wants data that is stored on site they will get it.

Mike

1101

2077 posts

Uber Geek

#1717676 9-Feb-2017 13:58

Security of Cloud systems was never a concern

But if a company has for the last 20+ years ran all there PC/server systems inhouse, then moving much of that to the Cloud/365 is a big
change . Plus , they need to run local servers regardless.

Of course $10K ++ for sharepoint (+ cals) is a very good reason to move to 365.
Although Sharepoint Foundation 2013 + exchange server is another option .
I have to be able to give some options .

timmmay

15923 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

#1717686 9-Feb-2017 14:18

1101:

Security of Cloud systems was never a concern

Perhaps you mean security of cloud systems is typically excellent. It's a key concern for executives, who typically don't have a clue what "cloud" means. You can buy a hard drive with "cloud" written on the box.

jnimmo

What does this tag do
1026 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#1717715 9-Feb-2017 14:43

Big reduction in support costs and risk for configuring and maintaining Exchange, getting it all setup right with edge protection etc. Also no need to worry about DR/hardware failure for at least your email.

Still can run an on premise server for specialty apps/file server etc, but it is really nice not having to backup Exchange etc, and probably means you can put in a much lower spec server.

Dynamic

2768 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1717730 9-Feb-2017 15:06

jnimmo: ...it is really nice not having to backup Exchange...

Think very carefully about that statement. If you accidentally corrupt, or someone maliciously damages an email or a folder in your hosted Exchange mailbox (be it Office 365, Intermedia, or other), what are your recovery options?

If you accidentally delete (or something causes emails or a folder to be accidentally deleted) and you don't notice for a month, what are your recovery options?

"4 wheels move the body. 2 wheels move the soul."

“Don't believe anything you read on the net. Except this. Well, including this, I suppose.” Douglas Adams

1 | 2