WooHoo!

[craigmodius]

first to post in the W2K3 forum.

as you may remember i was first to post in linux too

it pays to be alert.

OK I've had my moment

any 2k3 thoughts out there. i haven't seen it in the flesh ( warts and all i'm sure )

[NooNoo]

Dammit Craig, I have to sleep sometime... contrary to popular opinion

I shall be putting together a 2k3 server this morning.... wish me luck!

[craigmodius]

sleep what's that? is that what people do in between cups of coffee

good luck with 2k3 and post back and let us know aalllllllllllllllll about it.

[emr]

sleep what's that? is that what people do in between cups of coffee

good luck with 2k3 and post back and let us know aalllllllllllllllll about it.

Had it loaded on a home server a month or so ago. It seemed to me to be based largely on the W2k kernel with some additions like shadow copying (a bit like Norton Protect) for network drives and some enhancements to DNS and RRAS.

I had to reload that particular machine with W2k again for a project so I didn't get much chance to test it out. All in all I would say that corporate network wise there aren't a great number of plus points vis a vis the investment versus the benefits.

emr

[craigmodius]

All in all I would say that corporate network wise there aren't a great number of plus points vis a vis the investment versus the benefits.

emr

I have seen in the news and reviews lately a thing about the next version of MS Office allowing you lock documents so that they coud only be read by certain people or time stamp them so that they would not be useable after the date you specify etc. etc.

And this feature was reportedly only available when used in conjunction with W2k3 Server, so that seems like it will be a major selling point for both Office and W2k3 for some businesses.

I work in a hospital so with HIPAA and general patient confidentiallity concerns this would seem like a nice way of locking down documents with patient info on them.

Until then I won't be holding my breath.

[Radical Dreamer]

I like that you can specify a reason the server is going down, other than that I didnt see much that interested me. Shadow copy may be worthwhile, but then again, why should that amount of disk space be used just because morons delete stuff they shouldnt have? Its a nice feature, but i cant see the amount of disk space required making it all that worthwhile, especially for large businesses or biz that use lots of large files

[Matridom]

I've been running it for the past several months, seems to be based largely off xp more then 2k, some great features where added, RRAS and DNS are done differently, File sharing can now be managed via an MMC. They've also changed around how terminal server works. You also have all the nice little add-in's that came with XP, like the built in PPPoE protocol and the internet connection firewall (only on some versions of 2k3)

I've also found that it's a bit more stable then 2k was when getting to higher uptimes.

[constructor]

Its supposed to be a Killer ap with Exchange Server 2003.
Wizards make the setup easy too.
Doesn't look too admin friendly though.
Am stuffing in some of the Add ins to see of it makes life easier.

[Kymera]

This is good stuff. I've recently been asked to propose a move from NT4 Server to either 2k or 2k3. I need to formulate a decent migration plan. Does anyone have an idea how well 2k3 runs in Mixed Mode?

[Ya_know]

File sharing can now be managed via an MMC.

I have no problem managing shares from a MMC in 2k...