Using server 2003 as a workstation?

[Redestium]

Have I used it yet? Um yeah - quite a few of my servers are 2k3, and as time permits - the remaining NT and 2K servers that are not retired will be migrated to 2k3.

But what possible use do I have for a $400+ Server OS on my desktop?? It adds no features I need on my desktop, but you say it has better resource management. SWEET, since I am not having any resource issues with my current paid for OS - let my go fork over a few hundred dollars for an OS I will not notice any difference in with the day to day use of my machine.

But man that trial for 180 days is tempting ;) Man how sweet would that be, I can wipe out my current system - spend a few days getting it set back up the way I want it. Spend some money on software - since some of my current tools like defrag, partition management and virus protection will not run on 2k3, etc.. Where do I go again for this trial???

Oh wait, I just remembered - guess what. My desktop is really my production machine - I do all my day to day email, surfing, work, gaming, etc.. etc.. on it - so yeah its a production type box -- and it says right there in the trial EULA;

---

DESCRIPTION OF OTHER RIGHTS AND LIMITATIONS

Not for Production Use. You may not demonstrate, test, examine, evaluate or otherwise use the Software in a live operating environment or with data that has not been sufficiently backed up.

---

Oh what the hell who reads those EULA things anyway!! I can spend the next 180 playing with windows 2k3, which is chock full of all kinds of features I have no use for and then what the hell blow off a car payment so I can be legal on my desktop OS - oh wait I was. Why am I doing this again -- Oh yeah, so I can run 5 virtual machines - with paintshop loaded in 1, another loaded with photoshop, etc.. etc... Oh wait I can do that now.

Why exactly am I doing this again?? ;) Other than to give MS more money - and what I will be in the 'in' geek crowd cuz I run a $400+ OS to surf the web and read email, play a games with, etc.. Which everyone will know I got though not so legit means, or think I'm a complete MORON - cuz who in their right mind would pay MS some $400+ dollars for a OS that provides no new features needed for the desktop user. And then use that OS as their desktop OS??

Yeah I know - just another rant, making noise about 2k3 being a server OS, not a desktop OS, yada yada yada - but I feel better ;)

Haha, good one. :D (Y)

[Pookster]

These posts about Server 2003 as a workstation are getting quite old. But, I am going to throw in my two cents. :D

A lot of people are tempted to use Win2k3 as a desktop OS mainly due to the fact that the OS has an updated kernel. I think everyone that has tried Win2k3 has to agree that the kernel in Win2k3 is faster and optimized. Also, the fact that Longhorn won't be out until 2006 is making a lot of people use Win2k3 for as having to stick with Windows XP for five years (2001-2006) makes some people a little upset. For example, Linux makes updates to it's kernel on a regular basis. There won't be any major update to the Windows XP kernel anytime soon. Personally, I think this is very unprofessional of Microsoft. They should release an updated version of Windows XP with an optimized kernel. But, the reason they won't is simple: TOO BUSY WITH LONGHORN!

I've seen all of the benchmarks and tests that people ran comparing Windows XP to Windows 2003. And yes, Windows 2003 won the race. Searching Google, you can find some test results and the average results show that Windows 2003 improves performance by 20% over Windows XP. Personally, I think 20% is pretty good considering.

If Microsoft takes too long to REALLY update Windows XP (I mean come on, 2006 is crazy!!!), then they could lose a lot of people to Linux or people will switch to Win2k3 just so they have the latest in OS technology. Windows 2003 Server Web Edition has now dropped to $299.00. If you know what you are doing, you can just go buy that and convert it to a desktop OS very easily. Is $299.00 worth it just to convert from Windows XP to Win2k3? If Windows XP doesn't make any major changes, I would say yes, it is worth it, since Longhorn is not due for at least two years.

Then again, people who go out and buy Windows 2003 Server Enterprise just to use as a desktop OS are idiots (and I am quite sure they are not paying for it either).

