Why should I use a Server OS for my Workstation??

I am usually not a fan of Microsoft, but this was pretty sweet. (Sorry, my Indonesian is not very good :P)

This sounds great. Windows Server 2008 is so much cheaper than even XP. Been looking how to “hack” it for a while thanks

I am guessing this is for replacing Vista.

How does the Win 2008 compare with Win 7?

@Stephen D

Yes, it works fine. I’ve had no problems upgrading from 2008 to 2008 R2. However, Windows 7 has a lot more functionality than Vista did, and using 2008 R2 is not necessary to get the server-style backup features, software RAID, etc. Also, using Windows 7 allows you to use Microsoft’s new free anti-virus solution and Windows XP mode. These features aren’t available in 2008 R2… shame. If you’re doing a fresh OS install, I’d say use Windows 7 unless you need IIS or other server roles (such as terminal server).

How can I install Nero?

Arris: Take a look at the forum.

I guess I should amend my earlier post. The obvious question is what do U want to use the computer for? My needs are actually very basic. MS Office 2007, Utorrent, Firefox. I think I did read something about problems using Auction Sniper but I wasn’t sure if that was the OS problem or the firewall compatibility issue. Have I over simplified my question about which OS should best soot my needs?

Arris: Newer operating systems like Vista and Server 2008 are of course slower than OS’s like XP and Server 2003. This is just because the newer OS’s were designed to run on newer hardware. However the older operating systems will have fewer features so it’s up to you to decide which operating system suits your needs.

It will still show as a server install

I have used Windows Vista Ultimate (64 Bit ) since the day it came out, I like Vista a lot better than XP, but once I loaded Windows 2008 Server Enterprise (64 Bit), I was blown away by the speed difference. , I have configured 2008 server to run like a work station, After running a few Benchmark tests, it showed the increase in Performance, I think this is something I will keep doing as time goes on, it’s like Night and Day 🙂

how bout windows 7 performance compare with windows server 2008?

I am running 2003 server both home and at work, and I would just say that I wouldn’t really recommend it to anyone less geeky than myself.
The reason is that I have met some obstacles regarding drivers and software that won’t install. Its only a handful, like printer drivers, antivirus, MS Active Sync.
If you want a faster Vista, you could consider tinyVista.

For anyone who ask for the price…

Remember that a Technet plus submission just cost : 349$

And for that price you can use all Soft you want… Windows Server, Vista, Office…

some choices to make,
I make mine…

Is there any real difference between running enterprise or standard on the desktop?

Arris: See this topic for more info about the different versions.

Thanks! I’m 100% convinced now to do what should be done 🙂

Arris: Good to hear that! If you need any support, don’t hesitate to ask your question on the Forums! 😉

Hi guys! Thank you so much for all these informations and tweak stuff. Everythin works cool! Windows Server 2008 is a fantastic operating system I have ever seen. I am a video operator and video editor and we can not work without WIN platform, Linux is nothing in this way, believe me! Bye and enjoy using w2k8 🙂

Arris: I’m glad you got Windows Server 2008 up & running! 😉 You have a nice website btw!

Erickson…

You are right on the money. Microsoft did not become #1 because of some spell they cast on the firth night of the second moon cycle when the sky was red and purple…

They had a great idea, they marketed it very well, they expanded and added features that customers asked for.

The only reason that Windows is the preferred gaming OS right now is the invention of Direct X. Direct X allows for software developers to program for one hardware type… Direct X. If developers had to include commands for all the 3D Accelerators, Sound Cards, and Input Devices, we would be looking at games who only supported particular manufacturers because development and support costs would be so high that they could not support all hardware. Direct X allows for hardware manufacturers to have a standard to interface to, and give software developers a standard to interface to. This way everyone only needs to support one hardware profile (Direct X) which keeps development costs and support costs much lower than they would be if Direct X did not exist.

Anywho, getting off topic… Erickson, you did a fine job. It the people did not want Windows, it would have never been so widespread. Linux is impossible to implement as a standard OS because there are not any restrictions, no guarantees that one Linux system is the same as the next. Ubuntu is the closest distro to accomplish this, but they even have a long way to go.

And that is just my 42 cents.

@Anony-coward: Imagine a world where one gets laid by the /same/ person every night, and still has a stress-free life. Where one can indulge in hobbies and things of interest. Where one can use triple periods and not commas, or proper punctuation in general. When you meet me here I’ll make sure to buy you a drink. 😉

@Ptero-4:
“And the only reason it is so widely used is because all the computer and peripheral makers build only for windows.” (read: The only reason it’s so widely used is because it is so widely used)
Windows was the first operating system that was user friendly with a GUI (graphical user interface). It was a huge step up from DOS, and I for one loved Windows 3.1. It was quickly adopted by the masses as the savior of PC-kind, and became the standard for home and business workstations.

“[Do] you know why[?]”
I think I just said so, but tell us in your divine wisdom.

