Windows Server 2003 for 64-Bit Extended Systems Beta Customer Preview Program

[NightCrawler]

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/64bit/extended/trial/default.mspx


Does it run on a Athlon 64 ?

 

[Confused]

Important: Windows Server 2003, Enterprise Edition, for 64-Bit Extended Systems is only compatible with 64-bit AMD Opteron?based systems. It cannot be successfully installed on 64-bit Intel Itanium?based systems.

Yes, it does run on Athlon 64.


Confused

 

[NightCrawler]

Figured the server version would come out first since it is wanted/needed more then for desktops or workstations.

It only says Opteron not Athlon 64, you never know with M$.

Now I just need an Athlon 64 machine

 

[Confused]

It said Opteron-based Which the A64 is

I've downloaded it already...just waiting for a system to be bought for it to go on


Confused

 

[NightCrawler]

Thought more people would care about this.....

 

[mcveigh]

I care....but want xp for 64bit systems

 

[NightCrawler]

Originally posted by: mcveigh
I care....but want xp for 64bit systems

Well technically it is XP just tweaked for server use.

 

[Falloutboy525a]

but in theory you could just strip out all the server features and end up with a 64bit version of XP

 

[CQuinn]

...in theory you could just strip out all the server features and end up with a beta version of XP.

Yeah, I really want to see a BSOD in 64-bit space, to make sure my data is really and truly
hosed.

 

[stephbu]

Originally posted by: NightCrawler

Originally posted by: mcveigh
I care....but want xp for 64bit systems

Well technically it is XP just tweaked for server use.

Do you actually have 2K3 Server then Nightcrawler? Sure they share some Kernel code - but otherwise Server is quite different in many ways.

 

[NightCrawler]

Originally posted by: stephbu

Originally posted by: NightCrawler

Originally posted by: mcveigh
I care....but want xp for 64bit systems

Well technically it is XP just tweaked for server use.

Do you actually have 2K3 Server then Nightcrawler? Sure they share some Kernel code - but otherwise Server is quite different in many ways.

First it was called Windows XP server then Windows .Net and then Windows 2K3, they seperated XP and server along the way and added 1000 to the build 2600 to 3600 kept working to make server more stable and secure.

XP and 2K3 have a lot more in common then differences.

 

[stephbu]

Some pieces of the common kernel is the nearest you get there. Most significant alterations were to support application-separation, scale-up, scale-out, and operational management. Some of these push fairly deep changes throughout the kernel and Win32 API.

Examples are:

Altered thread scheduler to track processes within NUMA cells for multiproc NUMA bus systems.
Application partitioning and context APIs add service isolation with provision for side-by-side DLL versioning to NT loader.
Added thread-like characteristics to fibre API. Very important for NT service builders.
Volume Management - shadow copy, backup files even those that are open.
Credentials management
Service Instrumentation Framework
Kernel-mode HTTP listener
TCP Stack totally changed as payback from MSResearch project, better performance with much smaller memory footprint. TCP offload characteristics.

The source trees for XP and Win2K3 are seperate, run by seperate teams. They do share code (sometimes they don't - and get bitten for it!) - they also have different objectives. Some of these enhances doubtless will get pushed down in to XP - but many are only applicable to server environments. You're more likely to see benefit from Win2K3 enhancements on XP than vice-versa.

Cosmetically XP and Win2K3 may appear the *same*, but for developers there is a raft of new services and APIs available to build and deploy better robust scalable applications in less time.