Just my two cents.... now let the flames begin. :p

[+BudMan MVC]

hey pookster - great post btw. Could you point out some of these reviews that state a 20% improvement in performance. People always state this review said that, or this, etc.. where do they say that??

I have gone through the changes to the kernel - and there is NOTHING that could give that type of improvement in performance in a desktop setup - NOTHING!!!

I really am interested is seeing some type of real benchmarks - I would run the numbers myself, but seem like too much of a waste of time to me, except for the "I told you so" that might come out it.

Stating a number like 20% improvement is pure BS btw, 20% improvement in WHAT - load time of apps, boot up time, shutdown time, what exactly is there a 20% improvement in?? If load time of apps - what word already opens in less than .5 seconds. So your saying it will open in .4 seconds now?? SWEET .1 seconds faster - yup well worth the $299 dollars - where do I pay?? ;)

[Pookster]

That was a quick flame. :D

Most of the web sites I have (that shows performance comparisons) are links to other forums and I don't think Neowin would appreciate me posting these links in here. BTW, the performance improvements were in boot time, SANDRA benchmarks (CPU/Memory), 3dmark improvements (some results gave 30% improvement for 3dmark), and etc.

I agree with what you are saying for .4 seconds for $299.00... but I think it's a bit better than that considering all the different performance boosts that people claim Windows 2003 achieves.

BTW, how were you able to compare the kernel from Win2k3 from Windows XP? Did you reverse engineer the code? :D

[+BudMan MVC]

no I did not reverse eng the code - MS has posted what changes were made in the kernels. Nothing in the changes would suggest any type of real improvement in desktop type performance. I'll dig up the links to the white papers.

oh - and btw XP released late Nov 2001 and 2k3 in april of 2003 - so what you have 1+ year between. How much difference you do you think there is in the kernel??

edit: ok here is a link to info on the scaling improvements to the kernel in 2003

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003...ce/scaling.mspx

here is also a good read - it really is comparing the kernel changes from 2k to XP/2003 - but it shows that most of the performance increases are already included in the XP kernel. The server version is all about scaling - ie its a SERVER and has to be able to provide services to more than one user, etc... Scaling really does nothing to provide for improved desktop performance.

http://msdn.microsoft.com/msdnmag/issues/0...dowsServer2003/

edit2:

Most of the web sites I have (that shows performance comparisons) are links to other forums

So these review's are really just posts to threads about people discussing how much faster everything is under 2k3?? Or do you have some numbers, ie that 20% for example that shows hard benchmark numbers on specific things - where there was 20% increase in app load time. Or that Photoshop rendered some image 20% faster than XP on the same hardware, etc..

Or is just links to threads like this one. Where I can say I loaded 2k3 and it was 32.7% faster (I timed it) than XP - and now that becomes a benchmark? ;)

Edited June 9, 2004 by BudMan

[John Veteran]

Have I used it yet? Um yeah - quite a few of my servers are 2k3, and as time permits - the remaining NT and 2K servers that are not retired will be migrated to 2k3.

But what possible use do I have for a $400+ Server OS on my desktop?? It adds no features I need on my desktop, but you say it has better resource management. SWEET, since I am not having any resource issues with my current paid for OS - let my go fork over a few hundred dollars for an OS I will not notice any difference in with the day to day use of my machine.

But man that trial for 180 days is tempting ;) Man how sweet would that be, I can wipe out my current system - spend a few days getting it set back up the way I want it. Spend some money on software - since some of my current tools like defrag, partition management and virus protection will not run on 2k3, etc.. Where do I go again for this trial???

Oh wait, I just remembered - guess what. My desktop is really my production machine - I do all my day to day email, surfing, work, gaming, etc.. etc.. on it - so yeah its a production type box -- and it says right there in the trial EULA;

---

DESCRIPTION OF OTHER RIGHTS AND LIMITATIONS

Not for Production Use. You may not demonstrate, test, examine, evaluate or otherwise use the Software in a live operating environment or with data that has not been sufficiently backed up.

