Microsoft Changes The Game Plan: Windows 2003 A True NOS?

Sit back get a cup of coffee it's time for another tale of technology
by Jimmy Freligh Jr | April 1st, 2004

A lot of people ask about Windows 2003 is it better then Windows XP? Ha! I wish, there on way different levels, sure they look the same but, they do not perform the same. Next question is what is better, Windows 2000 Server or Windows 2003. Well hmmm let me think the newer the operating system the more it costs. What do you think is really better newer or older this really all depends on your purpose of having a server operating system. Older might be better but, in Microsoft's world newer is always better. Windows 2003 is the server-side operating system of Windows XP, Windows XP is the client so is Windows NT Workstation, Windows 2000 Professional and so on and so on. If your going to be playing games on a server platform operating system then Windows 2003 is not for you. Windows 2003 is the most stable and secure operating system Microsoft has ever made. I never seen such reliability out of a Windows operating system. Let me tell you why 2003 is so stable compared to all there other Windows based operating systems.

Unlike all other Windows based operating systems Windows 2003 doesn't support DirectX, which means you can't play games on it woohoo! To enable audio you have to enable certain services for your audio to work. There are a lot of steps to get the multimedia portion to work. It's all there but, you got to do things to make things work on Windows 2003, only thing is after tweaking the operating system you can do a lot but, you still can't play games. Why would you play games on a server operating system anyway! That's the question that pops in my mind, why did Windows 2000 Server and beyond support games, sounds and all this other stuff when you don't play games on a server, you don't use your companies central server to run your music CD's, play video games on it, do you. No you play games on a client you use a server operating systems to file serve, host a web site be a PDC, run WINS, DHCP, DNS why would they include this feature in Windows NT Server/Windows 2000 Server+? I will tell you why.

Microsoft starting getting smart because people like me kept asking the question. Why are your server operating systems enabled to play games, listen to music, change screen savers and so on. Was it because Microsoft didn't want to put in extra effort to get all that overhead off there chest. So Microsoft said fine we will create a server platform operating system with no overhead like DirectX and other things you would never use on a server operating system. The more overhead you strip off the more stable and reliable the operating system gets. These features being; screen savers, mouse pointers, desktop wallpapers, sounds and of course the beautiful no gaming support. The only catch is lets charge the general public and businesses who want this operating system a pretty penny for removing our overhead.

I have been a Microsoft beta tester for years I started testing Windows Whistler ways back then it turned into Windows XP then they called it Windows .NET then they finally changed there mind and said lets call it Windows 2003. I like calling it Windows .NET sounds cooler don't you think? There are different flavors of this operating system for certain usage just like any other operating system the more you pay the more bells and whistles you get. Most of the time it's more processor support more ram support etc etc you get that idea.

So what did we learn Windows 2003 is Microsoft finest operating system if you don't play games, Windows 2003 is the way to go if you like no crashes, no reboots and finally I can say, you can run a Windows based operating system for a year straight without a crash or a freeze or even a blue screen/memory dump. If your like everyone else who loves Windows and can't live without Windows, Windows 2003 is your best bet for a home/office server. Now for the clients I would go Windows 2000 Professional and Windows XP Professional. Sorry Microsoft Windows 9x/ME just plain suck. I highly recommend Windows 2003 for any type of Windows based servers.

"There is nothing that can't be done"
January 1999, Jimmy Freligh Jr

Jimmy Freligh Jr
Senior Network Operations Director of FiberOps | Winnetka City Councilman

Did nobody like this Newsletters I wrote? Whats the deal ha.

what does a beta tester do? how would you become one? just curious thats all. I never knew all that about the windows server platforms. but it stinks they cost a lot.

http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/hwdev/.../betatest.mspx

Great post ! I was contemplating whether to advise my client to go for Windows 2003 due to worry of stability problems. And as you know, it can be quite a while before patches are available.

I have also meddled with Whistler before and it is really bad. Unstable and buggy just like the first release of WINXP.

Heck, I like 'em... Just a lot of times, I read them, and go... "Hey... that's interesting," and I don't have anything to add/ask about the topic.

Keep 'em coming!

If they want to put the money down and want to go Windows go with Win2K3 seriously. Thanks for all the support these articles are going in magazines. I have more if you search around. Have a good day.

Also WinXP beta how can I forget that was one of the most exciting things I have ever tested. I loved it with the bugs once it came out I was bored with it then Win2k3 came out and I fell in love with a new OS that was Windows Based.

As for the articles good stuff I feel you on that! I read a ton of things and most of the time don't respond because I really don't need to.

Umm Actually windows 2003 does support directx, you need to enable it :p

Ive palyed ut2k3 on it as well as alot of other DX games

Yeah I wrote this article before I found that out thanks for pointing that out what I hate about writing articles is sometimes I forget to add something thanks again.