Windows XP Professinal Vs. Windows Server 2003 Premium. Upgrade from Windows 98SE ? Help !

[Tedd Riggs]

Our IT department is in the annual "upgrade mode" and have basically decided
to upgrade the field notebooks from Windows 98SE to Windows Server Premium
2003. They say that according to their studies, that Server 2003 is no more
difficult to go to then XP Pro. What I have read is that the XP Pro would be
a much safer step then trying for Server 2003. Most of the laptops are 500
MHz, 256 M Ram Sony Vaio's and I am a little concerned about this choice.
From what I have seen, our IT group is fine for IBM VMS decisions, but with
PC's..they do not have the worlds best track record..
Any comments on this one ? I could really use some help in this area as it
seems to me, that Server 2003 as nice as it is, would not be a good idea.
Thanks !
Tedd

 

[Arek Iskra]

Hi Tedd,

Hmm... it is really odd decision. Usually, Windows 2000/XP would be the way
to go for client computers, Windows 2000/2003 Server for servers.

 

[Carey Frisch [MVP]]

You should consider upgrading to Windows XP Professional
and not Windows Server 2003. A server O/S cannot upgrade
over a workstation O/S such as Windows 98. Also, a server
O/S is overkill for a notebook and will cost over three times
the amount for what Windows XP Pro sells for.

If one were to implement Windows XP in a business environment,
one should be using the "volume license version" of Windows XP.

Visit: http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/Default.asp


Windows XP Comparison Guide
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/howtobuy/choosing2.asp

Which Edition is Right for You?
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/whichxp.asp

Windows XP Supported Upgrade Paths
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;292607&Product=winxp


--
Carey Frisch
Microsoft MVP
Windows XP - Shell/User

Be Smart! Protect your PC!
http://www.microsoft.com/security/protect/

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


| Our IT department is in the annual "upgrade mode" and have basically decided
| to upgrade the field notebooks from Windows 98SE to Windows Server Premium
| 2003. They say that according to their studies, that Server 2003 is no more
| difficult to go to then XP Pro. What I have read is that the XP Pro would be
| a much safer step then trying for Server 2003. Most of the laptops are 500
| MHz, 256 M Ram Sony Vaio's and I am a little concerned about this choice.
| From what I have seen, our IT group is fine for IBM VMS decisions, but with
| PC's..they do not have the worlds best track record..
| Any comments on this one ? I could really use some help in this area as it
| seems to me, that Server 2003 as nice as it is, would not be a good idea.
| Thanks !
| Tedd
|
| --
| Tedd Riggs
| PDA Square Content Developer

 

[Guest]

Hi,

Are you saying that I.T are planning to install a server
platform on all Notebooks ???

That could cause allsorts of problems, especially in an
Active Directory environment.

Regards,

Tim

 

[Alvin Brown]

Hello

Well your correct Win XP would be a much better choice
and really you don't need win2003 on laptops if your users
and are only using it for checking mail and maybe doing a
few presentation. So Win XP would be a much better
router to go. Win2003 on a laptop is pretty much and
over kill for a 500MHZ laptop with only 256 ram, even
with memory upgrades is still a bd call to me

Alvin

 

[Tedd Riggs]

Thanks Arek and Carey,
I agree with both of you. The server software should be on the server side,
not the client side and I agree, I think they are not even thinking of the
cost of the Server Vs. XP. Yes they do use the volume license version, but I
think the problem is most of them went to one of the MSDN TS2 events and
decided Server 2003 is the way to go. Good now I have some more "ammo" to
tell them a polite, but firm "NO"
Thanks again for the fast response on this one ! As much as I like the
interface of Server 2003 (reminds me of Windows 2000 Pro which I always
liked and the NT versions before it), I agree 100% XP Pro is the way to go.
Tedd

 

[Tedd Riggs]

