Dell's Small Business Desktops Cheaper Than Comparable Home Desktops?

[Thorin]

Okay, so I've been tossing around the idea of buying another Dell desktop and using it as a file server; they're inexpensive, they're quiet, and they can hold two SATA drives.  I'll be installing Windows Server 2008 on it, as I have access to that from my MSDN subscription.  I was looking at that Inspiron 530 and 530s, thinking about maxing out the processor (it'll probably be soldered to the motherboard) under Dell's Home & Home Office section.  Then I had a quick look under the Small & Medium Business section, where they sell the Vostro 200 and 200s.

From everything I can see, the Inspiron 530 and Vostro 200 have identical architecture, but the Vostro is cheaper!  Here's the prices (going with no monitor):

Inspiron 530: $329
- Celeron 440 (2GHz, 800MHz FSB, doesn't even list L2 cache)
- 1GB RAM (2 x 512MB sticks)

Vostro 200: $329
- Pentium E2200 (2.2GHz, 800MHz FSB, 1MB L2 cache)
- 2GB RAM (2 x 1GB sticks)

Right off the bat, the Inspiron is less powerful than the Vostro.  So lets build the Inspiron up to the Vostro:

Inspiron 530: $459
- Pentium E2200 (2.2GHz, 800MHz FSB, 1MB L2 cache) adds $80
- 2GB RAM (2 x 1GB sticks) adds $50

Vostro 200: $329
- Pentium E2200 (2.2GHz, 800MHz FSB, 1MB L2 cache)
- 2GB RAM (2 x 1GB sticks)

So $130 more for the Inspiron.

Now lets top them both out for processor and RAM:

Inspiron 530: $679
- Pentium E8200 (2.66GHz, 1333MHz FSB, 6MB L2 cache) adds $200
- 4GB RAM (4 x 1GB sticks) adds $150

Vostro 200: $529
- Pentium E8400 (3GHz, 1333MHz FSB, 6MB L2 cache) adds $100
- 4GB RAM (4 x 1GB sticks) adds $100

That's $150 less for the machine with the faster processor.  Now, the Inspiron has that aesthetically-pleasing white and silver case while the Vostro has a black case, but I've never really cared about case aesthetics.  I've looked for other specs on both systems, and as far as I can tell they're using all the same components (for instance, BIOS chipset is Intel G33).

I'm wondering what the catch is...

[Lazybones]

You know those three options on the dell site Home/Small office, Medium business, and large business? They are all separate departments of dell with their own pricing systems. This used to even extend to the components, were if you ordered a stick of ram under one or the other it would be a vastly different price.

[Thorin]

Yeah, Home & Home Office, Small & Medium Business, Large Business.  I wonder if Small & Medium Business will sell to me.  Saving $150 while buying a (slightly) more powerful system?  I'm in!

[Thorin]

Any idea why I would get told by the Dell system configurator that the second hard drive I pick has to be identical to the first one?  Does SATA require identical drives hooked up?

[Melbosa]

Any idea why I would get told by the Dell system configurator that the second hard drive I pick has to be identical to the first one?  Does SATA require identical drives hooked up?

Sounds like it has you picking a RAID of some type, so this is why you are being told they have to be the same size.

[Melbosa]

Just an FYI:

File Servers typically don't need much horse power, unless you are going to use them as an application server as well.  So given that you can skimp on the CPU and RAM to opt for more Hard drive space.  And if you are just going to use it as a file server (not as an AD server, DNS, DHCP or something like that), I would suggest http://www.freenas.org/ or something like that (linxu appliance), as it will be so slipstream to the file server than running a Windows OS.

But this is a different story if you plan on using it more than a File Server.

[Thorin]

Any idea why I would get told by the Dell system configurator that the second hard drive I pick has to be identical to the first one?  Does SATA require identical drives hooked up?

Sounds like it has you picking a RAID of some type, so this is why you are being told they have to be the same size.

I looked for that, but there's no RAID option anywhere in the configurator.  Now that you mention it, though, I remember my Inspiron 530 having a RAID 0 or 1 option on the motherboard, so maybe the Vostro does, too...

Just an FYI:

File Servers typically don't need much horse power, unless you are going to use them as an application server as well.  So given that you can skimp on the CPU and RAM to opt for more Hard drive space.  And if you are just going to use it as a file server (not as an AD server, DNS, DHCP or something like that), I would suggest http://www.freenas.org/ or something like that (linxu appliance), as it will be so slipstream to the file server than running a Windows OS.

But this is a different story if you plan on using it more than a File Server.

It'll be a print server, and I may eventually run it as a web server.  Windows Server 2008 is free for me and it makes sense for me to get used to working with it.  FreeNAS is also free, but from the FAQ:

FreeNAS is Alpha or Beta, its not a production release and it will have bugs in it. It is your risk if you load valuable data onto FreeNAS. Review the FreeNAS licence before working with FreeNAS.

[Melbosa]

FreeNAS is Alpha or Beta, its not a production release and it will have bugs in it. It is your risk if you load valuable data onto FreeNAS. Review the FreeNAS licence before working with FreeNAS.

LOL almost all Open Source stuff has something like that posted... use at own risk, spend money if you want real support, etc.  Hell everything Google releases is beta for at least the first 5 years

But yeah if you plan on going beyond just File Server, then stick with a full OS of some sort.

[Thorin]

Well thanks for the input.

At the moment, I'm thinking of taking the bare-bones Vostro 200 and adding the high-end processor to it - going from a Pentium Dual-Core E2200 to a Core 2 Duo E8400 for $100 is a bargain.  Once it arrives I'll install Windows Server 2008, set up the file shares, and re-jigger my XP Home desktops to use it.  I might even be able to set up a single shared iTunes library!  No more having to switch to a certain user to get all of the songs!

I hope the Windows Server 2008 Backup utility compresses backups...  NT Backup (used by XP and Server 2003 and older) doesn't <sigh>