ms windows .net server 2003

[parrotman]

i know im a bit thick but yesterday i managed to grab,
ms windows .net server 2003 enterprise edition.
iv installed it & it needs activating & is only for 360 days.but was wondering was it worth our norm activating.
just lately iv been playing around with all different os,right from win2k + servers ,office,to xp everything & even redhat & lindows 3.
the linux i carnt seem to get anything to install ect.well

i even tried to install the longhorn.got to 55% that was it.to many missing things.was def a no no.

what i was wondering was what bonus is there to having a server like the .net
or is it just a complete wast of time?
& also could you use bb for it,without any cost.
also i have never sighned up to the msn or there instant messenging.i used to have aol but have cable bb.the thing is its a crap email.
what has made me never sighn up is that it was free to use,but you paid for the cost of the call.pluss when you uninstall it it will say it doesnt get you out of your contract.
my understanding was that if it was free then why would we need aol bb ect.
but if someone could put me right i would be very pleased.
cheers parrot man

 

[Shadey]

windows .net server isnt due for final release yet - its likely you downloaded the RC2 Preview version.

its very different from the likes of windows 2000 server versions, because its technology is based heavily on xml solutions to provide the connectivity that makes .net server - good (in some sense). Suppose to provide more connectivity. Its an easier process to build and deploy .net integrated systems, so its suppose to help large corps save on money - but i dont see how thats gonna happen when ms plans to charge sh*t loads for .net server.

Anyway - the whole idea sounds good and interesting, and does make a lot of sense - but making it open with so much connectivity capabilities might possibly mean more trouble - dunno how many new flaws its going to introduce. (Just take a look at XP)

If you dont plan to use much .net applications/solutions on your network - the .net server might not be worth the fuss, sure its new and has fancy bits and pieces, and may look nice, but if your not going to make use of the new technology you dont need it, cos there wont be any benefit in using it, Windows 2000 server is good enough. It seems the whole point of the .net server is to make it far more easier to deploy .net solutions cross clients on networks, so it can be very cost effective in some sense.

im sure if you check the ms site youd find loads of information on their flashy new server app.

- - - - - - - - -

yeah loghorn looks pretty amazing - but - i hate messing with beta o/s'es - so i aint gonna touch it, same goes with .net server - even if it is RC2 Preview.

- - - - - - - - -

Bud im not sure where you were going with the rest of the post -

yeah the hotmail email service is free - unless someone pays for the fee to get your computer connected to the internet - it aint gonna beable to check any email from any service free or not.

I *think* you can get AIM accounts even if you dont subscribe to AOL Internet service (dialup or broadband), I never used it - i could be wrong.

Why would you get call charges when using aol broadband? I also thought AOL Dialup were free-phone numbers (least it is in the uk), thats why its such a success. So i dont know where you might get call charges from - even support lines are free.

 

[spycat]

net server

spycat says: maybe stick with one of the established 2000 servers. people download alphas and betas and expect them to be fully functional. even "gold" releases are full of bugs.

i downloaded longhorn only because it is fun to get inside view.
a lot of things on it did not work. i did not expect it to work. but yet forums are full of posts about longhorn not functional.

but time goes on and longhorn will be functional. i personally feel that win98 se still is a hell of a lot more buggy than dot net server rc2. this is why i like 2000. some bugs here and there, but at least bugs are fixed.

only thing spycat really sees from betas to gold releases is that in gold, bugs are smaller. and people have already bought it and are stuck with it.

i usually run datacenter 2000. for me appears to be most stable version of microsoft OS's. search for spycat's earlier posts on this and read other guy's posts too. i thing datacenter is the ultimate. good luck Bro! spycat