Worth Getting: Windows Server 2003 over WinXP-Pro?


Recommended Posts

I'm thinking way ahead here, and future possibilities.

Hyperthetically, let's say I started up a small web design business (8x workers, 2x managers - so 10 people altogether). The workers machines will be Windows XP Home/SP2 (no need for Pro to program or use Photoshop). Now the main servers are the question here when it comes to managing the network:

- PC 1: Login Authentication (to be honest, this seems pointless)

- PC 2: File Server

- PC 3: Web Server - Apache/PHP/Website Hosting

- PC 4: MySQL

- PC's 5-14: Workers Workstations

Now the above works just fine on my current XP-Pro setup - so is it worth bothering with Win2003 Server/SP1, and if so - then why fork out the extra money on 3x PC's? I'm slowly reading through 2003's features - but will I really need it all (Standard 32-bit Edition)? (obviously if money permits then 64-bit setups, but that's not the point here).

P.S.

I'm not a total noob in networks, but I'm not very experienced with Server O/S's.

Thanks in advance.

I see what you mean, at first I do intend to have the 1 server (Apache / MySQL Database / Websites) but my point is, is it worth getting Windows Server 2003 for that task (or stick with XP-Pro)?

Also, is there much point in an authentication server when users login - or is that overkill?

PC 1, Hmm this wont be needed.. Just be sure to "lock" you network from the outsite with a good router etc.

PC 2, you could go for windows 2000 server (Or Server 2003 SBS or Standard..) or linux with samba.

PC 3 and 4, i would go for linux.

PC 5 - PC 14, Windows XP Home/SP2 as you say.

Answer: Yes, go for SBS or Standard 2003...

Edited by SAMeAiM

I'm against Linux file servers because of the complexity - twice in 4 years I've tried to get into it, but it's really not for me at all (tried Ubuntu, Gentoo, FC, Mandrake, SuSe etc.). I'll be using Gentoo for (Apache/MySQL & PHP) but as for file servers it'll have to be Windows only.

So the main difference between XP-Pro and Win2003 is the higher number of concurrent connections, and obviously some of that other technical stuff they stick in there (that I'll never use).

XP-Home = 5 concurrent connections

XP-Pro = 10 concurrent connections

2003 = ??

And will I need licensing of some sort to connect to the server?

P.S.

As for actual file storage I've looked into Mac OS X Server (Unlimited Connections), but then again there's the file system format...so much to research into (and so little time due to University).

The benfits may be worth the upgrade to windows 2003 in some cases for example the domain support makes it much easier to handle the logins and restrict users and with Windows 2003 it will set you up for later if your going to use things like ISA2k4 or Exchange or anythign that requires active directory, also you could look into Windows Server 2003 Small Buissness Edition, you can get a trial of that off of microsofts site as well as windows 2003 enterprise both which last 180 days

W2k3 has unlimited connections.

Licensing is handled via the server and are known as CAL's (client access licenses)

There are 2 types of CAL's - per seat (dynamic) and per user (static). Must people use the latter.

Server normally comes with 5 CAL's as standard, you then purchase blocks of CAL's.

There is a SB Ed of Server that includes 5 CAL's and Exchange. I think it is limited to 10 CAL's altogether.

Scan Computers - Microsoft Small Business Server Standard 2003 (5 CAL) OEM ?283 incl VAT

PLEASE NOTE : To qualify for this licensing you need to purchase either a system, or a non-peripheral computer hardware component (which will be an integral part of the computer system which the OEM software will be installed) such as a motherboard, graphics card, hard disk, processor, keyboard, mouse. At the SAME time as the Operating System.

Exactly - Microsoft are charging even more money to actually connect to ones own server. In my opinion thats pathetic marketing, ?283 is hefty enough, let alone the requirements of more CAL's to actually do any work.

I guess I'll look more into Mac OS X Server (no CAL's required). But thanks guys, you've all given me more to think about:)) and I remember in the past trying to understand 'per seat' / 'per user', and to be honest even that eludes me on the basic understanding of the differences - never mind ey'.

actually there is a crack on the internet the makes xp unlimited connnections but that does violate ur eula.

