Win 2k3 vs. XP Pro

[zuze]

I am scratching my head here. I just got this isane idea to switch from my trusted XP pro to windows 2003. I got a free license so it really seems tempting. I sometimes play games, and mostly do coding in vs or borland( yes I am cs major that is arrogantly dumb about his operaitng systems and yes I took os class too). Any nays on the switch??

 

[EeyoreX]

Why use Windows Server 2003 to do Windows XP tasks? To use Server 2003 as basically an XP box is silly. You have to enable things in Server to work like XP out of the box. Utilities, like anti-virus or disk drive utilities usually do not work on servers, so that's an extra expense. I can think of no compelling reason to use Server 2003 over XP in this case. I think you can safely consider this a "nay" post.

\Dan

 

[TheBoyBlunder]

I'd say no...if you search a little you might find it's a pain to get the proper drivers installed for your graphics card. For example, Nvidia doesn't have 32 bit 2k3 server drivers for the Geforce series.

 

[Xemus]

The above posts have very good points. You should not try to run Server unless you actually want to serve something (and it doesn't sound like you do).
Now, running server for the experience is a good idea. How about dual booting? That would give you the opertunity to play with server and to run XP for most of your daily tasks.

 

[stephbu]

Originally posted by: TheBoyBlunder
I'd say no...if you search a little you might find it's a pain to get the proper drivers installed for your graphics card. For example, Nvidia doesn't have 32 bit 2k3 server drivers for the Geforce series.

Not sure where you got that nugget from - looking at my Win2K3 install - I see an WHQL approved driver for my GeForce DDR

 

[JonnyBlaze]

yeah, basicly and xp driver will work in 2k3. why dual boot when one os will do everything that the other one will do?

id say got for it. i did.


JB

 

[rmrf]

windows 2003 server vs. windows xp

I would say the above would answer your question. Are you going to be running any sort of server tasks on this machine, or will you just be doing some programming and gaming? The word server trailing windows 2003 really does mean something. Last I saw, neither Best Buy or Microsoft for that matter were marketing their server line to end users. If you will not be doing any server tasks on the system, it will run the same as your windows xp installation. Stick with xp and leave server to the business end of things.

 

[stephbu]

I use a mix of WinXPPro and Win2K3 in a variety of environments at work and at home. I use Win2K3 in both workstation and server roles.

At work I use Win2K3 as dual monitor workstation for example. As a software architect having the featureset of our datacentres available on my desktop is an absolute must for developing proof-of-concept approaches, and of course familiarity with the available services. With the process priority set to foreground interactive applications Win2K3 is as responsive as XP.

Of course the hardware for Win2K3 is a little more needy with more services enabled, but RAM is cheap and even my dual 550 Xeon server at home runs it fairly well.

There are very few reasons beyond licence cost not to run it, most applications run unmodified, most that don't only need XP compatibility set on their installers and work just fine when run. I generally had more problems getting a couple of device drivers for my older server (circa 1999 - couldn't get an updated ACPI driver that worked) than newer hardware.

There is no upgrade path from Pro - it'd be a side-by-side install. Try it and see for yourself...