“Simpl[y] because it is so crappy[.] [And they know it], they just won´t tell anyone that it slows the computer down[. W]hich causes most computer users to get a new PC”
You’re saying companies sell an operating system because it’s crappy. Interesting business move, lets see if it works out for them. Most computer users buy a new PC so that they can run hardware intensive software (ie Video Games and media editors). Many people are forced to buy a new computer for new operating systems merely because they bought the bare minimum specs for the last operating system.

“(lots [of] money going to the computer maker, and to the peripheral makers due to the fact that they sell to the computer maker),”
I suggest you buy from NewEgg. Buying parts separately means you aren’t forced to get anything you do not want (ie Dell, HP, AlienWare).

“update the computer (money going to the peripheral makers)”
No, it doesn’t. Drivers and Windows Updates are entirely free. Unless you’re talking about an “upgrade” (which you just mentioned before your first use of the word ‘peripheral’). In which case, see my previous comment. Hardware purchases send revenue to the retailer (ie Dell, HP, NewEgg) and to the hardware developer (ie AMD/ATI, Nvidia, Seagate). Software developers get money when they sell their software. Often computer companies like HP and Dell bundle Windows with their computers. But you do not have to buy an OS when you buy a computer. … You really like the word “peripheral” don’t you. Did you just learn that word in your 6th grade vocab list?

“send it to the computer maker´s tech support (again more money going to the computer maker)”
No, it doesn’t. I’m not really sure what Windows has to do with hardware failure, but whatever. Hardware replacement under warranty as the case usually is when sending to tech support is on the company’s penny. Tech Support is a thankless, profitless job. I know. It’s where my federal work study is.

“The computer and peripheral makers KNOW that if they preloaded linux this wouldn´t happen as frequently”
Again, what does an OS have to do with hardware? Hardware warranties will be the same if you opt to not buy an OS.

“(not to mention that “security software” vendors would be out of business due to the lack of a market for their warez)”
If Linux became the new standard operating system lots of things would happen. First of all, Linux’s open source code, and customization would insure that support for the operating system would be a logistical nightmare. It’s simply not fit for widescale standardization. That’s what makes it a great OS in its own right. Additionally if it became the standard, hackers, crackers, and black hats would start coding malware, warez, etc faster than you can say “but Linux isn’t supposed to have this stuff”. This is what is happening to Leopard OSX.

“[They chose to preload the crappiest OS knowing that it would make them *b*illion*air*es at our expense.]”
You’re not too familiar with capitalism are you? Or competition? Crappy software does not, a BillionAIRe, make. Microsoft developed a monopoly of the OS field decades ago. They had a “good” idea and it made them rich. Good for them. I’d prefer to have that money, but I haven’t discovered a software niche of my own yet. Now-a-days there is competition. Especially from Apple. If Microsoft continues to release operating systems like Vista they will lose their customers.

“Obviously the software makers got caught in the [monopoly] and had to make their apps for windows.”
Bias aside, Windows is a great platform for gaming and business related applications. Much better than Mac or Linux. However I’d be impressed if you found non-gaming software that wasn’t multiplatform.

I’m starting to get a headache. I wonder if you actually use Linux. Or have ever.

Ptero-4, you forgot to mention that the moon landing is fake and aliens are real.

The truth is out there my tin foil hatted friend.

The suggestions, re linux on Vista, or 2008.

Google up andlinux. Its neat. Lets you run linux as a native windows process, and has a full ubuntu distribution. End result is you can run linux apps as if they where windows apps, and it integrates pretty nicely. Its a bit fussy, and doesnt really handle suspend/hibernate that well, but its worth it if you know your way around linux.

I’ve been running the “Server” versions of Windows as the “Primary OS” of the (desktop!) computer I do 95% of my work with, since 1998, when I loaded an unused copy of NT4 Server on my box, just to play with it. As my internet connection at that time was “about 100 feet of CAT-5” (my office was in the same building as my ISP at that time), I immediatey appreciaed all the extra network goodies that it provided me. As I upgraded through W2k Server to 2k3 Server and now 2k8, I’m now committed to “never going back”.

Only thing that irritates my about 2k8, is the “bundling” of WMP with the desktop enhancements. I see only one real use for all the overly-DRM-enthusiastic Windows Media.* — tell MS that they should “install” it where the Sun don’t shine! (I’m a VLC evavgelist!)

I’m compiling a list of all of the WMP “stowaways” in the Desktop Experience package — most importantly hijacked file associathns and new Services that start at bootup, or could be triggered to start without WMP being explicitly started bt *me*. Then, and only then, I’ll run Aero.

HINT FOR SERVER “NEWBIES”: BEWARE when calling anyone’s tech support department — NEVER SAY “2008 Server” SAY “Vista SP1” INSTEAD.

