does SBS 2008 matter? not a bit.

reflecting on all my sbs 2003 deployments, these sites are the suck.  I like to keep things pure, seems like whenever something is shoehorned, it becomes uncomfortable real fast – so no WSS3, exchange 2007 or the latest SQL.  may not be a big deal to most, but as office 2007 busts in, the pain is real – broken tools in wss2, no html email on winmo (ok, not because of office07, but still a problem), and an inability to host the bcm database from office 07 on pre r2 deployments, and this is off the top of my head – read, dealt with in the last 72 hours.  the bundle is 5 years old.  5.  yeah, i know assurance would fix that, but it isn’t a free lunch – the client paid for SA and will pay for the upgrades – unless you fscked yourself with a service plan that includes all that. 

things will be great out the gate with sbs 2008, but what about 2,3,4 or 5 years from now?  who knows if there will be another release at all to migrate to.  considering the hosted offerings, its making more sense to whip a server 2008 deployment and go hosted with exchange and sharepoint.  not to mention the zimbra and google apps factor, which I am diggin more and more.  and anyone doing the serious with sharepoint is not using wss, they are using office sharepoint server, or whatever they call it now.

so whats the plan?  migrate off the sbs platform, forget all the caveats, wizardry, and nonsense.  leave all that for the amateur.  embrace hosted services, its already here.  straight up windows server 2008 and when user density hits the marks, bring the services like sharepooint and exchange on prem.  and consider, anyone doing anything serious with either isn’t doing it with sbs.

I dont think sbs 2008 makes a difference.  it’ll be ok for the new micro server deployment, but a migration path…not so much.  so dont get caught up in all the hoopla, its just there for your amusement and we aint in line for the carnival.