---

Oh what the hell who reads those EULA things anyway!! I can spend the next 180 playing with windows 2k3, which is chock full of all kinds of features I have no use for and then what the hell blow off a car payment so I can be legal on my desktop OS - oh wait I was. Why am I doing this again -- Oh yeah, so I can run 5 virtual machines - with paintshop loaded in 1, another loaded with photoshop, etc.. etc... Oh wait I can do that now.

Why exactly am I doing this again?? ;) Other than to give MS more money - and what I will be in the 'in' geek crowd cuz I run a $400+ OS to surf the web and read email, play a games with, etc.. Which everyone will know I got though not so legit means, or think I'm a complete MORON - cuz who in their right mind would pay MS some $400+ dollars for a OS that provides no new features needed for the desktop user. And then use that OS as their desktop OS??

Yeah I know - just another rant, making noise about 2k3 being a server OS, not a desktop OS, yada yada yada - but I feel better ;)

Post of the month! :woot: :fun:

[cpu killer]

Have I used it yet? Um yeah - quite a few of my servers are 2k3, and as time permits - the remaining NT and 2K servers that are not retired will be migrated to 2k3.

But what possible use do I have for a $400+ Server OS on my desktop?? It adds no features I need on my desktop, but you say it has better resource management. SWEET, since I am not having any resource issues with my current paid for OS - let my go fork over a few hundred dollars for an OS I will not notice any difference in with the day to day use of my machine.

But man that trial for 180 days is tempting ;) Man how sweet would that be, I can wipe out my current system - spend a few days getting it set back up the way I want it. Spend some money on software - since some of my current tools like defrag, partition management and virus protection will not run on 2k3, etc.. Where do I go again for this trial???

Oh wait, I just remembered - guess what. My desktop is really my production machine - I do all my day to day email, surfing, work, gaming, etc.. etc.. on it - so yeah its a production type box -- and it says right there in the trial EULA;

---

DESCRIPTION OF OTHER RIGHTS AND LIMITATIONS

Not for Production Use. You may not demonstrate, test, examine, evaluate or otherwise use the Software in a live operating environment or with data that has not been sufficiently backed up.

---

Oh what the hell who reads those EULA things anyway!! I can spend the next 180 playing with windows 2k3, which is chock full of all kinds of features I have no use for and then what the hell blow off a car payment so I can be legal on my desktop OS - oh wait I was. Why am I doing this again -- Oh yeah, so I can run 5 virtual machines - with paintshop loaded in 1, another loaded with photoshop, etc.. etc... Oh wait I can do that now.

Why exactly am I doing this again?? ;) Other than to give MS more money - and what I will be in the 'in' geek crowd cuz I run a $400+ OS to surf the web and read email, play a games with, etc.. Which everyone will know I got though not so legit means, or think I'm a complete MORON - cuz who in their right mind would pay MS some $400+ dollars for a OS that provides no new features needed for the desktop user. And then use that OS as their desktop OS??

Yeah I know - just another rant, making noise about 2k3 being a server OS, not a desktop OS, yada yada yada - but I feel better ;)

(Y) Well put :).

And this thread goes on ?? , does it ever end:p:p

Keep on going guys, this gets just a bit more interesting by the post - altho I think BudMan here just put the lid on the discussion.

[sandman45654]

But what possible use do I have for a $400+ Server OS on my desktop?? It adds no features I need on my desktop, but you say it has better resource management. SWEET, since I am not having any resource issues with my current paid for OS - let my go fork over a few hundred dollars for an OS I will not notice any difference in with the day to day use of my machine.

Better resource management is just one of the many improvements in WinS2k3. Stability and security have also improved quite a bit. Windows Server 2003 underwent a line-by-line code audit for both security and stability, it shows. This may not be important to you but it is to me.

But man that trial for 180 days is tempting? Man how sweet would that be, I can wipe out my current system - spend a few days getting it set back up the way I want it. Spend some money on software - since some of my current tools like defrag, partition management and virus protection will not run on 2k3, etc.. Where do I go again for this trial???

