• Sign in to Neowin Faster!

    Create an account on Neowin to contribute and support the site.

Sign in to follow this  

Using server 2003 as a workstation?

Recommended Posts

+BudMan    3,517
No but I will tell that you are a total nut - to get a life and to butt out of other people's business. What gives you the right tp proclaim over what other people do, or do not do in the privacy of their own homes? Or in the deepest parts of your delusional fantasy, do you believe that you are a member of some kind of thought police, that can determine what other people should be allowed to think and do?

Like I said mate, you're a loon - lets face it. And no one here gives a damn what you think.

Clear enough now?

GJ

How is stating ones opinion on a topic butting into anyone business? If my opinion is that your a "..." to run w2k3 as a workstation. For "...." reasons - then that is my opinion.

I have just as much right to state my opinion on a requested subject - as you do. Just because somone does not AGREE with another posters opinion does not mean they are butting into anyone's business.

A thread was started, questions ask - where in the rules does it state that you can only post if you opinion is inline with everyone else that has posted in that thread? Where does it say that? -- but what the rules do say is "as a forum to debate topics"

? for you - is it more likely that the 13 year old asking about w2k3 got his copy through legitimate channels, or is there a VERY good chance that he downloaded it from some warez site? Come on be honest - what do you feel is more likely - not fact, just more likely??

Lets say they are running a trial version - which is possible, it does clearly states in the EULA that "Not for Production Use. You may not demonstrate, test, examine, evaluate or otherwise use the Software in a live operating environment" So again I would think even if running the trial - the topic of is the copy the poster using even legal - since it does state in rule 2 (warez/cracks/circumvention) that "This includes linking to software, posting about it, and suggesting to get it." So - I would think that if there is a "chance" that the copy the 13 year old is using is not 100% legit - then the topic of violation of rule 2 should be open for debate. Or are you suggesting that we can all just think as you do - and only if we 100% agree with what eveyone else can we post. Who's the member of the thought police??

The EULA also states that you may only run the current trial for 180 days for 1st date of install. This does not mean you can reinstall it at 179 days and start the count over, etc.. This does NOT mean you can download another trial and start the trial over, etc.. So what exactly is the point of using a product for your workstation. Do you really believe that a 13 your old is going to be forking over $4000 for a copy of w2k3 ent - come on REALLY??

I could care less what a person does in the privacy of their own home, but once they bring the topic to a public forum - how is that you can post your opinion on the topic, but when someone does not feel as you do about the subject - they are butting in?? I am not 100% sure - but I believe atleast the majority of the threads about w2k3 have been started with some kind question of should they, should they not - what is the better version for it, ie standard/web/ent.. etc.. Or why can't I get this "..." piece of software to run on it, etc.

So how exactly is posting ones opinion on that subject - posted on a PUBLIC forum butting into anyones business. If you do not have something to contribute to the debate - other than the fact that you believe everyone that has the opinion of not to use it is butting into someones business, why don't you mind your own?

This topic had finally moved in a direction that had a point - ie would any of the changes in the kernel even have an effect on workstation type performance, etc.. Or do all the changes just support server functionality, etc..

As to your statement - no one here gives a damn about what gameguy thinks. Tell you what - I am more interested in his opinion on the subject than your rant about some delusional fantasies you believe he might be having. Is that how you spend your time?? Fantasizing about Gameguys dream world?? If this is the case - who's the loon?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
darkmark327    0

owned.gif

by Budman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
raid517    0

Dude I am not interested, nor do I have time to read your inane loon ramblings Apart from shoving a grenade up your ass (which you appear set to do anyway) and pulling the pin, you have no control over what anyone else does. I don't care what some 13 year old wares freak does, so why the hell should you?

In this world you are still innocent until proven guilty. While it is possible to obtain items like this through legitimate channels, I prefer to believe in people's innocence.

Anyway, I am not going to spend endless hours arguing with you over your own personal obsessions. At the end of the day I don't care. I don't even use server 2003. Hell I don't even use Windows for that matter.

Lol my Suse Linux box is DEFINATELY a workstation and a server. So what are you going to do about that?

You want to get on my case about that too?

GJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
darkmark327    0

Do you come here and ask why NAV or PM won't work, or why you can't get sound or DirectX to work? Of course not. The problem is fools who think "gee, it has a higher version number, it must be better" and then complain endlessly when their programs don't work. And of course, anyone who actually pays the grand or so and then turns it right back into XP is, bluntly, retarded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
John    7
Dude I am not interested, nor do I have time to read your inane loon ramblings

then do yourself a favor. before you make another post like this one, READ what you're responding to :rolleyes: then you won't have an excuse to sound ignorant...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
raid517    0
then do yourself a favor. before you make another post like this one, READ what you're responding to :rolleyes: then you won't have an excuse to sound ignorant...

I have seen people asking questions, I don't know about 'endlessly complaining.' If you think people's questions are dumb, then it's really simple to resolve - just don't answer them. What is the point in getting totally stressed over it and making yourself look an idiot by joining some sad, lonely f*cks, self obsessed, nutjob alliance?