2 mods this post is telling u theres a crack but im not giving a link

585890397[/snapback]

Um, I've never heard of such a thing. You may be thinking of the SP2 concurrent half-connection patch?

Oh I'm well aware of that specific crack, and other warez information. However, to run a legitamate business I want to do everything legal and right - for my own personal use I'm no angel, but in the legal world I have to be (why risk a business - I'm not one for gambling).

There is a SB Ed of Server that includes 5 CAL's and Exchange. I think it is limited to 10 CAL's altogether.

Scan Computers - Microsoft Small Business Server Standard 2003 (5 CAL) OEM ?283 incl VAT

585889812[/snapback]

SBS is probably the original poster's best bet. It's cheap, easy to deploy, and rock solid.

SBS supports up to 75 concurrent user licenses. Unlike traditional Server 2003 CALs (which are Device or User CALs), SBS uses Concurrent Users CALs. This means that you can have 5 CALs and 10 users, so long as no more than 5 are connected at the same time.

SBS CALs are not terribly expensive. And they count toward both Windows and Exchange (optionally SQL Server as well, with the Premium Edition).

Microsoft also offers a "transition pack" that converts SBS licenses to standard licenses (for Windows, Exchange, and SQL) at an affordable price, if you ever grow past the SBS limitations.

2 threedaysdwn there is a crack for the conncurrent connetions to a computer (anti*** hint hint)

and 2 DjmUK using linux has gotten easier and remember there is the services 4 unix in windows and there is samba but sbs is probably da best as other have said

Networking Differences Between XP Pro and XP Home

1.XP Pro systems can join a domain; XP Home systems can't, which limits its use to home and SOHO environments because it can't use any corporate-specific features such as IntelliMirror.

2.Microsoft Internet Information Services (IIS) 5.1 and Personal Web Server (PWS) are found only in XP Pro.

3.Direct access to the Administrator account is available only in XP Pro. XP Home users must log on using Safe mode to access the Administrator account.

4.XP Pro supports Remote Desktop, which is basically a single-user version of Windows 2000 Server Terminal Services. XP Home supports only Remote Assistance.

5.Networking-related Group Policy Objects (GPO) are available only in XP Pro. XP Home supports no group policies.

6.Microsoft Remote Installation Services (RIS) and Sysprep are supported only in XP Pro.

7.The Network Monitor application is available only in XP Pro.

8.The UI for IP Security (IPSec) is available only in XP Pro.

9.SNMP support, Simple TCP/IP Services, the service access point (SAP) and Client Services for NetWare (CSNW) are available only in XP Pro.

10.XP Home supports only simple file sharing. Detailed file-level security permissions such as those found in Win2K are available only in XP Pro, which also supports the simple file-sharing model that XP Home uses.

11.XP Pro lets users limit the number of connections to shared folders and control user access by account. XP Home users access shared folders through the Guest account, which is disabled by default in XP Pro.

12. You can upgrade Windows NT 4.0 Workstation and Win2K Professional only to XP Pro. You can upgrade Windows 9x versions since Windows 98 only to XP Home. Neither version supports upgrades from Windows 95.

Hope this helps!

Oh and by the way XP Pro doesn't have a limitation on the amount of PC's that you can have in a workgroup!

SMB is a good solution for small business. It includes Exchange and Server and it comes with 5 CAL. You are limited to 50 connection and one DC, but by the time your companies gets that big you will have different needs. Note that you are also limited to two TS connections. The major reason I would get server over XP is that the Server supports Raid. You need Raid in your server to protect your data. PS make sure you get a good backup system. XP Pro is also limited to 10 connections.....

Have fun !!!

toejam: Thanks for that breakdown (just saved it to a text file), I thought the only difference was IIS & Networking, I didn't realise the extent...XP-Pro it is :)

Eversurf: Ah, I totally forgot about RAID. Of course I'll look for hot-swappable servers ;)

Heh...where to start here...

I would go with XP Pro no matter what in the situation that your in. The only reason I would go with home is when your either going to be using Linux as your server and you will NEVER excede 5 connections to a computer at a time...which one with that many computers might happen. If you plan on growing (as a normal business I should think does) then plan for the future and get XP Pro.