Or maybe you could use Partition Magic to create a new partition. It shouldn't be that big of a deal, since your current OS supports PM8. As far as AV goes, Norton's sucks, but that's just my opinion. Either way there are free AV alternatives that you could use during the trial. I'm curious though, which disk defragmenter do you use?

---

DESCRIPTION OF OTHER RIGHTS AND LIMITATIONS

Not for Production Use. You may not demonstrate, test, examine, evaluate or otherwise use the Software in a live operating environment or with data that has not been sufficiently backed up.

---

I cannot believe you just quoted the EULA. You can do better than that right?

Why exactly am I doing this again??? Other than to give MS more money - and what I will be in the 'in' geek crowd cuz I run a $400+ OS to surf the web and read email, play a games with, etc.. Which everyone will know I got though not so legit means, or think I'm a complete MORON - cuz who in their right mind would pay MS some $400+ dollars for a OS that provides no new features needed for the desktop user. And then use that OS as their desktop OS??

To hell with the "in" crowd, thats for sheep. I run WinS2k3 because it does what I need better than any OS, including Xp. You act like $400 for an OS is a big deal, and to most it is. Do you forget that many people will pay more than that just for a videocard? Not to mention there are MANY ways to get WinS2k3 for free. Attend a seminar, get a WinS2k3 cd. As for you being a moron, well thats as debatable as the WinS2k3 as workstation discussion itself.

Yeah I know - just another rant, making noise about 2k3 being a server OS, not a desktop OS, yada yada yada - but I feel better

What ever floats your boat, or tickles your pickl:D:D

You know, the more I read your post the more it sounds JUST like the same ole WinS2k3 isn't a workstation argument. Granted you've worded better than most. "It cost too much" & "It doesn't run all my apps" doesn't really go far towards proving WinS2k3 doesn't make an excellent WOS. Hell you even hinted at piracy. Even though you have NO idea how I got my copy of WinS2k3. Sure I may have downloaded the corp files or for all you know I could have a MSDN account, either way it is irrelevant.

I find it hard to believe someone with your apparent expertise wouldn't want WinS2k3 as their main OS. I also have a hard time believing someone in the IT field wouldn't be able to pony up a few hundred dollars for an OS and still be able to pay the car payment.

You talk a lot of sh!t, but you haven't proved anything or said anything that hasn't been said before. Care to post a screenie of your virtual network in action? Don't forget the Winve:):)

Edited June 9, 2004 by sandman45654

[+BudMan MVC]

Um sandman, it was joke/rant post ;) your more than free to spend your money as you see fit. If you feel the OS provides you with what your looking for, for a price your willing to pay. Or hey you find youself with a FREE copy of Enterprise - and no where to use it but your single cpu desktop 1 gig of ram - Hey more power too you.

Oh and btw - yes I could fork over $400, and not have to worry about the car payment, thats not the point. And hell yes - some people spend $400+ on the lastest vid card. But then again there is normally some gain they want, be it in they now can run higher res, or better refresh rate, higher framerates in games, etc... etc... what exactly do I see on my desktop for $400+ when I use 2k3?

You mention that stability and security is improved over XP - really. Hmm my main XP box has required say 1 or 2 reboot due to apparent lockups, weirdness, etc.. (lack of stability) over the last couple of years. Seems pretty stable to me - how much does that improved stability cost again??

Security - again, not one worm has gotten through my $49 router. And what about stuff like this;

Microsoft Security Bulletin MS04-015

Vulnerability in Help and Support Center Could Allow Remote Code Execution (840374)

Affected Software:

? Microsoft Windows XP and Microsoft Windows XP Service Pack 1 ? Download the update

? Microsoft Windows XP 64-Bit Edition Service Pack 1 ? Download the update

? Microsoft Windows XP 64-Bit Edition Version 2003 ? Download the update

? Microsoft Windows Server? 2003 ? Download the update

? Microsoft Windows Server 2003 64-Bit Edition ? Download the update

I see that 2k3 is affected, when they were doing this line by line audit for Security reasons - did they miss this? Was the auditor sleeping on the job or what?? You also have MS04-14, 13, 12, 11, 7, 6, 4, MS03-45,44,43,41, etc.. etc...

