Windows Xp Pro Or Windows Server 2003?

[monkeyhead]

Hi,
We just upgraded all pcs on the network.
The Main Computer is 3ghz,512mb ram,200gb hd.
Its used as a server if u like for 8 other comps.Which would be more benfiacl Windows 2003 server or Windows xp?
Please could you tell me what the differnces are
Many thanks
Monkeyhead

[dgmortal]

if its actually running as a server, than server 2003 would be the most logical decision .

EDIT: as far as the differences.....
Windows XP Professional
Windows Server 2003

[shn]

It looks like there is less than 10 boxes there...........that setting is ideal for a small workgroup. Just set all of them up with xp and make a workgroup.

But the other has a decent processor and nice hard drive.................512 megs though would not be sufficient for windows 2003 server.

Thats my opinion. Im sure the minimum mem requirements for 2003 server is probably 512 or 256 I forget but a gig at least is cool for 2003 server. Im a ram freak though. Maybe your not.

But I personally would only use windows server for setting up as a primary domain controller and you definately dont need to set up a windows domain with less than 10 boxes.

Besides there is no sense in paying for thoose extra cals (client access liscences) for thoose few boxes.

[klite_master]

Actually, contrary to popular believe, Windows 2003 Server doesn't require any more RAM or other system resources than normal WinXP OS. In fact, it requires less RAM because it includes lass kiddy-crap than WinXP. Other big pluses are of course incredible stability, improved compatibility since WinXP (except for some occasional badly-developed-software, such as Clean Kazaa 2.60, which doesn't start). Any way, this OS, Win2k3, is very good to use as a Workstation, and you can use it as Server too, if you wish. There are no minuses, CleanKMD 2.60 was the first one I've noticed, but I blame it's developers for that one.

[ck-uk]

Originally posted by klite_master@2 February 2004 - 16:40
Actually, contrary to popular believe, Windows 2003 Server doesn't require any more RAM or other system resources than normal WinXP OS. In fact, it requires less RAM because it includes lass kiddy-crap than WinXP. Other big pluses are of course incredible stability, improved compatibility since WinXP (except for some occasional badly-developed-software, such as Clean Kazaa 2.60, which doesn't start). Any way, this OS, Win2k3, is very good to use as a Workstation, and you can use it as Server too, if you wish. There are no minuses, CleanKMD 2.60 was the first one I've noticed, but I blame it's developers for that one.

Any chance you have or know of a download for this mate??

[Eat_Some_LSD]

I'm running Server 2K3 myself, it works great (if not better than XP) as a workstation...even with my 768 MB SDRAM it doesn't slow down; and I play tons of games, too.

Look under requests for "Windows NT Server," I posted a link there for the ISO (straight from Microshaft), which is where I got my current OS.

[dgmortal]

Originally posted by Eat_Some_LSD@2 February 2004 - 12:03
Look under requests for "Windows NT Server," I posted a link there for the ISO (straight from Microshaft), which is where I got my current OS.

dont do that. go look for a real copy of server 2003. that iso is only the trial and needs cracks and whatnot if you want to use it past 180 days. find one off of emule or bittorrent that isnt the trial.

Edit.....i see your link has the instructions to transform the iso into a non-trial version. still...save yourself some time and download one that doesnt need all this work. you can find them all over emule.

[ck-uk]

Yeah mate i know they're all over emule,i just though he may have been kind enought to give me a quick transfer of his

No worries thou emule i go

[Eat_Some_LSD]

The thing about trying download off P2P is that you'll never have any sources. I've been trying to download Norton 2K4 for the past week, jumping supernodes once or twice a day and still have yet to find a single source...that's why I posted the FTP, it's verified and you'll have it downloaded in an hour or less on a cable modem.

[ck-uk]

Originally posted by Eat_Some_LSD@2 February 2004 - 18:32
The thing about trying download off P2P is that you'll never have any sources.  I've been trying to download Norton 2K4 for the past week, jumping supernodes once or twice a day and still have yet to find a single source...that's why I posted the FTP, it's verified and you'll have it downloaded in an hour or less on a cable modem.

Cheee mate i'm on it.I'll have alook at it
Its not an ftp thou mate but the lnks is protected.But its only a trial version so it shouldnt be a prob to post


For ppl who want to use a download manager incase the transfer braaks
http://download.microsoft.com/download/5/2...6/x09-22207.iso