Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 13th Mar 2007 22:58 UTC, submitted by Serious_T
Windows With an absence of fanfare, but otherwise on schedule, Microsoft opened up its download page for Service Pack 2 of Windows Server 2003, both 32-bit and 64-bit editions. Perhaps most importantly, enterprises won't have to wait until Longhorn to be able to utilize Windows Deployment Services, the company's new image-based system for pre-composed, remote Windows installations.
Thread beginning with comment 221337
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Better OS than Vista...
by Southern.Pride on Wed 14th Mar 2007 18:26 UTC
Member since:

I have to say Server 2003 is better than Vista to bad they could not have removed some of the services out of this one and made it a desktop os...

Reply Score: 1

RE: Better OS than Vista...
by MarkVVV on Wed 14th Mar 2007 20:04 in reply to "Better OS than Vista..."
MarkVVV Member since:

They did. It's called Windows XP Professional x64 Edition.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE: Better OS than Vista...
by kaiwai on Thu 15th Mar 2007 10:07 in reply to "Better OS than Vista..."
kaiwai Member since:

Microsoft always has a habit of taking a great operating system and royally rooting it to kingdom come.

Case in point, NT was a rock solid, be it slight slow due to hardware constraints, micro-kernel based operating system, very small, compact rock solid kernel with security built into it from the ground up.

Everything came unstuck when management wanted the graphics more snappy by pushing it into the kernel, wanted compatibility put ahead of implementing things properly.

Fastforward to today, take Windows 2003 SP1 and stuff it up by adding layers of compatibility and features; the new features are great, but quite frankly, the backwards compatibility should have been thrown out - yes, up take would be slow as companies would have to stop using removed API's like GDI/GDI+ for example, but at the same time, the need to have layers of abstraction and compatibility would reduce the bloatage and force good coding practices on third party software vendors.

Back on topic, it'll be interesting to see how Windows 2007 Server will be like compared to Server 2003; from what I understand, the next 9 months or so are being spent doing some major overhauls in Windows, but I am skeptical as to whether they'll put quality above meeting deadlines.

When you take into account a rejuvenated Sun Microsystems with development on Solaris x86 going gang busters, Linux vendors pushing out enterprise server/workstation upgrades or updates (Red Hat Enterprise 5.0 and SuSE Linux Enterprise Desktop SP1), Microsoft can't afford to be making the same sorts of mistakes they did in the past as they know that there are viable alternatives, and both regulatory bodies are keeping a close eye of Microsoft.

Reply Parent Score: 1