1. You are viewing our forum as a guest. For full access please Register. WindowsBBS.com is completely free, paid for by advertisers and donations.

Help Choosing Between Server 2003 and W2K

Discussion in 'Windows Server System' started by Mr. Chip, 2005/08/20.

  1. 2005/08/20
    Mr. Chip Lifetime Subscription

    Mr. Chip Well-Known Member Thread Starter

    Joined:
    2005/06/30
    Messages:
    427
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hello,

    I am looking for advice from IT people experienced in both Windows Server 2003 and Windows 2000 Server.

    I have a W2K server that is being used as a web server that is experiencing some technical problems (that are being addressed in a thread I have running in the Windows 2000 forum). Now that I have started to debug the situation, I am wondering if I would be better off moving this server to 2003.

    Here are the hardware specs:
    - Dell PowerEdge 600 SC with a single 3 GHz CPU
    - 2GB of RAM
    - Two 36GB 10K SCSI drives mirrored in RAID 1
    - DDS4 tape drive

    The server is running a .NET application that runs off of a SQL Server 2000 database. The database is relatively small (300 MB at present, expected to grow to 1 GB in the next 18-24 months). Traffic is relatively light as well. Today, at peak I may have 100 - 150 simultaneous guests logged into the site. In the future, this number may double or triple.

    I would like to keep the database and Web application on the same box for the next few years. Although I could in theory us MSDE instead of SQL 2000, I would like to stay with SQL 2000. For this reason, I am looking at Windows Server 2003 Standard (as opposed to Web Edition).

    I have seen all the marketing materials from Microsoft and I know that they want the world to upgrade. What I am wondering is for someone in my situation (i.e., relatively simple set-up with a small database and light traffic), should I stay with W2K or move to 2003?

    I would greatly appreciate any insights you can provide on the pros and cons of both approaches. Is 2003 really more stable? What about ease of use? I rate myself a moderately experienced computer guy (but in this crowd maybe I am more of an advanced beginner). I will be administering the server. Is 2003 easier to manage than W2K, or visa versa?

    Thank you all in advance for you help! :D
     
    Last edited: 2005/08/20
  2. 2005/08/20
    Scott Smith

    Scott Smith Inactive Alumni

    Joined:
    2002/01/12
    Messages:
    1,950
    Likes Received:
    4
    I cant see how you could go wrong with win2k3 server. it's a really nice product and I have it running on several Power Edge 600SC Servers.

    In the link below is one I converted to SATA RAID 5

    sized

    Full Size
     

  3. to hide this advert.

  4. 2005/08/20
    ReggieB

    ReggieB Inactive Alumni

    Joined:
    2004/05/12
    Messages:
    2,786
    Likes Received:
    2
    I too run a 2000 and a 2003 server. 2003 is better. However, I would not (and have not) upgrade the 2000 server just for the benefits of the 2003. I am a firm believe in the old maxim, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it ".

    However, if the problems you are having mean you need to reinstall the server OS, then I would seriously consider 2003.

    2003 is easier to secure, and the remote administration is much easier. Those two options alone mean I would not purchase or install a new 2000 server. Any new Microsoft server on my network will be 2003.

    If you are developing a web application that provides a service that you sell to customers, or you are considering selling the whole system to a customer, I would strongly recommend that you look at Microsoft's partner program (http://partner.microsoft.com). You can get a lot of assistance via the partner program, including NFR copies of server OS. You can use a second PC as a test platform and try a number of server configuration to suit the software you are developing.

    Should you not want to buy into the partner program MSDN is another option (http://msdn.microsoft.com/) membership of which would give you access to other OS and server systems to try out with you application.
     
  5. 2005/08/20
    Mr. Chip Lifetime Subscription

    Mr. Chip Well-Known Member Thread Starter

    Joined:
    2005/06/30
    Messages:
    427
    Likes Received:
    0
    Reggie,

    Yes, I am likely looking at having to re-install my OS. My developer who wrote the .net application suggested that I wipe the hard drives and re-install everything from scratch - being careful to go in a specific order:

    1. Install the OS (either W2K or 2003)
    2. Install all relevant patches ans service packs
    3. Configure the firewall, anti virus, and spy ware software
    4. Configure IIS and set up my websites
    5. Install SQL 2000
    6. Restore my database
    7. Install the .Net applications

    Since I may end up following this "start from scratch" approach, it sounds like you would go with the 2003 alternative.

    On a related note, is have seen the standard edition for Windows Server 2003 advertised for under $300 in an OEM configuration. Is there any downside to buying it this way?
     
  6. 2005/08/20
    Scott Smith

    Scott Smith Inactive Alumni

    Joined:
    2002/01/12
    Messages:
    1,950
    Likes Received:
    4

    No support from MS.
     
  7. 2005/08/22
    windux

    windux Inactive

    Joined:
    2005/06/12
    Messages:
    181
    Likes Received:
    0

    Windows 2003 server is better than windows 2000 server family ;) . If you can do the upgrade do it.
    If you need SQL Server on the same box then Windows Server 2003 requires SQL Server 2000 Service Pack 3 or later to be applied.
    Installation from the scratch e always the best solution but not always possible to do that :D in your case you are lucky right?
    You will need at least the windows server standard edition to run sql server.
    The installation steps that you wrote are good.
    Do not forget the policys on the system.

    Resources for more info about this:

    Sql server

    Windows Server 2003


    Upgrade or new installation?
     
  8. 2005/08/23
    Mr. Chip Lifetime Subscription

    Mr. Chip Well-Known Member Thread Starter

    Joined:
    2005/06/30
    Messages:
    427
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thank you windux. I am leaning toward a clean install. Any recommendations on a good place to purchase the Windows Server 2003 Standard on-line?
     
  9. 2005/08/23
    windux

    windux Inactive

    Joined:
    2005/06/12
    Messages:
    181
    Likes Received:
    0

    Here you have all the options
     
  10. 2005/08/25
    Mr. Chip Lifetime Subscription

    Mr. Chip Well-Known Member Thread Starter

    Joined:
    2005/06/30
    Messages:
    427
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thoughts about Web Edition

    Windux,

    Thank you for the links. My developer now suggests that I go with Windows Server 2003 Web Edition and MSDE. The move would be cost effective as I already own two unused licenses for Web Edition and MSDE has no license fee.

    In terms of the limitations of Web Edition and MSDE, I can live within the technical limitations of the OS (up to 2 GB or RAM - what I have now, up to 2 CPUs). I can also live with the limits of MSDE as the most number of users logged into the database at one time will be 3, and my database will not exceed the 2 GB maximum size for the foreseeable future).

    My question to all of you, is do you see any major negatives in using Web Server over Standard Edition? I am assuming that 2003 Web Edition would be an improvement over W2K Server. The Standard Edition would cost an extra $500 and I would rather put the funds toward something else.

    As always - thank you for the advice!
     
  11. 2005/08/25
    Newt

    Newt Inactive

    Joined:
    2002/01/07
    Messages:
    10,974
    Likes Received:
    2
    For your situation I don't see any down side at all with Web Server and the cost saving would be nice.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.