• Sign in to Neowin Faster!

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

Sign in to follow this  

Games on Windows Server 2003

Recommended Posts

Jason    5
if someone wants to purchase some flavor of unix, then purchase vmware, then purchase windows to run in a vmware session just to play some windows game then they should be allowed to do so.  stating that windows 2k3 is a server os does nothing but aggrevate people as evident by this thread.

that being said, this thread needs to be deleted.

You ever seen the performance of games under VMWare?

Plus, where did VMWare come into this at all???

From his post it appears he thinks he should have the right to use Linux and run "WINDOWS" based games on it natively.

So I want to run Mac OS software on Windows and I think I should be allowed to do so :laugh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pilsbury    0

Living off evaluation copies is a very grey legal area...

If you use if after the evaluation period, you should buy it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+BudMan    3,454
Sorry, I thought that Windows XP Home did NOT support Workgroups.

So someone that does not even have a full understanding of what either version of XP can do. Says the more expensive, designed for server use, ie w2k3 is better suite for workstation/game play - then the products designed for such things???

hhhhmmmmm --> Well that is good enough for me - I am off to the store this minute to get myself a copy of w2k3. What was I thinking using a desktop version to play games, surf, email, etc.. Had I known I could of gotten a few more FPS out of HL buy only spending a few hundred dollars more on a server version OS - that by default turns everything I want to use OFF. What the H_LL was I thinking?? ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jackalo    0
Living off evaluation copies is a very grey legal area...

If you use if after the evaluation period, you should buy it...

And I'm sure that businesses can afford to do that. How about people attending college that don't have access to large financial backing, but wouldn't mind using some of the advanced features of 2003 Server until they could afford a copy down the road, or even suggest it to a future job that they may have/get?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Asmo    0

LOL this age old debate, who cares people? Use what you want, XP and 2k3 run the same for desktop useage (except XP has very limited server capablities) if you want the extra features of 2k3 for whatever reason go for it, 2k3 is not slower or faster for gaming, xp/2k3 are pretty much the same, some games may have 2-5% variance, just disable stuff in XP if you want it to run more slimmed down like 2k3.

Peace.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jackalo    0
hhhhmmmmm --> Well that is good enough for me - I am off to the store this minute to get myself a copy of w2k3. What was I thinking using a desktop version to play games, surf, email, etc.. Had I known I could of gotten a few more FPS out of HL buy only spending a few hundred dollars more on a server version OS - that by default turns everything I want to use OFF. What the H_LL was I thinking?? ;)

Are you saying that you're too lazy to click a few buttons to turn the options back on?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jackalo    0
LOL this age old debate, who cares people? Use what you want, XP and 2k3 run the same for desktop useage (except XP has very limited server capablities) if you want the extra features of 2k3 for whatever reason go for it, 2k3 is not slower or faster for gaming, xp/2k3 are pretty much the same, some games may have 2-5% variance, just disable stuff in XP if you want it to run more slimmed down like 2k3.

Peace.

That's the best answer I've heard all day. :D

After hearing that, I'm out of this discussion. Have fun arguing everyone. :happy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
alexander777    0

From his post it appears he thinks he should have the right to use Linux and run "WINDOWS" based games on it natively.

Jason you need to brush up on your computer skills. if you run linux ( which I do mandrake 9.1 and redhat 9.1 ) you can run windows based games , as you should be able to. after all windows controls 80% of the o/s market so that means for you laymens that windows based games are the majority, and to be fair and NON-MONPOLY should make games for other 20% of o/s btw wine for linux will run any windows based game or program. just switched from windows to linux several weeks ago, after using micorosoft products for 15 years. bottom line they suck and are unstable. dont beleive so take a look at windows security patches for the last 3 monthes and then goto linux and look at theirs case closed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
slapnuts_ox    0

Alright to start things off I run linux so I have an unbiased opinion about which version of windows does what except ME which was a god aweful ngihtmare for ny pc user. This said i am in college and we get an academic discount for 2k3 at my school and 4 of my fraternity brothers currently run Win2k3 std edition. The OS is just plain better in every way. XP is cheeper yes but 2k3 is really a very nice OS. If i was running any edition of windows it would be that. They have run benchmarks and everyone gets better performance with 2k3. 2k3 is simply XP with over 1100 builds added to it and a bunch of features and kernel 5.2 vs 5.1. All games they play works fine for them and they have no problems. Geez some people are so narrow minded....try stuff out before you say its crap or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
slapnuts_ox    0

alexander777 nice to see another linux user in here :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+BudMan    3,454
Are you saying that you're too lazy to click a few buttons to turn the options back on?

