Which OS would you choose to use for your business NOW

[drag]

Originally posted by: Sunner
I'd go with Win2K, but mostly because I know it good enough.
I've used Win2K3 for like 1 hour total, so I have no strong opinion for or against it.

Win2k3 is pretty much win2k with everything turned off by default. Most things you do in both OSes are exactly the same, and if they are different then either it's not very different or it involves enabling services that are normally shut off. Nothing that anybody familar with win2k and armed with a new reference book or two can't handle.


Personally I'd always get the newer version of NT (like Linux, always get the newest stuff) unless their was a hardware driver problem (unlikely), or you needed to software that is only certified to run on win2k.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: drag

Originally posted by: Sunner
I'd go with Win2K, but mostly because I know it good enough.
I've used Win2K3 for like 1 hour total, so I have no strong opinion for or against it.

Win2k3 is pretty much win2k with everything turned off by default. Most things you do in both OSes are exactly the same, and if they are different then either it's not very different or it involves enabling services that are normally shut off. Nothing that anybody familar with win2k and armed with a new reference book or two can't handle.


Personally I'd always get the newer version of NT (like Linux, always get the newest stuff) unless their was a hardware driver problem (unlikely), or you needed to software that is only certified to run on win2k.

Driver support is supposedly better in 2k3, and you save time by not having to download a metric ton of patches.

 

[spyordie007]

Originally posted by: oniq

Originally posted by: spyordie007

Originally posted by: oniq
Neither. FreeBSD for server.

That wasnt an option; dont crap on people's threads.

Since when is stating my opinion crapping on people's threads?

That's about the same as someone coming in to the "Which is better Debian or Mandrake?" thread and posting that Windows XP is the best. It was crapping on the thread.

Yea...well...it was a stupid thread to begin with. Its like asking to choose between dos and Windows 2000. Btw...oniq...thanx 4 the opinion...i may jus look into freebsd on my network.

I agree, NT 4 is quite old and it's not really a fair comparison.

 

[kfranc9]

quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by: oniq

quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by: spyordie007

quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by: oniq
Neither. FreeBSD for server.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


That wasnt an option; dont crap on people's threads.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Since when is stating my opinion crapping on people's threads?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


That's about the same as someone coming in to the "Which is better Debian or Mandrake?" thread and posting that Windows XP is the best. It was crapping on the thread.

quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yea...well...it was a stupid thread to begin with. Its like asking to choose between dos and Windows 2000. Btw...oniq...thanx 4 the opinion...i may jus look into freebsd on my network.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I agree, NT 4 is quite old and it's not really a fair comparison.

No, its more like saying...whats better....Red Hat 9 or Red Hat Enterprise Server 3.0. Understand you're comparing 2 different distrubtions. The question between Debian and Mandrake is a very good question. Debian is a hard-core, stable OS...usually fully-tested code is released, but it lacks features. Mandrake is a good beginner OS and has the normal update routine. I'm pretty sure they're are many more differences...maybe you should do a little research.

 

[spyordie007]

I think you missed my point

 

[drag]

I agree, NT 4 is quite old and it's not really a fair comparison.

No, its more like saying...whats better....Red Hat 9 or Red Hat Enterprise Server 3.0. Understand you're comparing 2 different distrubtions. The question between Debian and Mandrake is a very good question. Debian is a hard-core, stable OS...usually fully-tested code is released, but it lacks features. Mandrake is a good beginner OS and has the normal update routine. I'm pretty sure they're are many more differences...maybe you should do a little research.[/quote]

Actually It's more like asking, "what is better: Redhat 6, Redhat 8, or Fedora?"

NT 4.0, W2k, W2k3 and for the most part WinXP, are pretty much the same OS (as apposed to OSes designed for different purposes, but the same exact generation of OSes like RHES and Redhat 9.0)

Realy, don't let the name stuff throw you off, that's marketing.

They are all NT. Just evolutionary improvements/developements on each other.

Except for the added features/services (want to say "bloat", but that's not realy correct), I'd bet that NT 4.0 and W2k3 share 80-90% of the code.

So that's why I say always get the newest version.

 

[chsh1ca]

It can't be 80-90% drag, if only because it would take more than that to fully integrate IE.

Windows 2000/2003 hands down. I like NT, but really, it's old and you shouldn't even be considering switching to an OS that will be unsupported next year.

 

[jose]

Red Hat Linux Enterprise ES ..

You should have seperated 2000 from 2003 .

Regards,
Jose

 

[MNKyDeth]

Where I am I would have to choose win2k not win2k3.

I run several servers Linux and MS based and the only MS OS that can compare to our linux OS's in terms of stability is our win2k servers. For some reason the win2k3 servers seem not really crash, but have issues with certain software we use. Maybe it is just needed a recode on the software but so far win2k3 is more of a pain for me than the other choices. WinNT4 isn't even a consideration as thers have ponted out, it is good to be more toward the nerwer versions of MS products if you go that route.