In the last 10 years, I’ve been told by a few “script-following outsourced morons” things like “(product) does not run on servers”. While 2k3 Server actually was a slight;y different OS than XP (later “branch” off the Windows “trunk”), providing a 25% probability it *actually was*, drivers and apps OK with 2k Pro, were equally OK with 2k Server. This will also be tha case with Vista and 2k8 Server.

Vista Home is a YUGO
Vusta Pro is a MINIVAN
’08 Server is a MACK TRUCK…
Run it “bobtail” and blow the doors off of the Vista boxes!

-NK

Heya all

1)why use virtualpc 2007? Virtualbox works just as good and costs nothing even better it runs on Linux and Windows.
2) Linux is not hard @ all try the new Ubuntu it is even easier than Windows, it does it all for you!
3) There are several cases where big corporates use Linx on the desktop
there are a lot of government organisations too. We actually boot linux thin clients and launch citrix from there.
4) On the server nothing beats Linux, they don’t even come close!
5) If Windows is so much better why are the majority of webservers on the net Apache + Linux?
6) And all the DNS servers? All the root DNS servers?

My list can go on and on, but yes, the market is dominated by windows currantly.

It may work better, but the cheapest non-crippled Windows Server 2008 I could find (Standard Edition) is $700, and it includes 5 client licenses you’ll never wind up using… Microsoft won’t sell it without either an additional device client license or those user client licenses.

Vista Ultimate OEM can be had around $190, Retail can be had for $250.

Also, that multi-thousand dollar MSDN subscription you’re paying for comes with the OS for testing purposes only… check your EULA. It’s not intended for production use (which would be what you’re using it for on a daily basis).

How badly do you want that extra 10% – 15% performance gain? You’re better off spending the difference in cash on more memory or a beefier CPU.

Can anyone give a list of services to disable to make vista run faster?
@ linux fanboys your daddy called your step brothers (BSD guys) a bunch of “masturbating monkeys”. What a shame.. actually you all are the same.. And why do you lurk around in windows forums.. Linux sucks.. I’ll give you zillion reasons for that..

>I am asking sincerely what Server 2008 workstation
> has that makes it better than the Mac OS X
> experience with Leopard.

“Developers. Developers. Developers.” Any luck running VS2008 in Leopard?

Here is another well respected author/speaker/tech guru who feels the same way:

http://windowsitpro.com/article/articleid/99607/might-your-next-workstation-run-server-2008.html

for the visual studio developer above – check out mono.

This is exactly what I did when XP/Server 2003 first came out. Windows Server 2003 is an extremely fast, powerful and slimmed down version of XP that supports almost the exact same set of features and products. I could install Server 2003 on a system with minimal resources and still have it running amazingly well.

The only reason I made the switch over to XP SP1 was for wireless support. There is a built in security feature in Server 2003 that disables the use of wireless NIC’s as they are unsecure. I never did find a workaround for that. I’m unsure if it has carried into Server 2008.

I personally run Linux with XP in a virtual machine for Visual Studio.

Gilberto, then use dual-boot: Use Linux for pleasure, internet, etc, and Windows for Visual Studio. I really can’t be sure this might work for you, but it’s an unmentioned alternative here.

Or you know, you could just use Linux and stop having to put up with this kind of nonsense.

I just tested max mem in server x86 and for me is 3.2gb (4096mb on board)

Arris: The memory limit for Server 2008 x86 is 4GB using Physical Address Extension. To force Windows to use PAE enter the following command in the Command Prompt and restart: BCDEdit /set PAE ForceEnable

if only Windows Vista was like this, the way you can customize and control what to install features I think this is the next best thing after Windows XP

users are not that too stupid to customize everything on their computer

I’m so impressed with Server OS 2008
this is the first time I used a server OS on a workstation and I’ll use this until Windows 7 comes

I thought i’ll be stuck at XP forever ^_^

WS2008 x32 standard it use 4 Gb of Ram ?
Or only it show only instaled phisical memory
but ussable memory is under 3.5 Gb like Vista SP1 ?

Arris: Specifications of the different versions can be found here. You can use 4GB on a x86 system using Physical Address Extension but your system will run slower, so I advise to install a 64bit version!

Are there any guides on how to dual-boot WinXP SP2 with WinServer 2008 x64 Enterprise? sorry if OT

cheers

Arris: Try the manual from the Intel Softwareblogs and use as XP booting settings, the configuration at tech-recipes.com. That should work… If there are more people who want this, I’ll make a tutorial.

Microsoft Internet Information Services 7: Fully featured webserver;
Vista has it too, but limited to 10 simultaneous connections since it’s not a server OS.

Hyper-V: Virtualization integrated in the Operating System.
When released Vista will get it too

Terminal Services: Work on one PC simultaneously.
Vista has it too…

If 2008 and Vista are pretty much identical, would it be possible to ‘fix’ Vista so that it performs the same as 2008? If so, how? It would be interesting to find out what’s slowing it down.

“Work on one PC simultaneously.”???? I already do that now.