Couple of other things

doesn't really go far towards proving WinS2k3 doesn't make an excellent WOS

Where exactly was I trying to prove that 2k3 would NOT work as a Desktop os, where? Sure it will work as your desktop - I'm not arguing that point in the slightest. But does it make sense from a time spent/TCO/features provided point of view??

I love how people bring up the piracy thing - your right, I have know Idea where you got your copy. Bill Gates himself might of hand delivered it to your door, with a basket of fruit - asking you to please use it and review it. And let him know what you think about it's improved ability to bump the framerate up in halflife from 102 to 104, or if you notice how much faster Word loads, etc..

Dude - face facts there are 2 things that come to mind when someone mentions they are running the 2k3 (especially if ENT) version (which retails for $4k) as their desktop os.

1) They stole it

2) They stole it

Oh wait, there is that 3rd thing. They are a complete Moron when it comes to value for their dollar.

Hey I agree - it's completely not fair, and no one should have the right to judge you on how you spend your money, etc.. But what are you going to do - life is just not fair, and people judge all the time. If you got yourself a fancy new haircut which gave you pink and blue spikes around the top - and green waves above the ears. Yeah that would be a bitching dew - and the ladies would be all over you, etc... But as you walked down the street, if people did not just bust out laughing - they would be thinking "what an idiot". Yeah I know - their lame, and just don't get it. But what you going to do - people make assumptions and judge, its human nature.

I find it hard to believe someone with your apparent expertise wouldn't want WinS2k3 as their main OS

Are you judging me??? Are you making assumptions??? What do you find hard to believe exactly - that I value how I spend my dollar? Are you saying I'm not a geek - man you better tak;)that back!! ;) Well damn it - I can use a $4k OS that supports 8 CPU's and supports upto 32Gig of hot swap memory on my 1 gig single cpu machine with the best of them - so back off dude with your judgement;)ok - ROFL!! ;)

[sandman45654]

Um sandman, it was joke/rant post ;)  your more than free to spend your money as you see fit.

Careful with how you word things, you came across as a pampas @ss. No worries though :D

what exactly do I see on my desktop for $400+ when I use 2k3?

I'm not sure what you yourself will see. Myself, I have gained things like a 20 second boot time and +10 Megs per second higher disk I/O. There are many things I could list but there isn't one single thing that made me choose WinS2k3. It's the combination of all the improvements that made me switch.

You mention that stability and security is improved over XP - really.  Hmm my main XP box has required say 1 or 2 reboot due to apparent lockups, weirdness, etc.. (lack of stability) over the last couple of years. 

I ran Xp from the day it was released until the day WinS2k3 was released. In that time my system crashed around 6-8 times. Not all that bad really. Since upgrading to WinS2k3 my system hasn't crashed once. The only time I reboot is after installing WinUpdates or other software that requires it. Other than that my system is always running.

Seems pretty stable to me - how much does that improved stability cost again??

Nothing, if you know where to look. And no, I don't mean warez. $300 for the web edition isn't bad either, only $100 more than the full version of Xp Pro.

Security - again, not one worm has gotten through my $49 router.  And what about stuff like this;

Microsoft Security Bulletin MS04-015

Vulnerability in Help and Support Center Could Allow Remote Code Execution (840374)

Affected Software:

? Microsoft Windows XP and Microsoft Windows XP Service Pack 1 ? Download the update

? Microsoft Windows XP 64-Bit Edition Service Pack 1 ? Download the update

? Microsoft Windows XP 64-Bit Edition Version 2003 ? Download the update

? Microsoft Windows Server? 2003 ? Download the update

? Microsoft Windows Server 2003 64-Bit Edition ? Download the update

I see that 2k3 is affected, when they were doing this line by line audit for Security reasons - did they miss this?  Was the auditor sleeping on the job or what?? You also have MS04-14, 13, 12, 11, 7, 6, 4, MS03-45,44,43,41, etc.. etc...

