Probably you are thinking at the moment: “Why the heck should I use Windows Server 2008 as my Workstations Operating System?? Vista works fine for me…”.
The answer is clear: Windows Server 2008 has almost exactly the same features as Windows Vista (SP1), but is remarkably faster and more stable! People say: “It’s Windows Vista without the bloat“!
Here are four great benchmarks about Windows Vista (SP1) versus Windows Server 2008:
Beside the speed, Windows Server 2008 also includes:
Install Windows Server 2008 Now!!
Tags Server 2008 Workstation
March 21st, 2008 at 18:15
Hyper-V it’s RC0 in server2008
March 24th, 2008 at 20:11
“Work on one PC simultaneously.”???? I already do that now.
March 31st, 2008 at 3:54
I want an OS that really manages available memory to its fullest and has a much more robust filing system than NTFS. I think those are the reason WS2008 is the choice for anyone. The other stuff mentioned above is nice but unless you are a web hoster I can’t see why it is much more useful than, say, W2K pro or XP pro.
Big problem for me is still the huge gap in available software vs. the popular workstation OS’s. I have a zillon utilities and always want “one more”. The world of 3rd party stuff that makes a PC cool to use exists as 32 bit XP executables and will be for a long while to come.
If I had the brainpower to compile my own stuff, I’d be running Linux and that would be the end of the discussion ;-))
Admin: You can try if all your 3rd party stuff works by installing Windows Server 2008 x86 in Microsoft Virtual PC 2007. This way you can also learn the “difficult” Linux
April 2nd, 2008 at 18:23
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.
April 3rd, 2008 at 23:55
Vista can’t perform as fresh install of Windows Server 2008, unless you disable almost all services. Windows 2008 can perform as bad as Vista when you load it with lots of services and anti virus.
I have to hard disk for my laptop - one with Vista SP1 and one with Windows 2008, when both have all same services running - I really can’t see any difference in the performance!
If you make your strip down installation copy (vlite) of Vista, remove all the features/services you dont need - it will perform 10 times better than before and you’ll still have the few desktop features (like Media Center).
April 6th, 2008 at 21:33
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…
April 8th, 2008 at 14:06
Uncripple Windows XP to allow more than 10 concurrent connections for IIS, allow more than 1 root website,
http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000329.html
April 11th, 2008 at 10:53
Are there any guides on how to dual-boot WinXP SP2 with WinServer 2008 x64 Enterprise? sorry if OT
cheers
Admin: 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.
April 16th, 2008 at 13:06
How to dual boot?I did it.
For example take a standart 160 gb sata disk.
Make 4 equal partition.Be carefull 4 primary partition
not logical partition.
Firstly.set up WinXP SP2 in first partition.
Then install win vista in second free partition.
and then set up 2008 32 bit in 3rd free partition…
then boot from dvd and install win2008 64 bit in 4th
free partition…
windows boot manager will automatically configure boot menu.
you should set up operating systems from older to newer of course.
April 24th, 2008 at 10:04
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 ?
Admin: 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!
May 3rd, 2008 at 20:17
I just installed it and did this process.. wow does it run fast.. I’m so impressed.
May 6th, 2008 at 7:18
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 ^_^
May 29th, 2008 at 21:50
Is it possible to write a setup-sequence that en- or disable the registry settings of a running vista system to get the same performance of win server 08 available for people who are not so sure in changing registry settings?
June 12th, 2008 at 18:42
I just tested max mem in server x86 and for me is 3.2gb (4096mb on board)
Admin: 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
June 29th, 2008 at 7:32
i love the way it runs, but i am having trouble finding drivers for a few things.
most of these things i dont really need, like the drivers for my razer tarantula.
some, i would really like to have, like the utilities for my asus p5q-pro…which do NOT install with this OS.
its give or take. love the 64 bit system, and it really is beautiful to look at.
overall, four thumbs up.
July 16th, 2008 at 10:13
Or you know, you could just use Linux and stop having to put up with this kind of nonsense.