Alvin,
You hit it right on the head. Most of the laptops that they want to upgrade
are the sales/marketing ones and the only thing they use is OE, Word and
PowerPoint and sometimes activesync if they have a PDA. As far as I am
concerned, plain Jane Windows 98SE would still serve most of the needs,
however most people want to go with Office 2003. The engineering staff use
more of the programs (Front Page, Access and MapPoint 2004) but as far as I
can tell, there is no reason at all for the Server 2003 and also I agree, I
think with only 256MB Ram it would be very slow...
Tedd

--
Tedd Riggs
PDA Square Content Developer
www.pdasquare.com

Hello

Well your correct Win XP would be a much better choice
and really you don't need win2003 on laptops if your users
and are only using it for checking mail and maybe doing a
few presentation. So Win XP would be a much better
router to go. Win2003 on a laptop is pretty much and
over kill for a 500MHZ laptop with only 256 ram, even
with memory upgrades is still a bd call to me

Alvin

 

[Carey Frisch [MVP]]

HOW TO: Use the Windows Classic Theme in Windows XP
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;294309&Product=winxp

HOW TO: Distribute a Custom Desktop Theme to Users in Windows XP
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;310514&Product=winxp

Support WebCast: Preparing Your Network for a Windows XP Professional Roll Out
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;324884&Product=winxp

--
Carey Frisch
Microsoft MVP
Windows XP - Shell/User

Be Smart! Protect your PC!
http://www.microsoft.com/security/protect/

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


| Thanks Arek and Carey,
| I agree with both of you. The server software should be on the server side,
| not the client side and I agree, I think they are not even thinking of the
| cost of the Server Vs. XP. Yes they do use the volume license version, but I
| think the problem is most of them went to one of the MSDN TS2 events and
| decided Server 2003 is the way to go. Good now I have some more "ammo" to
| tell them a polite, but firm "NO"
| Thanks again for the fast response on this one ! As much as I like the
| interface of Server 2003 (reminds me of Windows 2000 Pro which I always
| liked and the NT versions before it), I agree 100% XP Pro is the way to go.
| Tedd
|
| --
| Tedd Riggs
| PDA Square Content Developer

 

[Doug Sherman [MVP]]

Retail prices:
Windows Server 2003, Standard Edition (Standard Server product plus 5 CALs)
$999

Windows XP Professional Upgrade $199 U.S.

Even with volume licensing or other discounts the server product will cost
5x as much as the workstation OS. For the same money as the cheapest
version of Server 2003, you could buy a whole new laptop with XP Pro
installed.

Doug Sherman
MCSE Win2k/NT4.0, MCSA, MCP+I, MVP

Alvin,
You hit it right on the head. Most of the laptops that they want to upgrade
are the sales/marketing ones and the only thing they use is OE, Word and
PowerPoint and sometimes activesync if they have a PDA. As far as I am
concerned, plain Jane Windows 98SE would still serve most of the needs,
however most people want to go with Office 2003. The engineering staff use
more of the programs (Front Page, Access and MapPoint 2004) but as far as I
can tell, there is no reason at all for the Server 2003 and also I agree, I
think with only 256MB Ram it would be very slow...
Tedd

--
Tedd Riggs
PDA Square Content Developer
www.pdasquare.com

Hello

Well your correct Win XP would be a much better choice
and really you don't need win2003 on laptops if your users
and are only using it for checking mail and maybe doing a
few presentation. So Win XP would be a much better
router to go. Win2003 on a laptop is pretty much and
over kill for a 500MHZ laptop with only 256 ram, even
with memory upgrades is still a bd call to me

Alvin

as

 

[Bruce Chambers]

Greetings --

To start with, glacial is the term that pops into my mind. Those
500 MHz laptops are barely adequate for running Win2K, and will be
awfully slow for either WinXP or Win2K3 Server.

If you turn off all of WinXP GUI eye-candy, it will still be quite
slow but usable for simple word processing, email, web-browsing, etc.
It won't be much good for graphics-intensive applications, and many
newer games. I speak from experience, as, during the public preview
period, I tested WinXP on a 500 MHz machine with 256 Mb of RAM.

