Jump to content

Server to workstation -- why?


colemancb
 Share

Recommended Posts


There is a noticable improvement.

The main one I noticed was it runs as quick as it does when you first turn it on, all the time. I often left my PC on a week or a fortnight and it was constantly quick. I think it handles memory different to XP and its why you get this result, but don't quote me on that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I currently do not notice any speed increases per se, but being able to run server processes on my workstation does come in handy (and not having connection limits is pretty useful as well in my environment). Server 2003 vs XP is probably a more personal thing when it comes to choice for desktop OS - Server 2003 is quite a bit more handy in certain situations than XP, and you should get similar performance for day-to-day operations, especially in x64 variants of both where the kernel is identical.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Same here. I see no performance advantage whatsoever. None. But some people have a genuine need for sever components (IIS6 namely), or use need apps that will only install on server versions of windows (like SQL Server [non dev ed nor express ed] and such things). XP has better compatibility with "desktop" apps though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Same here. I see no performance advantage whatsoever. None. But some people have a genuine need for sever components (IIS6 namely), or use need apps that will only install on server versions of windows (like SQL Server [non dev ed nor express ed] and such things). XP has better compatibility with "desktop" apps though.

SQL 2005 standard can run on Windows XP PRO with no problems, and as far as I can remember, there was an article on how to install IIS6 (even IIS 5) on Windows 2000/XP. :)

As per why Win2k3 over XP, I see no reason at all, as Win2k3 has more services and processes that run in bg than XP has, but there are still people that thinks that win2k3 runs faster than XP.

Edited by valter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

SQL 2005 standard can run on Windows XP PRO with no problems

That's new, you couldn't do that with SQL Server 2000. It was just an example of apps that require server software. Even without SQL Server 2005, the list is pretty long.

and as far as I can remember, there was an article on how to install IIS6 (even IIS 5) on Windows 2000/XP. :)

You remember wrong. Installing IIS5 on win2k or IIS 5.1 on XP is a couple clicks away. But IIS6 does not, and will not run on anything else than win2003. It's impossible. And the version of IIS coming with XP is not only older/different, but it's also crippled (max connections namely), making it useless for load testing. And just lik the previous example, IIS was only one example, there are dozens more server components which aren't available on XP.

As per why Win2k3 over XP, I see no reason at all, as Win2k3 has more services and processes that run in bg than XP has, but there are still people that thinks that win2k3 runs faster than XP.

I see a reason, but I would be tempted to say it's slower/has more overhead too (if you're actually using some of the server stuff it's meant for).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A lot of developers will run Server as a workstation OS for the simple aspect that when you're programming, you can test out your code live in front of you in a real environment before throwing it out onto a production server. I myself have done it very often.

Edited by jcarle
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's more or less my point too. I write a lot of server middleware running on IIS6 and such things (often requiring various server components which aren't available on XP, or that interface to [test instances of] apps like Exchange which require a server OS). I'd much rather develop on the same platform than develop and find out it won't run on the other platform. And again, on the list of apps that require server OS'es, there are developer-specific software such as VSTS.

Also, win2003 has a different licensing WRT virtualization. It lets you use up to 4 copies of itself in VMs without requiring more licenses (so esentially 5 copies of the OS simultaneously), which is very handy too. You can test your new stuff on another (virtual) server or test stuff that requires several servers at once.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As per why Win2k3 over XP, I see no reason at all, as Win2k3 has more services and processes that run in bg than XP has, but there are still people that thinks that win2k3 runs faster than XP.

It uses a newer kernel that benches slightly higher as well as being more stable.

As for services, you can turn those off like you can in XP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...