microsoft bit

1. ( 2 of 22 found this review helpful ) Posted: Nov 3 2003

   To the company of the all specializers it is adviced to have this one..

2. ( 2 of 4 found this review helpful ) Posted: Oct 25 2003

   I couldn't get my hands on a copy of Windows 2003 Small Business Server, so I opted for installing Windows 2003 Server on my server. After wiping out Red Hat Linux, and installed without any major problems. After several hours of patching and applying hot fixes (and rebooting), I was up and running. However, I found 2003 Server unusable for my purposes (thankfully, I got an evaluation copy instead of the full, non-refundable version). I wanted to make it the primary domain server so I could manage my PC accounts better. I also wanted to make it a file server, email server and web server. Unfortunately that is where the problems started. Windows 2003 Server cannot be a Primary Domain Controller without Active Directory Services. Active Directory Services cannot run without DNS services. I ended up giving up and going back to Linux and Samba (which will act as an NT4 style PDC). Yes, 2003 does have a lot of features, but for users who like Win 2k and/or Linux, the benefits may not be worth it.

3. ( 3 of 6 found this review helpful ) Posted: Sep 17 2003

   I would stay away from this product! I am running a dual Xeon 2.4 Ghz with 2 gigs of ram and a RAID 5 controller, and can't get the operating system to install, it simply locks up. There is no tech support for this product Microsoft says to go back to were you purchased it for support. Once you break the product seal there are no refunds. SO I am stuck with a $1,200 piece of software that doesn't work and still have to go out and purchase software that does. Your best bet is to not risk $1,200 that is usless. I have been working with computers since 1978 so I am no amateur to operating systems.Kent,

See all reviews...