Imperfect software analyzing imperfect code, need I say more? LOL Not to mention the millions of lines of code to audit. While the audit didn't catch everything, it is an improvement.

Where exactly was I trying to prove that 2k3 would NOT work as a Desktop os, where? 

You didn't. But the name of this topic is "Using server 2003 as a workstation?, Any advantages?". Not "Is WinS2k3 worth the money to be used as a WOS". There definitely are advantages to using WinS2k3. Yet all you seem to talk about is the price. The price is rather irrelevant to the topic IMO. If someone is asking if WinS2k3 is a worthy WOS they are either 1. Aware of the price or 2. Planning to warez it.

But does it make sense from a time spent/TCO/features provided point of view??

It just depends on what you spend and what you expect.

Are you judging me???  Are you making assumptions???  What do you find hard to believe exactly[/quot:woot:/>Yes and yes :woot: , not really. I just find it hard to believe that someone with more than enough money, access to a WinS2k3 cd (guessing), and that is a geek wouldn't want to upgrade to WinS2k3, just an off topic observation.

One last thing, be careful swit:rofl:ge;)s that fast :rofl: ;)

[Pookster]

Keep on going guys, this gets just a bit more interesting by the post - altho I think BudMan here just put the lid on the discussion.

I don't think this discussion is over yet. Sandman45654 has raised some very valid points. The biggest point being that Windows 2003 Server Web Edition and Windows XP price difference is only $100.00 (compared to XP Pro). If I was looking for a new OS and didn't have Windows XP already, I would probably purchase Windows 2003 Server Web Edition.

As for the piracy issue, how many people would truly admit to using a copied/pirated version of Windows? :D

[+BudMan MVC]

so sand I am curious about that 20 second boot time decrease - what do you credit that too? Less services running maybe?? Quite easy to turn off a few un needed services in XP to decrease my boot time. Also what was your boot time before 2k3? BTW - since you state you only reboot for updates - is the 20 second decrease worth the added hassle of installing a new OS, and the cost - lets throw it all into the TC for a move from a working XP desktop to a working 2k3 desktop.

As yes this thread was asking - "any advantages to using 2k3 as a workstation" But is not pointing out the disadvantages to using it as a desktop a valid point to the discussion. Would you not agree that the Total Cost (time and money) of moving to 2k3 has to be considered when weighing the advantages vs disadvantages??

You could point out lots of advantages to owning a H2 vs your little geo metro you already own, etc.. If you only weigh advantages of something you can not make a worth while choice. Let see it fits more people, it can go anywhere, its easier to drive over curbs with, it easier to pick up chicks with, less likely to get stuck in snow, etc..

So from that small list of advantages - why would I not dump my geo and get an H2?? All those advantages are GREAT - why not change to driving a H2 vs a geo?? Well let see, it cost more to buy - and I already own the geo. It cost more to drive (gas mileage), it cost more to insure, it will not fit in my single car garage, wife would need a ladder to get into it - it takes longer to wash, etc.. etc..

Do you get my point?? Yes it great to point out advantages of something - but you also have to look at the disadvantages as well. And like I have said - I am not disputing the fact that yes you could use 2k3 as your desktop OS. But is switching to it worth it?? Or is even if a new install - is it worth it from a cost view - since warez can not be discussed here on neowin - we must assume these 13 your old kids are buying the ent version - yeah ok :), possible problems with software and drivers, etc..

You pointed out 2 possible great advantages a desktop user might be looking for - if it is true your seeing a 10MB+ / sec increase in disk I/O, then yes that would be a great reason for some people to use it. But personally I really find that hard to believe - do you have some links to benchmarks showing this? You surely can not think that is across the board on all hardware, etc...

