Difference between W2k and W2k Server

[m3rcury]

Can anybody tell me the major differences? I have w2k right now, should I upgrade to w2k server? I have an Athlon 850 with 256mb on Asus A7v133.
Thanks

 

[igiveup]

Well, same memory support, but server can support up to 4 processors while pro does "only" two. Server comes with a program called Terminal Server that lets you run programs on the machine from over the internet or LAN. Cool if you have another computer, but its outdated and couldn't run things as fast. There are other cool things with server. Keep in mind that when you buy it it will come with 5 client liscenses (or more if you are rich and have money to burn) which means you have the right to install Pro on 5 other computers. In fact, pro comes on the cd also. Basically almost the same core with a few key file differences, as well as the management apps. Just checked pricewatch and you can pick it up if you are a student (academic bundle) for $445.

Basically unless you want to serve up some quality games or manage a network a lot easier and more securely I would just stick with 2k pro, especially if it is stable, which it usually is.

 

[potz]

it's the same except that server just comes with a bunch of stuff such as dhcp, dns, and other services that you won't need if you're just a client. win2k pro will do fine.

 

[Workin']

<< Keep in mind that when you buy it it will come with 5 client liscenses (or more if you are rich and have money to burn) which means you have the right to install Pro on 5 other computers. >>

That is so not true!! It gives you the right to have 5 users connect to the server. It DOES NOT include 5 licenses for Win2k Pro! They are Client Access Licenses (CAL), which means a user can access the server, NOT install Pro for &quot;free&quot;. Jeez, you're gonna get this person thrown in jail.

Let's see... 1 license for Pro costs $280, so 5 would be $1400. Server costs $820. That would be a helluva deal - 41% off the price of the Pro licenses with Server features thrown in for nothing.

Unless you need support for 4 CPUs or need server services, stick with Pro. Going to Server is not an &quot;upgrade&quot;.

 

[DynaOne]

I bought a machine that had 2000 server installed - did some things I didn't like. When I installed 2000Pro I set it as a separate boot option -so I have both, but have never found the need to use Server.
DynaOne

 

[speed01]

Unless you are planning on running an actual server, there really is no reason to switch to the server version. I find the server to run slower than Win2k Pro due to the added processes that run in server.

 

[G14]

I prefer Win2k SERVER over pro. The main reason being so I can learn how to use it and use Terminal Server (which is built into Win2k SERVER) from work all day. It's awsome I can surf the web, use Outlook, ect. through my computer at home and my work doesn't know where I'm surfing to!

 

[jeebus21]

Win2k Server defaults for maximize performance of background services. It might seem slower because it is not an operating system that is made for playing games or having the fastest WinBench, etc. scores. If you have no need for Terminal Services (to hide from your boss G14) or run DHCP, DNS, WINS, RAS, or RIS, then you should stay away from server.