1) Right-click the Task Bar > Properties > Start Menu, ensure
"Classic Start menu" is selected.

2) Right-click an empty spot on the Desktop > Properties > Themes >
select "Windows Classic."

3) Right-click My Computer > Properties > Performance > Settings >
Visual Effects, ensure "Adjust for best performance" is selected.

However, with a PC this old, it's essential to make sure it's
components are WinXP-compatible _before_ proceeding. Have you ensured
that all the PC's components are capable of supporting WinXP? This
information will be found at each of the PC's component's
manufacturer's web sites, and on Microsoft's Windows Catalog:
(http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/hcl/default.mspx). Computer components
designed for use with Win9x/Me very often fail to meet WinXP's much
more stringent hardware quality requirements.

Can you obtain OS-specific device drivers for your PC's
components, and any necessary motherboard BIOS updates? Additionally,
you can download and run Microsoft WinXP Upgrade Advisor to see if you
have any incompatible hardware components.
(http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/home/howtobuy/upgrading/advisor.asp)

HOW TO Prepare to Upgrade Win98 or WinMe
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q316639

Placing a Server OS on these laptops strikes me as just too
ludicrous for words.


Bruce Chambers
--
Help us help you:



You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on
having both at once. -- RAH

 

[Alex Nichol]

Our IT department is in the annual "upgrade mode" and have basically decided
to upgrade the field notebooks from Windows 98SE to Windows Server Premium
2003. They say that according to their studies, that Server 2003 is no more
difficult to go to then XP Pro. What I have read is that the XP Pro would be
a much safer step then trying for Server 2003.

I can think of no reason to use Server. It is a *Server* system. In
Win2000 some people seemed to get the idea that it was somehow macho to
use Win2000 Server on an essentially standalone machine. But Server
2003 would be absurd for a laptop - and would lose functionality in the
context compared with XP Pro

 

[Tedd Riggs]

Alex,
I think I finally "won" and talked the IT group out of this crazy upgrade
also saying there was no reason for Server 2003 on the notebooks. To make my
point, I borrowed one of the standard IT laptops (400 Mhz, 128 MB Ram) and
upgraded it to Server 2003 using a trial version. They soon found out how
slow it was and a large amount of the software did not work, including about
half the drivers for the laptop...
Thanks for your advice, the more I can show them that this idea it crazy,
the better the chance of this not coming up again is.
Tedd

 

[Hank Arnold]

If someone recommended that to me, I'd first have to pick myself off the
floor and stop laughing..... This has to be the stupidest suggestion I've
ever heard. Bar none. First of all, the idea of running a server OS on an
end user laptop is absurd. Secondly, the laptops you are describing are
incapable of handling it. Period.

If you insist on upgrading the laptops, add memory and install Windows 2000
Pro. They will be able to run it OK. Not good (you will be getting a **LOT**
of complaints about how slow they are running compared to before), but OK.
This will give you stable systems that have good networking and security
capabilities.

I'd price a decent laptop with XP Pro installed. You can get them for around
$1K. Even less if your users are low end types. Celeron laptops are very
cheap these days. With screen sizes these days, people who currently use 15
inch displays won't want/need them, saving you a probable display upgrade.

Tell your IT department that there are better solutions than what they
propose. Don't let them do this. You'll regret it if they do.....

 

[Tedd Riggs]

Hank,
When I first saw the memo from IT about this, I thought that it was a joke.
But soon found out its not. Finally after many emails and showing them the
cost difference and the fact that half the laptops would not work, they
changed their mind.
For some reason they had the impression that Office 2003 along with OneNote
would only run on Server 2003 and proving to them this was not the case, I
think finally made the difference.

I did not really believe in Aliens on this earth, however when dealing with
our IT group, I found out that they actually have been here
Tedd

 

[Arek Iskra [MVP]]

Glad to hear they changed their minds!