I was trying to make a snide remark / joke - which I guess you missed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JimM17    0
if someone wants to purchase some flavor of unix, then purchase vmware, then purchase windows to run in a vmware session just to play some windows game then they should be allowed to do so.  stating that windows 2k3 is a server os does nothing but aggrevate people as evident by this thread.

that being said, this thread needs to be deleted.

You ever seen the performance of games under VMWare?

Plus, where did VMWare come into this at all???

It came into this when i brought it into this. Obviously the point of my post completely averted you as i was simply stating that a person has the right to run a game under whatever operating system and under whatever conditions they choose without being completely and totally torn apart for it.

And no, running anything under an emulator usually provides poor performace, but if i choose to do so, i should be able to without being told i am an idiot or a fool. But like i mentioned above, i dont expect you to understand that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Vlad    12

Has anyone here heard of "citing your sources"? If Windows 2003 offers such better performance/memory management than Windows XP (Pro or Home, I don't care), can anyone actually offer any proof other than the typical Microsoft "It is because we said so!" BS or overrated word-of-mouth?

Note that the burden of proof here lies on users of Win 2003.

Sheesh, one would think (or at least, hope) that so many supposedly college educated people would know how to prove a point...

Vlad, Yet Another Linux User (YALU)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pilsbury    0
And I'm sure that businesses can afford to do that. How about people attending college that don't have access to large financial backing, but wouldn't mind using some of the advanced features of 2003 Server until they could afford a copy down the road, or even suggest it to a future job that they may have/get?

Thats what educational discounts and training courses are for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pilsbury    0
if someone wants to purchase some flavor of unix, then purchase vmware, then purchase windows to run in a vmware session just to play some windows game then they should be allowed to do so.? stating that windows 2k3 is a server os does nothing but aggrevate people as evident by this thread.

that being said, this thread needs to be deleted.

You ever seen the performance of games under VMWare?

Plus, where did VMWare come into this at all???

It came into this when i brought it into this. Obviously the point of my post completely averted you as i was simply stating that a person has the right to run a game under whatever operating system and under whatever conditions they choose without being completely and totally torn apart for it.

And no, running anything under an emulator usually provides poor performace, but if i choose to do so, i should be able to without being told i am an idiot or a fool. But like i mentioned above, i dont expect you to understand that.

Maybe you need to use better examples then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pilsbury    0
Jason you need to brush up on your computer skills. if you run linux ( which I do mandrake 9.1 and redhat 9.1 ) you can run windows based games , as you should be able to. after all windows controls 80% of the o/s market so that means for you laymens that windows based games are the majority, and to be fair and NON-MONPOLY should make games for other 20% of o/s btw wine for linux will run any windows based game or program. just switched from windows to linux several weeks ago, after using micorosoft products for 15 years. bottom line they suck and are unstable. dont beleive so take a look at windows security patches for the last 3 monthes and then goto linux and look at theirs case closed.

1) WineX sucks performance-wise. Good way of making a P4 perform like a Pentium

2) What about GNU code being compromised, and all the patches for the holes that have been found within it? Without wanting to start any major Linux / Windows debate, all OS'es are as insecure or secure as the user makes them...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jason    5
From his post it appears he thinks he should have the right to use Linux and run "WINDOWS" based games on it natively.

Jason you need to brush up on your computer skills. if you run linux? ( which I do mandrake 9.1 and redhat 9.1 ) you can run windows based games , as you should be able to. after all windows controls 80% of the o/s market so that means for you laymens that windows based games are the majority, and to be fair and? NON-MONPOLY? should make games for other 20% of o/s?  btw wine for linux will run any windows based? game or program. just switched from windows to linux several weeks ago, after using micorosoft products for 15 years. bottom line they suck and are unstable. dont beleive so? take a look at windows security patches for the last 3 monthes and then goto linux and look at theirs case closed.

