Comments on: Windows Server 2003 — as a workstation http://jamesmckay.net/2007/11/windows-server-2003-as-a-workstation/ because there are few things that are less logical than business logic Fri, 05 Sep 2008 23:29:09 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5 By: Paul http://jamesmckay.net/2007/11/windows-server-2003-as-a-workstation/#comment-2661 Paul Wed, 30 Apr 2008 10:13:15 +0000 http://www.jamesmckay.net/2007/11/windows-server-2003-as-a-workstation/#comment-2661 I've been using 2003 as a workstation for 2 years (still refer to this guide as part of the course for setup) I totally recommend 2003 over Vista and XP. Although some bundled apps aren't included from xp and some software will refuse to install on a "server class" OS there are plenty of alternatives and performance and stability gains particularly with intensive apps easily outweigh their loss. I’ve been using 2003 as a workstation for 2 years (still refer to this guide as part of the course for setup) I totally recommend 2003 over Vista and XP.
Although some bundled apps aren’t included from xp and some software will refuse to install on a “server class” OS there are plenty of alternatives and performance and stability gains particularly with intensive apps easily outweigh their loss.

]]> By: James http://jamesmckay.net/2007/11/windows-server-2003-as-a-workstation/#comment-2573 James Wed, 16 Apr 2008 12:34:55 +0000 http://www.jamesmckay.net/2007/11/windows-server-2003-as-a-workstation/#comment-2573 I don't think I can add much to my original post, to be honest. I don't really recommend it unless you specifically need it: you lose out on some cool stuff such as Windows Live Writer, the Windows Media Player extension for Firefox, and so on. There are some situations that might warrant it: if you're doing SharePoint development, for instance, but in other cases you're probably better off running it in VMWare on top of Vista if you really need it. I don’t think I can add much to my original post, to be honest. I don’t really recommend it unless you specifically need it: you lose out on some cool stuff such as Windows Live Writer, the Windows Media Player extension for Firefox, and so on. There are some situations that might warrant it: if you’re doing SharePoint development, for instance, but in other cases you’re probably better off running it in VMWare on top of Vista if you really need it.

]]> By: ljubomirz http://jamesmckay.net/2007/11/windows-server-2003-as-a-workstation/#comment-2570 ljubomirz Wed, 16 Apr 2008 07:19:14 +0000 http://www.jamesmckay.net/2007/11/windows-server-2003-as-a-workstation/#comment-2570 Hi James, it's been a while since you blogged about it, but i wander what is your feedback after half a year. I'm planning to replace Vista from my developer box, and as possible alternatives i'm looking at either windows server 2003 or 2008. Thanks, ljubomirz Hi James,

it’s been a while since you blogged about it, but i wander what is your feedback after half a year.
I’m planning to replace Vista from my developer box, and as possible alternatives i’m looking at either windows server 2003 or 2008.

Thanks,
ljubomirz

]]>