Comments on: Windows Server 2008 adoption is better than Vista’s?

By: Michael

Michael — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 19:15:25 +0000

Stefan, this reason certainly makes sense. I remember that I did the same with Windows NT 3.51. I wanted to learn how Windows Server works, and so I installed it on my new desktop. The computer seller wondered why someone would like to run a server on a desktop and warned me that I will run into problems sooner or later. Well, I really had problems because not all Windows 95 apps were running, but I didn’t regret this step because a few weeks later I got a new job as Window admin.

nev, there might still be a slight difference to Server 2008 if you disable all of Vista’s desktop features, but I think that doesn’t really matter. More important is that you can enable these features later if you run into problems.

Soeren, you are the only I know who really uses Flip.

By: Soeren P

Soeren P — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 12:15:43 +0000

Vista FLP is needed

By: nev

nev — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 08:14:42 +0000

@elLoco
You can spend all weekend disabling Vista features, but you can’t get it down to the bare Server 2008 installation.

If Vista can have the a-la-carte feature of Server 2008, then it would even create a cult following in the power users department.

By: Stefan Gregori

Stefan Gregori — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 07:48:03 +0000

Michael, first thank you for that information!

The reason why I use Windows Server 2008 right now is that I want to learn more about the server features and roles! I have not much experience in such things and with the 240 days free trail of the server I might be able to get more into it

At the moment there are no compatibility problems besides some browser plugins which dont work with the server os.

However, if there will be problems I can download any other operating system free from the my university

By: Michael

Michael — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 17:50:30 +0000

elLoco, you perfectly summarized my post.

Stefan, Vista SP1 and Server 2008 are basically the same operating system. Each has additional features which can be disabled. Thus if you disable all “desktop features” in Vista you get more or less Server 2008 without the server roles and features. The only reason I can think of running Server 2008 on a desktop machine is that you want Hyper-V. However, in the long run you will get problems with Server 2008 as desktop OS because some desktop apps need Vista’s desktop features.

By: Stefan Gregori

Stefan Gregori — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 07:09:53 +0000

I am testing Windows Server 2008 as normal operating system for 2 months now on my laptop! Well, I have to say, I am quit surprised! Maybe with your special applications and tasks the os is not the best but if a normal user like me uses windows server 2008 as normal vista its way better than vista itself!

- more stable
- 300 MB less memory use
- many server programs run better
- many viruses cant infect server os
- many unused processes dont start automatically

By: elLoco

elLoco — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 18:43:34 +0000

The problem with vista is simple: compatibility issues, lack of drivers, and more machine needed on average users hands that cannot see real benefit on using over XP. They do not want to spend time re-learning this or finding solutions.

Windows server 2008 is in “profesional” hands that will look for the extra features, spend the extra time and enjoy any improvement.