Currently running Server 2003 but am looking at reinstalling in the near future due to a change of direction with the domains. Should I take this opportunity to install Windows Server 2008 instead? I would love to play with new technology and the server is only for a small home business so downtime/performance issues aren't really a concern.
+1
A:
I am no expert on Windows server revisions, but the only new feature of Server 2008 I can think of is Hyper-V. But I would try Server 2008 just for Hyper-V, as this VM hypervisor is supposedly much faster than VMware and Virtual PC, and is compatible with Virtual PC virtual disks.
crosstalk
2008-10-02 06:38:05
Actually there are more new features like readonly AD, NAP, IIS7, WDS, and the terminal feature is much better, easier and more usable for the everyday user. But these are only the main titles, it has a lot of renewed features comparing to W2k3. And I haven't even mentioned Server Core.
Biri
2008-10-02 06:43:03
+1
A:
One rule that has served me very well over the years is: Do not upgrade infrastructure components just for the sake of upgrading. If it works well, leave it be. You mentioned that some downtime isn't a big deal, but if the server is actually used then there is a chance it can become a big deal unexpectedly. Why not simply get (or build) a new machine and play with the new operating system there? That way you get the best of both worlds.
Mihai Limbășan
2008-10-02 06:49:01
A:
There is no Exchange Server 2008. Exchange has always been tightly integrated with IIS which tends to bind it to a specific version of Windows. However, Exchange Server 2007 SP1 can be installed on Windows Server 2008.
Exchange Server 2003, however, cannot run on Windows Server 2008 and I do not believe there are any plans to do so in a future service pack.
Note that Exchange Server 2007 requires x64 architecture, running the 64-bit OS, on a production system. The days of booting /3GB are past - it simply does not provide enough virtual address space for current large databases. Exchange's long-running virtual memory fragmentation problem has not been fixed, it has just been given more virtual address space to work in.
Mike Dimmick
2008-10-02 11:15:14