Cost to maintain a small office network?

[M.alex]

If you have a small office, say 6 people (6 desktops), one server, daily off-site backups and remote access to the computers, how much would you expect to pay per month for 3rd party IT maintenance services (i.e., configure and maintain network), excluding physical costs associated with hardware upgrades/fixes?

[revelations]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

If you have a small office, say 6 people (6 desktops), one server, daily off-site backups and remote access to the computers, how much would you expect to pay per month for 3rd party IT maintenance services (i.e., configure and maintain network), excluding physical costs associated with hardware upgrades/fixes?

If its setup right - as far as the network itself (ie good hardware, wifi is stable, power is on a UPS) - annual or biannual maintenance is all you really need.

1-2 hours per visit.

If by 'server' you are referring to a Windows Domain Controller, then it can be 2-3 hours a month. They used to be big money makers.

[M.alex]

By server I mean a centralized network computer where files are stored/worked on

I imagine though most 3rd party IT providers would charge some type of monthly maintenance fee to keep on top of it?

[firebane]

For a small office I am concerned how people have remote access and security setup properly.

That could increase costs too.

I would also be questioning the off site daily backups.

Best thing would be to get some quotes from places who cater to this work.

[Zhariak]

People might argue with me on this.... But....

Small environment like that, with a server (and AD), firewall, centralized AV software, backup/DR, etc.... I'd say if you wanted to do it properly, spend 1,000 to 1800'ish a month on a company that will monitor/manage/patch the server, software, updates, backup, and workstations.


I see companies pay hourly, or scheduled monthly maintenance, they've been compromised for 30 days without knowing, and the people coming to do the "maintenance" are level 1 techs that don't really do anything and miss MAJOR problems. These companies make their money off the extra billing when shit hits the fan because you aren't spending the money to maintain your environment.

I see companies spending 200-800/month on who knows what (just paying to be a client), nothing get's done and the IT company says it includes "some things they need", but can never say what they are doing. Again, these companies make their money off the extra billing when shit hits the fan.


It's not about being cheap, it's about doing it properly. If you do it properly, your stuff will always be up, you'll never have to call your provider. It's a win/win because all the maintenance is scheduled and in the background (no nightmares for your provider), and everything is always working for you and is up and running (no nightmare for you and your staff).

[rage2]

TIL small companies still rely on servers and off site backups.

If you define what your use cases are (documents, spreadsheets, quotes to customers, custom software etc) there's probably a better way than the classic client/server model. Anything not retail, you can probably get away with g-suite business ($10/user/month) and iPads with keyboards where there's no maintenance.

[firebane]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

TIL small companies still rely on servers and off site backups.

If you define what your use cases are (documents, spreadsheets, quotes to customers, custom software etc) there's probably a better way than the classic client/server model. Anything not retail, you can probably get away with g-suite business ($10/user/month) and iPads with keyboards where there's no maintenance.

I did some work earlier this year for an office who had setup 1 server running a couple virtualized servers.

They were also trying to push over 200gb to cloud storage in a 1Mbps connection

It was bad

[ExtraSlow]

I question the need for a physical server. I think that causes more problems than it solves for a company with 6 desks.

[benyl]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

TIL small companies still rely on servers and off site backups.

If you define what your use cases are (documents, spreadsheets, quotes to customers, custom software etc) there's probably a better way than the classic client/server model. Anything not retail, you can probably get away with g-suite business ($10/user/month) and iPads with keyboards where there's no maintenance.

haha, yeah. My side business runs Office 365. I have 6 users. I pay $6 for some users who just need email and SharePoint / OneDrive access. I pay $15 for those that need local office installs.

Everything in the cloud.

[revelations]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I question the need for a physical server. I think that causes more problems than it solves for a company with 6 desks.

MSP I used to work for pushed Windows Servers on everyone (2010s) just so that they can get the service contract.

It was so bad that one client, a company ended up with their own Exchange Server - for 1 person (with DC as well).

Complete dumbfuckery and no one could really get the firewall to play nice with the server either (prob DNS issues as usual).

[revelations]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I did some work earlier this year for an office who had setup 1 server running a couple virtualized servers.

They were also trying to push over 200gb to cloud storage in a 1Mbps connection

It was bad

wow .... thats almost as bad as a client using Telus MSP for their internet/firewall - head office downtown - pushing maybe 20mbs through their 12 year old Palo Alto shitbox - that was connected to Telus purefibre.

Telus MSP means you pay rental for a firewall thats out of date by a decade .... LOL (even the OS was never upgraded until I mentioned to them).

[revelations]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

By server I mean a centralized network computer where files are stored/worked on

I imagine though most 3rd party IT providers would charge some type of monthly maintenance fee to keep on top of it?

If you have just a Windows box acting as a file host (and not a Windows server), and assuming cloud options are not preferred - you are better off from a long term cost point to move to a QNAP or SYNOLOGY nas setup. It would reduce your monthly maintenance costs, as opposed to a Windows box that needs to be checked, updated, rebooted, etc.

The NAS systems will send out an email to a point person if something is wrong for eg. (backups failed, disk failing, etc.)

[Xtrema]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

haha, yeah. My side business runs Office 365. I have 6 users. I pay $6 for some users who just need email and SharePoint / OneDrive access. I pay $15 for those that need local office installs.

Everything in the cloud.

This is the right way to do most offices up to 20 people if there is no special applications requirements.

There are still some legal (or illegal) reason to keep managing a server onsite but it won't be as cheap as cloud for SMB.

[thetransporter]

make sure you have ransomware protection
and if you have back ups make sure the receiving device or remote server does not accept an overwrite of the file(s) if the incoming file is encrypted by ransomware.

[syscal]

Going to respond to this when I haven't been sipping whisky...if I remember to....

[suntan]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

TIL small companies still rely on servers and off site backups.

If you define what your use cases are (documents, spreadsheets, quotes to customers, custom software etc) there's probably a better way than the classic client/server model. Anything not retail, you can probably get away with g-suite business ($10/user/month) and iPads with keyboards where there's no maintenance.

This.