All you will succeed in doing is making yourself look equally pathetic.

In any case, as far as dumb questions go, the whole world of Windows is full of dumb questions about 'why this or that doesn't work.' All you need to do is look at the 2K and XP forum on these boards and you will quickly see that for yourself. Windows server 2003 is no exception to this rule.

And if peeps do have the money to spend on a server OS - and want to make it look like XP, that is their lookout. It's their money. They earned it, they can do whatever they please. Unless you think you have the right to tell people how to spend their cash too?

Bottom line is it is still none of your business. Period.

GJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
John    7
In any case, as far as dumb questions go, the whole world of Windows is full of dumb questions about 'why this or that doesn't work.' All you need to do is look at the 2K and XP forum on these boards and you will quickly see that for yourself. Windows server 2003 is no exception to this rule.

And if peeps do have the money to spend on a server OS - and want to make it look like XP, that is their lookout. It's their money. They earned it, they can do whatever they please. Unless you think you have the right to tell people how to spend their cash too?

i know there are plenty of "stupid users" using windows 2000 and xp. i know there are a lot of these "stupid users" who also think that server 2003 > xp. anyone who asks "stupid" questions about how to do something in 2003 either shouldn't be using it or has no business being any type of administrator.

for the record, i've never said that if you paid for it you can't use it. but i have said and will continue to say you're a fool if you don't use at least one component of server 2003 that isn't included in xp...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+BudMan    3,517
Bottom line is it is still none of your business. Period.
What do you not understand about the concept of a public forum??? When someone asks a question, or poses a topic - and I state my opinion on it. This is NOT butting in - and has nothing to do with minding my own. Nor does it have anything to do with control.

What is so FREAKING hard to comprehend about that? Talk about inane ramblings.

"totally stressed over it and making yourself look an idiot "
I think you might want to look in a mirror dude!

Who ever said any of us were stressed out about what anyone does here? Do I really care if a 13 year old is running a warez copy of w2k3 and thinks he is kewl? I could care less - and sure and the hell do not feel any stress over it, if anything getting to vent now and then over the stupid things people post can be a stress reliever.

If anyone is butting into to other peoples business - it seems to be you, since you state you do not even run windows - why are you putting your nose into it? Why are you stressing that someone calls someone else an idiot for running a OS that you do not even use. Why do you seem to care so much?

I honestly suggest you see a doctor about your issues, thought police, delusional fantasies about other people's lives, grenades up people's ___, we are all out to control you? The use of the word "peeps" Dude these are signs that something is wrong - I would suggest you seek professional help ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
StevenNT    11

I'm a Network Tech and have been reading this topic on Neowin a while. i'm amused at the comments on this topic. Look we NEVER will be able to stop users from using a SERVER os as a games/music computer or what ever they do to look ?cool? now days so give up. I personally use OS's as they are desigined for. Windows Server as a SERVER and Windows Home Edition/Professional Edition as a DESKTOP OS.

All I can say is make a thread for users who WANT to use it as a workstation and leave them to it and let them moan about it to them selves while the sensible users can IGNORE them. I don?t recall seeing this happening to Windows NT Server or Windows 2000 Server. What ever turns them on i guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Element94    0

I user server 2003 as a workstation OS because:

- The kernel is a little more stable (never will be as stable as linux, but still a little more stable than XP)

- I use IIS 6 for .NET development

- It is more secure (locked down automatically)

- It is newer (by 2 years, 12 Months, 104 Weeks, 728 Days, 17,472 Hours, 1,048,320 Minutes, 62,899,200 Seconds)

Oh, plus server versions include a little more functionality than workstations Os'.

Anybody who takes this topic personally, should REALLY, REALLY, REALLY, REALLY, REALLY go to physcotherapy.

Element94

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+BudMan    3,517

Why is something newer always more stable? Hmmm - I think xp has locked up on me maybe once in the 2 some years I have been running this install, stability is not really an issue.

And dude your a bit off in your counter there - so your saying w2k3 is 12 years and 357 days newer?? ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PF Prophet    0

budman menny people have problems with xp just becouse u dont dosnt mean others dont ;)

and the reasion u never saw 2k server questions was becouse 2k pro and 2k server are the same bloody thing just more **** enabled (ntswitch/tweaknt) hence theres no issues myself i used 2k server for along time after i got the full from a teacher of mine who was in the beta but didnt want her full copy's of window(2 copys of pro 1 copy server 1 copy adv server)

she gave them to me becouse she didnt trust 2k at the time and her server didnt support it (compcrap hadnt made updated drivers/support for 2k yet)

i use 2k and 2k3 i dont like the bugs xp has showen me repetedly things i never see in 2k OR 2k3

oh and u can ask ms there techs and reps will admit that ms feels that 2k3 is the most stable server AND workstation version of windows todate

i know i questioned the one that comes into western buisness college about such things when he gave us are free vouchers for sbs they recoment it for anybody running 2+ proc's for cad/modeling/anamation work becouse its memory managment is better as well as it being more stable

this whole issue should really be a NONE issue as i stated MONTHS ago just make a sub forum for those that wana use 2k3 as a workstation and leave them/us be

2k3 IS xp but XP with over 2 years more dev time and alot less lagacy code (thats a good thing)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Element94    0

In any event, 2003 is 2 years newer, and it has a little more stable kernel. In addition, the security is locked down automatically, and because it doesn't load as much crap as XP (because of increased security) it results in faster performance.

