Windows Server 2003

Guest2 · 26 Mar 2010 at 14:41

I have been using Windows Server 2003 more then usual recenty and wondered why I didnt use it instead of XP before. It feels a lot faster, stable and secure than XP.

What is (was) the reason for not using 2003 as a home OS? The only thing I can really think of is driver support for things like graphics and sound and extra cost

SiriusB · 26 Mar 2010 at 15:16

Price.

Burnsy2023 · 26 Mar 2010 at 15:28

Guest2 said:
It feels a lot faster, stable and secure than XP.

XP is as fast and as stable as 2003. The security depends on your configuration. There is simply no need to use 2003 as a desktop OS.

J.B · 26 Mar 2010 at 18:48

You could argue the same for server 08 and Vista really. Server OS are designed to be more stable by running less of the add ons and extra bits.

I went to Uni with a guy who ran 2003 of his main OS. try installing MSN on it!

Simply put, server OS are designed for being servers. Sorry to sound obvious but its a bit of an odd question!

Try installing a free AV or something like that.

SiriusB · 26 Mar 2010 at 18:54

I remember coming across an article showing how you could turn Server 2008 into a workstation machine. The amount of work involved was just crazy. Just buy Vista/7!