Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 16th Sep 2009 22:03 UTC
While we often focus on the desktop offerings from Microsoft, the company of course also plays a role in countless other markets. The most prominent of those is probably the server market, where Windows 2000 Server and Windows Server 2003 are now facing a number of support changes - important stuff if you manage Windows servers. The biggest news? There will be no third service pack for Windows Server 2003.
Thread beginning with comment 384581
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2009-05-20
If you decide to use a 'bleeding edge' distro like Fedora then you shouldn't complain about the amount of updates that is the nature of the beast. You could have looked for a 're-spin' of the disto. This would include all the updates.
If you want stability (And a more direct comparison to Server 2003) go for something like RHEL or SLES.
I just installed RHEL 5.4 and the size of the updates I needed was 68Mb.
If you want stability (And a more direct comparison to Server 2003) go for something like RHEL or SLES.
I just installed RHEL 5.4 and the size of the updates I needed was 68Mb.
Exactly. I'd hope people would tout these so-called long-term support distributions more, especially for newcomers. For me, these are the state-of art Linux.
But instead the press and the public pushes the masses to the next shiny thing in Ubuntu or Fedora.
EDIT: more typos.
Edited 2009-09-17 07:09 UTC
Member since:2006-09-21
Exactly. I'd hope people would tout these so-called long-term support distributions more, especially for newcomers. For me, these are the state-of art Linux.
A couple of points on that: a lot of people use Windows Server to manage Windows desktops. Linux cannot take the place of Windows Server for that situation (yet). And yes, sometimes you are stuck with Windows desktops.
The second point is that long term support variants of Linux are rarely long term. Those 10 years from Microsoft are hard to beat, even if they are just security patches. It is also worth considering that long term support variants of Linux usually lock you into older applications. Even if you were willing to build an updated application from the sources, building that application and its required libraries is excessive.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2005-07-22
If you decide to use a 'bleeding edge' distro like Fedora then you shouldn't complain about the amount of updates that is the nature of the beast. You could have looked for a 're-spin' of the disto. This would include all the updates.
If you want stability (And a more direct comparison to Server 2003) go for something like RHEL or SLES.
I just installed RHEL 5.4 and the size of the updates I needed was 68Mb.
Back on Topic, I'd like an SP3 which is just a roll up of all the patches to Server 2003. Simpler & quicker to apply as opposed to the hours you spend downloading individual ones from Microsoft. Pah. Yep, I could get them all but I only use 2-3 S2K3 systems as opposed to 20+ Rhel/Centos/Fedora systems.