Expanding IT Network ideas?

Long story short I'll be hiring more employees and dont currently have a network. I'll be installing Cat 6a cables in the office I lease.

My question to you guys and gals is for file serving. What do you use/prefer? A full blown server or a simple NAS? Do you use your servers to host email or other apps on an intranet? Is it worth maintaining a server and building out a server room vs just having a NAS box run in a small room?

I dont want to use cloud services as I find working off them to be slow and glitchy. I've demoed options from CCH and TR and would avoid cloud based solutions at all costs.

I've worked in several offices, including H&R in the past, where there was always a full blown server. (NAS = network attached storage, basically a large network drive that all users can mount on the local workstations). One high priority is security, which strongly indicates a separate, locked server room (also environmental conditions for the hardware might be important).

Going from non-networked (single user) to networked with employees is a pretty big jump, IMO, if you don't want to use cloud-based software (SaaS). You have a window of only a few months before tax season 2019, I think you can do it but don't dawdle.

Your tax software will have a lot to do with what works best (and don't forget Quickbooks Desktop, if you use that, and MS Office). You must also consider backup capabilities, if your primary work site becomes unavailable for whatever reason. According to Thomson Reuters, "NAS devices often use proprietary operating systems that may not handle file locking properly and may cause data corruption and/or performance issues." This sounds very consistent with all my prior experience as an IT professional.

I wouldn't bother trying to host mail, just add users to your current mail provider for the new employees.

I use ProsystemFX which is installed locally and would likely host it from the file server and run workstation set up on the individual computers. Not sure if QB can just run locally and have the files saved on the network. I dont see a need for having more than one person in a QB file at any time.

Also whatever route I go the files will be backed up on the cloud using a business plan with 256 bit encryption.

Would a server have a higher chance if being stolen over desktop computers? Never had anything stolen from my office before.

Not sure if QB can just run locally and have the files saved on the network. I don't see a need for having more than one person in a QB file at any time.

Yes, I think it can. The problem isn't the need to have more than one person, it is ensuring that there is never more than one person in the same file at the same time. Same thing for your tax return data files. Remember, being "in" the file could include forgetting it's open on your workstation while you go to lunch or a meeting.

Would a server have a higher chance if being stolen over desktop computers?

Stealing one computer (or hard disk) with all your data on it would be much easier than having to steal four or five separate stand alone workstations, so that might be the "higher chance". Similarly for attacking a machine electronically.

I'll defer to others for more specifics beyond my general comments, since I've not personally gone through the transition you are looking at.

If you go server route (and NAS), make sure it is in a locked closet. Ideally, it'll be concealed to appear as something else but the fact it locks would be a giveaway it contains something important. Regardless, you do not want employees having access to the physical hardware.

Encrypt...every...single...drive. Encrypt all backups, local and cloud. At least if something does get stolen, it'll be difficult for the criminal to gain access. Once the drives are encrypted and pulled out of the machine they're associated with via a TPM, it becomes very difficult to unlock/decrypt.

Minimize network switches, and use gigabit. The cost is so insignificant anymore that it makes zero sense to use 100 meg switches. Do not use hubs, they slow things down relative to switches. As a result, make sure you have enough available network runs to each location. My general rule is four, but no fewer than two.

A NAS is fine for data storage, but they differ greatly in performance (read/write speeds), and security. Make sure any storage device you have is either RAID 5 or 10 (I'm a RAID 10 person, at this point in my life--storage is cheap, data loss or data recovery is not). Do you need a full sever? Depends on software you use, whether or not you want to use Exchange and Active Directory, etc. I do not have a full-fledged server, nor do I ever plan on it, and have absolutely no issues with alternative systems and services I use to achieve same end results. Biggest benefit to a server, in my mind, and ignoring what software or virtualization needs may be, is Active Directory--it can be very nice to control user accounts from the server, though server CALs are a PITA to deal with (and expensive).

Network equipment, servers, NAS devices, etc, generate a lot of heat. Make sure they're all on robust battery backups and have ventilation.

Quickbooks does not care where the files are located. If you have a multi-user license, it will handle it properly, and all Quickbooks installs are local, anyway. With multi-user, it automatically locks out certain functions that require single-user mode. If you are logged in as Admin, since about 2012, there have been ways to kick users out if they stay logged in. More recently, a timeout can be set though it is much too long for my preference.

For most small companies, I think servers are overkill, particularly if Active Directory and Exchange are not utilized. In fact, then they're just overpriced data storage devices, since you can easily build a Windows 10 Pro PC to be robust enough to host ANY software you need, including over a network.

Thanks for the input. I was planning on RAID 10 with a four bay NAS to start with. The main idea was to really just have a shared drive that backs up to the cloud a few times a day. But after talking with people who may or may not know what they are talking about, things like future proof, expansion options and just get a server if you're going to network were thrown around. Hence the topic of NAS vs Server. Since I am not planning on having a full time IT professional on site and I dont really know what Active directory is and dont really care to know at this point, sounds like I'll just start with a NAS.