As for the server...taking a look at the prices of an Apple server, I can only see (read...my opinion here) an Apple purest with an all Apple network would be interested. It looks like for your situation, you might want to look into Small Business Server 2003. It comes in either Standard Edition or Premium Edition, with Premium Edition having SQL 2000 and ISA 2004 included as well as 2 licences of Frontpage 2003. Small Business Server 2003 comes standard with Windows Server 2003 Standard, Exchange 2003, Windows Sharepoint Services 2003, and Office Outlook 2003 for all your client PCs. That right there for $599 retail cost is a slamming deal and think would work best for you. Since you would be using MySQL for a database, you prolly don't want the Premium Edition unless you want ISA 2004.

Prolly the most compelling reason though is that you install the software and it just works. A Linux server can do most, if not all of this, but it will take a whole lot longer to do. So depending on how you value your time and frustration, that is your choice.

Post back for more questions!

If you want an out of the box solution that works, does email, local or remote via any web browser, gives you a remote workspace or allows your admin remote control. Distrubute software to any of your client PCs or backup your installation every night or whatever schedule you set up.

There is not a single open source solution that comes remotely close to what SBS 2003 does out of the box.

I get emails every day in my Inbox describing the health of my SBS 2003 server, allerting me to any issues in the last 24 hours.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Umm, read my answer again! If you have something to add or contribute, feel free. Otherwise my point was that you apparently dont want faster updates... so you want slower updates by process of elimination. If you have something to contribute, meaningful answers are better.
    • These features described above are good, but far from what developers will like the most. The main feature that developers will care and love the most it's called "Bring Your Own Models". It gives us the ability to connect to LOCAL AI models running on Ollama. The feature it's located on GitHub Copilot tab -> On the model picker where you can select "manage models" instead of paid models and then it will show you the "Bring your own models" window where you can now select Ollama and the endpoint of your local server. So if you have a beefy spec machine you can now use your own model 100% local inside Visual Studio 2026 18.7.0
    • Microsoft Teams is getting a controversial location tracking feature that users may hate by Usama Jawad Image generated with Microsoft Copilot Earlier this year, Microsoft planned to roll out a controversial location tracking feature in Teams, but following customer feedback, it decided to delay its release. The bad news is that the company has decided to launch it later this year, but it's based on roughly the same design that was shared earlier, which means that many users still have good reason to worry. Basically, Microsoft Places and Teams have received workplace check-ins via Wi-Fi. The idea is that if an employee arrives at the office and connects to their enterprise network, their profile status indicator will show them as being present in the office. For example, if you arrive at work, open Teams on your PC, and connect to the "Studio B" company Wi-Fi network, your Teams profile will indicate that you are present in "Studio B", as shown below: Microsoft says that this feature is basically a replacement for physical workplace check-in peripherals, it reduces the need to manually update your status, and it also enables co-workers to know that you're at work so that they can coordinate in-person meetings with you. IT admins can enable this workplace check-in capability at a tenant level, and users have the ability to control whether they want to enable it or not. Of course, all of that sounds great on paper, but naturally, many Teams customers may still have concerns, as they did before. This is because it enables your reporting manager and other members of the organization to track if you are at the office, when you arrive at the office, and where you are right now. This could be problematic for people who work in what they consider to be flexible work environments or hybrid setups, and this kind of location tracking could be considered an invasion of privacy. Microsoft has tried to alleviate some of these concerns by letting users know that they can manually set their location easily, which essentially overrides workplace check-in if they feel uncomfortable with it. However, that doesn't really solve the problem because your organization could enforce a workplace policy that mandates that this feature remains enabled. The Redmond tech giant has also assured users that this capability does not store historical data and is only a real-time indicator of location. Finally, it only generates a signal when you connect to a corporate network, which means that if you are working from home and connect your PC to your personal Wi-Fi, it won't broadcast your location to your employer; you will simply be shown as "Remote". Microsoft has encouraged IT admins to prepare for this change and begin informing users so they know what to expect once it begins rolling out later this year.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Very Popular
      AndrewSteel earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Veteran
      Taliseian went up a rank
      Veteran
    • One Month Later
      Clizby earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      Timaximus earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Timaximus earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      516
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      162
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      157
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      82
    5. 5
      ATLien_0
      81
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!