Remote Web Workplace alternatives?

I have decided that the only real benefit to any networks I set that SBS
offers is Remote Web Workplace as it makes it very easy for me to administer
remotely. There are no other features of SBS that warrant the extra cost
for what I do.

Is there a way to install Remote Web Workplace on Server 2003 Standard? Is
there an alternative that can be used instead? The ability to access any
machine on the network through the server is a great advantage for me. I
really like the way it works, but to pay for SBS just for this feature seems
crazy.

ss.

SBS is cheaper than Windows Server 2003 Standard. Your argument is
nonsensical. You get MORE for LESS with SBS.

Remote administration of ANY Windows 2000/2003 server is possible through
RDP (a minor part of RWW).

"Synapse Syndrome" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
>I have decided that the only real benefit to any networks I set that SBS
>offers is Remote Web Workplace as it makes it very easy for me to
>administer remotely. There are no other features of SBS that warrant the
>extra cost for what I do.
>
> Is there a way to install Remote Web Workplace on Server 2003 Standard?
> Is there an alternative that can be used instead? The ability to access
> any machine on the network through the server is a great advantage for me.
> I really like the way it works, but to pay for SBS just for this feature
> seems crazy.
>
> ss.
>

"SuperGumby [SBS MVP]" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> SBS is cheaper than Windows Server 2003 Standard. Your argument is
> nonsensical. You get MORE for LESS with SBS.

OK, it is the Premium version that I have used. To be honest I find it very
confusing and SQL and Excahnge aren't even used at the office I have used
it. I wasn't aware that SBS was cheaper than Standard Server 2003 though.
Is it possible to install SBS without much of what it installs? All this
extra stuff is just added complication. e.g. installing NNTP server by
default.. what?
>
> Remote administration of ANY Windows 2000/2003 server is possible through
> RDP (a minor part of RWW).

Yes, I know that. But accessing connected desktop machine is not possible
this way. The port used by RDP can only be forwarded to one machine and the
only way I can think of to access connected desktop machines is to cannect
to the server using RDP and then connect to the desktop machine using RDP
again from the server. Not nearly an elegant solution as using RWW.

ss.

>
> "Synapse Syndrome" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
>>I have decided that the only real benefit to any networks I set that SBS
>>offers is Remote Web Workplace as it makes it very easy for me to
>>administer remotely. There are no other features of SBS that warrant the
>>extra cost for what I do.
>>
>> Is there a way to install Remote Web Workplace on Server 2003 Standard?
>> Is there an alternative that can be used instead? The ability to access
>> any machine on the network through the server is a great advantage for
>> me. I really like the way it works, but to pay for SBS just for this
>> feature seems crazy.
>>
>> ss.
>>
>
>

BTW 'enterprise' admins SALIVATE over RWW, they have gone crawling on their
knees to the SBS Dev team to get this technology released to the standard
server market. It will possibly happen one day.

"SuperGumby [SBS MVP]" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> SBS is cheaper than Windows Server 2003 Standard. Your argument is
> nonsensical. You get MORE for LESS with SBS.
>
> Remote administration of ANY Windows 2000/2003 server is possible through
> RDP (a minor part of RWW).
>
> "Synapse Syndrome" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
>>I have decided that the only real benefit to any networks I set that SBS
>>offers is Remote Web Workplace as it makes it very easy for me to
>>administer remotely. There are no other features of SBS that warrant the
>>extra cost for what I do.
>>
>> Is there a way to install Remote Web Workplace on Server 2003 Standard?
>> Is there an alternative that can be used instead? The ability to access
>> any machine on the network through the server is a great advantage for
>> me. I really like the way it works, but to pay for SBS just for this
>> feature seems crazy.
>>
>> ss.
>>
>
>

Most 'enterprise admins' would probably VPN to the network and then RDP to
the workstations. SUX hey :-)

Though RWW is often referred to as the 'killer app' of SBS I find it easier
to justify SBS on the combination of Windows Server and Exchange. If you are
implementing SBS systems without Exchange you are doing the users a great
disservice.

"Synapse Syndrome" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:e$(E-Mail Removed)...
> "SuperGumby [SBS MVP]" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> SBS is cheaper than Windows Server 2003 Standard. Your argument is
>> nonsensical. You get MORE for LESS with SBS.
>
> OK, it is the Premium version that I have used. To be honest I find it
> very confusing and SQL and Excahnge aren't even used at the office I have
> used it. I wasn't aware that SBS was cheaper than Standard Server 2003
> though. Is it possible to install SBS without much of what it installs?
> All this extra stuff is just added complication. e.g. installing NNTP
> server by default.. what?
>>
>> Remote administration of ANY Windows 2000/2003 server is possible through
>> RDP (a minor part of RWW).
>
> Yes, I know that. But accessing connected desktop machine is not possible
> this way. The port used by RDP can only be forwarded to one machine and
> the only way I can think of to access connected desktop machines is to
> cannect to the server using RDP and then connect to the desktop machine
> using RDP again from the server. Not nearly an elegant solution as using
> RWW.
>
> ss.
>
>>
>> "Synapse Syndrome" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
>> message news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>I have decided that the only real benefit to any networks I set that SBS
>>>offers is Remote Web Workplace as it makes it very easy for me to
>>>administer remotely. There are no other features of SBS that warrant the
>>>extra cost for what I do.
>>>
>>> Is there a way to install Remote Web Workplace on Server 2003 Standard?
>>> Is there an alternative that can be used instead? The ability to access
>>> any machine on the network through the server is a great advantage for
>>> me. I really like the way it works, but to pay for SBS just for this
>>> feature seems crazy.
>>>
>>> ss.
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

"SuperGumby [SBS MVP]" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Most 'enterprise admins' would probably VPN to the network and then RDP to
> the workstations. SUX hey :-)
>
> Though RWW is often referred to as the 'killer app' of SBS I find it
> easier to justify SBS on the combination of Windows Server and Exchange.
> If you are implementing SBS systems without Exchange you are doing the
> users a great disservice.

Yes, I plan to learn about that some time.

Cheers

ss.