And a 20 second decrease in boot time - again some people might be willing to fork over $400+ dollars for that, and spend a few days migrating all their stuff, etc.. for it. But then again - what does it buy the user that only reboot their machine for hardware changes and updates - I really could care less about 20 seconds less to boot up. And since my machine already boots up in less than 40 seconds. I find it very hard to believe I would see a 20 second decrease in the boot time ;)

And yes, I have enough money - and I have the access (shoot the CD is sitting right here on my desk for the standard version - and the ent version is in the safe) to install it on all my machines at home, etc... But I really do not see the point - the disadvantages far out way the posssible small advantages there might be on the desktop. Yes overall its a great OS - for its designed purpose. I guess we are just on different sides of the fence - since what I really find hard to believe is why people that should know better (have the computer skills) do not see this.

I can not for the life of me understand why someone would think its cool or worth it to run a server OS on their desktop - without some reason behind it, besides some perceived minor performance increases. Now if I had a valid reason - then sure. But I can not for the life of me think of one ;)

But see - we can agree to disagree, and we can point out flaws in each others logic. Bring up points why I am right, and your wrong, etc.. :) Without getting all bent up about it - man you mention to someone that they warez'd it. And they have a cow - what business is it of yours if I did, etc..!! If you mention that the promotion of 2k3 as a desktop OS - promotes people to warez it, etc.. people have a cow.

People are always going to have different points of views, and make different judgements on everything - That's life. If you do not like someones point of view - then yes in a public fourm you have the right to voice your opinion on something - just as much as the next guy. As long as you do not break any of the fourm rules!

If you have any links to these benchmarks showing true desktop performance increases, I would be very interested in seeing them. I keep meaning to grab a couple of new machines from work - and do a real benchmark of XP vs 2k3 from a desktop point of view. Ie drive performance, app loading, etc... software compatability, etc.. Just really do not have the time for such play time... Maybe this summer ;)

[sandman45654]

My total boot time on WinS2k3 is 20 seconds. I know that it is has nothing to do with fewer running services, I have the exact same services running on WinS2k3 as I did on Xp. My boot time on Xp was 35-39 seconds. Is the difference "worth" the TCO? Eh, it's nice but alone doesn't warrant the upgrade. It is a real plus when I do need to reboot many times in succession, like when overclocking. As for the TCO, mine has been nil. I do not run AV software and I can use Ranish Partition Manager (free partition manager) when the need arises. If I'm not mistaken you can even run PM8 off a WinPE cd. I know this is just my experience, others may not be so lucky.

You have a valid point about pointing out the negatives being as important as pointing out the positives. And yes the TCO does need to be factored in. WinS2k3 isn't for everyone, I have not said that. So if anyone got that impression I apologize. For the savvy geek though the cost can be very low. The cost excuse, along with the warez argument, have been brought up time and time again, both arguments have been beaten to death to be honest with you. It would be nice to hear something new for a change.

I see your point with the Geo vs. H2 scenario. But it's not as black and white when the price difference can be as little as a few tanks of gas for the H2.

For me, it was well worth it. I will not go back to Xp for any reason. For other people I cannot say. That is something they need to figure out for themselves. That's what is great about the 180 day trial. You can make sure everything (hardware & software) works before paying a single cent.

As far as warez are concerned, I have no control over what others do, nor do I care what a 13 y/o is doing on his parents pc.

Driver support for WinS2k3 is almost as good as Xp's. Most, but not all Xp drivers work on WinS2k3. All the drivers I have tried have worked without any problems. Fact is, the problem with most of the incompatible drivers is installer based, not an actual driver incompatibility issue. Things like hardware compatibility should be checked BEFORE obtaining or installing any OS. Anyone planning on running a server OS as a WOS should already know this.

That bit about knowing better than using a server as a WOS is just bogus IMO. Yes, I know it says server in the name but that proves little. Do you know that Longhorn is a continuation of WinS2k3, not Xp? That's right, Xp>WinS2k3>Longhorn.... WOS to SOS back to WOS again. Same thing again, Win2000>Xp>WinS2k3. Microsoft can switch it back and forth and so can I :) By that I do not mean using TweakNT or NtSwitch, you can use WinS2k3 as a WOS without doing the actual conversion. It's not necessary (unless you just HAVE to have NAV and PM8) and I don't recommend doing it.