Element94

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JS022681    0

bottom line, nobody who actually paid for server 2003 would use it as a workstation, take your warez and shove it up your ass, kthx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
devilotX    11
bottom line, nobody who actually paid for server 2003 would use it as a workstation, take your warez and shove it up your ass, kthx

Oh... such a nice response....

How do you know its a warez copy? it could be a Scholastic version for all you know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Frank    3
2k3 IS xp but XP with over 2 years more dev time and alot less lagacy code (thats a good thing)

The Dev time was not making Windows 2003 more stable then Windows XP, but in making WINS, DHCP, AD, DNS, and all of the other built in "extras" that come with a Server OS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OptiPlex    0
Oh... such a nice response....

How do you know its a warez copy? it could be a Scholastic version for all you know.

Scholastic? They sell Windows Server 2003 to little kids now? :D

Ok ok, just kidding, I think you mean Academic.

;)

Off-topic: The one thing that I couldn't fix in Win2k3 server is the internet speed. Kept capping downloads to 87KB/sec so I went back to my legal 2000 and then to XP :ninja: and back and forth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stezo2k    0

come on guys, this is a silly argument that is causing flames/people getting angry or upset, if you own win server 2003 legally, you should be able to use it as you want cause you own it. I myself have used it, and it is not much different to XP if you want to use it as a desktop OS, so it isn't worth upgrading to.

I'm sure people that own 2003 don't want to fork out more money for a workstation OS if they want to use it at home, so I can't see what's wrong with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Element94    0

I use 2K3 legally, but DO have a Corp version. And, the licenses are purchased, in fact, in large corporations (like the one I work at), they buy the licenses in bulk, and currently there is an estimated 728 licenses not being utilized.

So, install away!

Element94

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Frank    3

Your telling me your company bought 800 more Windows 2003 server licenses then it needed? Two questions... Why? and also why not get a volume agreement for what you need?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ericnmu    0

I gave it a go on one of my boxes.

Everything ran fine, had no driver problems, games worked great.

I'm back to XP though... I was just testing it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PF Prophet    0
Scholastic? They sell Windows Server 2003 to little kids now? :D

Ok ok, just kidding, I think you mean Academic.

;)

Off-topic: The one thing that I couldn't fix in Win2k3 server is the internet speed. Kept capping downloads to 87KB/sec so I went back to my legal 2000 and then to XP :ninja: and back and forth

u need to dissable the reserve bw thing search for it think its in gpedit or something i just dissable it and get over 350k(when on cable)

corse web and std never do that im my exp but ent for some reasion keeps part of ur bw in reserve :/

humm for me its 2k/2k3 why bother with xp ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PF Prophet    0
Your telling me your company bought 800 more Windows 2003 server licenses then it needed? Two questions... Why? and also why not get a volume agreement for what you need?

corp=vlk(volume) but u acctuly get licences for each box least intel has them BOXES of them LOL

they also get stickers for all the boxes with a SN on it that refers to the licence ;)

and yes menny companys get to menny thats how i got std and web for xp pro(retail) from an admin who works for intel ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
John    7
u need to dissable the reserve bw thing  search for it think its in gpedit or something  i just dissable it and get over 350k(when on cable)

corse web and std never do that im my exp but ent for some reasion keeps part of ur bw in reserve :/

humm for me its 2k/2k3  why bother with xp ;)

If you're talking about QOS (Quality Of Service) then you're mistaken. Someone who knew nothing about QOS read that in group policy and thought it eats your bandwidth. QOS only limits your bandwidth if a QOS enabled application requests a certain amount of bandwidth. IF you have a QOS application and IF it requests guaranteed bandwidth, then QOS will reserve the amount of bandwidth specified in group policy. However, if you have no QOS applications, having QOS installed/enabled does nothing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+BudMan    3,517

GG is RIGHT on the money on QOS, that BAD tweak has been around forever - MS has even posted about it. And you still see that type of BAD mis-information floating around. ARRRGGHHH!!

If you are NOT 100% sure, or atleast 99.8% sure on the piece of info you are passing on - please do EVERYONE a favor, and DON'T pass it on.

From MS:

Correcting Some Incorrect Claims About Windows XP QoS Support

There have been claims in various published technical articles and newsgroup postings that Windows XP always reserves 20 percent of the available bandwidth for QoS. These claims are incorrect. The information in the "Clarification about QoS in End Computers That Are Running Windows XP" section of this article correctly describes the behavior of Windows XP systems.

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?...6&Product=winxp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.