Don't try to patronise me, you know nothing about me or my knowledge of computers so don't print unresourced garbage.

As for security Windows 2000 has better security ratings than Linux does.

Linux Rated Less Secure than Windows

When Microsoft announced last fall that the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) had awarded Windows 2000 the highest possible grade in the Common Criteria (CC) security certification, open-source advocates downplayed the honor as insignificant and unrelated to real-world security analysis. This week, however, ISO also awarded Linux the CC security certification, and as one might expect, the open-source community greeted the announcement with cheers. There's just one catch: Linux got a lower security rating than Win2K did last year

Windows 2000 Passes Security Test

Microsoft announced that Windows 2000 has received the highest level of security certification of any commercial operating system. The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) awarded Windows 2000 with the Common Criteria (CC) certification for the broadest set of real-world scenarios yet achieved by any operating system as defined by the Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation (CCITSE). As an international standard that's often a requirement for local, federal, and international government contracts, the CC isn't an easy certification to receive.

Try comapring Win 2003 Server's patches to Linux for teh last 3 months.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
alexander777    0

1) WineX sucks performance-wise. Good way of making a P4 perform like a Pentium

2) What about GNU code being compromised, and all the patches for the holes that have been found within it? Without wanting to start any major Linux / Windows debate, all OS'es are as insecure or secure as the user makes them...

first off being playing with these boxes for 25 years ( sincle the altair ) I know and have run every operating system known to man. wine x preformance is no problem at all !!!!! its the kiddies who hardly know how to log into their hotmail or the windows based users who get on the linux bandwagon then find out its not wriiten for ms stupid people who like to just be able to point and click instead of using a little brain power and using a command line instad of a point and click gui. in the end maybe 10 years maybe less ( hopefully) we linux users wont be having this conversation, the proof will be in the pudding. btw have you been reading the news posts like british airways computer crash, the power balckout etc what o/s you think they were using. hmmmmmmmm :devil:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
alexander777    0

As for security Windows 2000 has better security ratings than Linux does.

jason.

first off when you read these studies about benchmarks you have to do a little research example that ratings of 2000 was funded by a 3ard party subsidy ( which btw is owned by microsoft ) you can hire or pay anyone to say anything. I will agree 2000 is pretty stable and has low security issues that I will agree with. However that doesnt make it a bettter o/s per say there's hundreds of issues to consider. I guess my biggest point of this and this will close the case. did you happen to see the news artcle posted on here several weeks ago when the blaster worm was going on and microsoft backed up allll their servers? guess what o/s those backed up servers were running?

LINUX even microsoft knows lmao. case closed. :devil:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jason    5

The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) awarded Windows 2000 the security rating and they are biased to no one.

Sorry you closed no case Microsoft did not use Linux to backup their servers, they may have hired a thrd party's services but as to that company using Linux its completely irrelivant.

Edited by Jason

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
alexander777    0

well you use what you think is best and I'll use what I think is best. we are small only 20% of the market. we'll goto sleep and not worry about the next blaster worm etc. but to each their own. one final note if you think iso is unbiased you know even less then i thought. cheers this post is closed for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kurtz    0

Win2k3 Server expensive?

I got my copy from Microsoft for $99.00.

Guess I am just a better shopper then most :cool:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Endoscient    0

wow.... in this and longhorn forum. nmost of tiem when ppl ask for help over 1/2 the psots are falesm hwo they shouldn't being using OS bc it is a server/alpha OS. get over it stop trolling its there choice. also its not againsst EULA to talke about win 2k3. ur just guessing he obtainedd llegally. also wut if he has an uncle at MS that got it to him cheap, or has oddles of money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AQUaDeX    0

omg this is getting lame, I think some mod or so should just lock this thread, I feel sorry for ZombieFly, if your problem isn't solved just open a new thread after this one is locked

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
xEonBuRn    0

Through MS Academic Alliance with my school, as an engineering student I can get free licenses to w2k3 server standard and enterprise... I was thinking of trying one of them.. is it worth it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.