Unfortunately I do not have any benchmarks for you. Not to be rude but you have everything you need (except for time) to test the OS for yourself. I don't plan on proving something to you that you can easily try yourself.

I can not for the life of me understand why someone would think its cool or worth it to run a server OS on their desktop - without some reason behind it

I completely agree with you.

But see - we can agree to disagree,

Yes we can, I have no problem with that. To be honest I have enjoyed the last few posts.

The cost/app compatibility issues are valid but both can be resolved, rather easily. We all know NAV or PM8 won't run on WinS2k3. Not too many people can name at least 3 more programs that cannot be ran. Warez and the fact that the word server is in the title on the other hand, hold little relevance and have nothing to do with this discussion IMO.

[yoninh]

without some styles and componenets,it will be faster.but u must configure it first

[glitch409]

i might run server 03 for a while just cause i got a trial from ms and havent used it :D

[ssjchris_29]

As for the piracy issue, how many people would truly admit to using a copied/pirated version of Windows? :D

ummm, not quite pirateated, but i have a copy of an MSNDAA disc that i received through my college as well as a legal W2k3 Server Standard edition key. its perfectally legal for me to use for personal use so yeah, along with the 2 or 3 fully legal copies of windows xp professional, as well as my older windows 2000 pro/server/adv. server disc i have (the discs are probably illegal, but the keys i had (but unfortunitly lost to the unknown depths of my room) were perfectally legal. means i'm doing fairly well on legality of my desktop OS :-D

[Pookster]

Better hope the FBI ain't watching. :D haha

[ootput]

Hi there!

This post exists to balance out the thesis-papers and the [s1ze][b0ld] rants that permeate this thread.

Its short. Its sweet. Its 2:30 am.

Gawd.

[NEFKNTYM]

Hello everyone, my name is Aaron. I am a Systems Administrator and I use 2003 SERVER ENTERPRISE EDITION on my laptop.

specs are:

3.2 ghz P4 processor...none of that mobility crap

1gig of DDR 400

15'' uxga screen

Radeon 9600 pro 128 mb DDR

hitachi 60gb 7200 rpm hard drive

toshiba dvd burner

1394b

4 usb 2.0

s-video out

200gb external maxtor harddrive 7200 rpms...using firewire only

using my camera as well

using all my server tools...dhcp manager, user manager, server manger on my portable server. no problems with drivers. i did have to make a combne camera drivers from the cab files (used winrar to open them up) for 2000 server and xp pro sp1 to get the camera software to work on my 2003 server laptop. I rock.

The machine performs great, it loads IE and other apps faster. it shuts down and logs off faster. i wont ever go back to xp pro thats why i did the work on the camera drivers.

You will have to so some editing in MMC and the registry to get everything to work especially if you have domain admin priviledges tied to your user name and you still want to have full admin rights.

[grendal]

I have to agree with Aaron on this one. While some may think that running a server OS as a workstation is not worth the effort, I have seen the results and agree that 2003 is better for a workstation than XP as long as you tweak some settings.

As to the flamers, I used to be of the same mindset that server should stay server but if you're as bored as I am in Baghdad and want something to play with, why not play with what's available?

[NEFKNTYM]

I have to agree with Aaron on this one. While some may think that running a server OS as a workstation is not worth the effort, I have seen the results and agree that 2003 is better for a workstation than XP as long as you tweak some settings.

As to the flamers, I used to be of the same mindset that server should stay server but if you're as bored as I am in Baghdad and want something to play with, why not play with what's available?

where in baghdad are you?

[Randolph]

where in baghdad are you?

what the hell are you talking about?

[grendal]

I'm in BAGHDAD!

Seriously, I am over at Camp Victory.

[NEFKNTYM]

I'm in BAGHDAD!

Seriously, I am over at Camp Victory.

thats cool, i'm at ISG.

[grendal]

Howdy neighbor!