July 16th, 2008 at 10:48
Excellent idea, I will have a try… Unfortunately, as Nick suggests, I can’t use Linux as I’m developing with Visual Studio 2008
July 16th, 2008 at 13:45
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.
July 16th, 2008 at 14:24
Is everyone missing the most obvious deal-breaker to this solution? Developers will have no problem with this if they have an MSDN or Technet subscription, but the rest of us don’t have the cash to shell out $600 for a license of Server 2008 for our PCs at home…
July 16th, 2008 at 15:17
I personally run Linux with XP in a virtual machine for Visual Studio.
July 16th, 2008 at 15:49
Would this be suitable as a gaming platform as well? IE I’d like to be able to continue playing WoW and a few other applications as well…
July 16th, 2008 at 17:51
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.
July 16th, 2008 at 18:29
You know, people really do goof around with Windows a lot. Reading through this, all the restrictions you people are running into are just ones imposed by Microsoft. E.g. license limitations, or unavailability of software developers,
This is what ‘free’ software is about (linux/Firefox/etc): Freedom to do what you like, not just free as-in $$$$$. Proprietary systems like Windows are all about restrictions like in this thread.
If you guys weren’t stuck needing Windows for specific applications (e.g. Direct X games, Visual Studio, other proprietary platforms) then you wouldn’t encounter such retardly restrictions. You could use any platform, any GUI, any components.
You know, this why you can find a million and 1 different linux variants for different types of computing situations.
It’s pretty evident how much Microsoft is stopping you guys from getting what you want out of your PC here.
July 17th, 2008 at 0:40
for the visual studio developer above - check out mono.
July 17th, 2008 at 3:08
All you Linux fanboys should go play. Why are you posting here, bored with trying to find open source apps that actually work? You crack me up with ‘proprietary this’ and ‘proprietary that’ — I’m a consultant for Fortune 100 companies and not a single one uses Linux as a corporate standard desktop… none. If you don’t know what a big deal that is you are clueless about operating systems, corporations, and what it takes to support a corporate desktop. Is Windows “better” than Linux… at some things yes, at some things no. But the items in the yes category easily out weigh the no category. There are many studies done on this… go do research, work in the field for 12 yrs, and then post a reply. See you in 12 yrs.
July 17th, 2008 at 4:04
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
July 17th, 2008 at 5:00
If someone is willing to buy a copy of Server 2008 and use it for a workstation, why is this better than paying the Apple tax and buying a nice Mac. I am not trying to be a wise guy. I am asking sincerely what Server 2008 workstation has that makes it better than the Mac OS X experience with Leopard. I would really like to hear some good answers to this question…
July 17th, 2008 at 9:58
>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?
July 17th, 2008 at 13:00
[...] slashdot, infoworld, win2008workstation (1), win2008workstation (2) posted in rants || print | email | [...]
July 17th, 2008 at 13:38
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..
July 17th, 2008 at 13:40
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..
July 18th, 2008 at 2:52
(To Consultant went too far.. Have you forgot about Google, Nasa,Dreamworks, etc they all use linux for the desktop. PS: Do A Little Research Yourself, it seems that 12 years ain’t enough)
I’ve used Windows 2003 Server as a workstation, and it works very well, very few incompatibilities for 3rd party software it’s really ideal for anyone working with windows development. if anyone is unsure about it, get Microsoft Virtual PC 2007 and try your 3rd party software there. Then Make the Switch.
This will make a lot of sense to VS2008 Developers, but for the public it may not that attractive.
As For Linux, Linux has tons of good things but for VS2008 Developers it won;t be any good. Linux support other platforms like java and its Cross Platform VM.
The Desicion All Depends on how do you see things for you, and the company you are working on.
-Regards,
July 18th, 2008 at 14:59
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.
July 18th, 2008 at 22:29
Totally Agree With Guy..
July 23rd, 2008 at 12:37
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.