[submix8c]

Server 2000 = Super 2000 Pro
Server 2003 = Super XP Pro
Server 2008 = Super Vista/Windows7 Ultimate
So... one might "assume" -
Server 2012 = Super Windows8

Server OS's have MANY additional features not found on "Consumer"/"Business" versions. Like... being a Server (Domain Controller, DHCP Server, full-blown Web/FTP Server, Media Content Server, etc). Servers can do EVERYTHING the others can do AND THEN SOME! Some folks actually Disable many Services just to make it more non-Server-like unless/until they want/need a given Service. Even how to add "unsupported" Components to it that aren't included from the next-lower (if you have that OS as well).

Server2k3->Workstation
http://www.msfn.org/win2k3/index.htm
Server2k8->Workstation
http://www.msfn.org/...to-workstation/
Server->Workstation - Why?
http://www.msfn.org/...orkstation-why/

See? You're a User! (mild snark... please don't be offended).
edit - LOL

This post has been edited by submix8c: 05 June 2012 - 04:16 PM

[Tripredacus]

andreaborman, on 05 June 2012 - 03:49 PM, said:

Yes I have heard of Windows Server 2008 and Windows Server 2012. But it's not an operating system like Windows Vista ,Windows 7 or Windows 8 is.Or is it? So what do people use Windows Server for? Can you browse the web in Firefox and play videos in WMP and use Windows Server like you use Windows XP,Windows 7 or Windows 8 for example or not?What do they use Windows Server for? Andrea Borman.

Sure you could do all of those things in a Server OS, but I certainly wouldn't!

[tomasz86]

submix8c, on 05 June 2012 - 04:08 PM, said:

Server 2000 = Super 2000 Pro

It's 2000 Server

[submix8c]

tomasz86, on 06 June 2012 - 08:48 AM, said:

submix8c, on 05 June 2012 - 04:08 PM, said:

Server 2000 = Super 2000 Pro

It's 2000 Server

I was trying to be "consistent".

[andreaborman]

submix8c, on 05 June 2012 - 04:08 PM, said:

Server 2000 = Super 2000 Pro
Server 2003 = Super XP Pro
Server 2008 = Super Vista/Windows7 Ultimate
So... one might "assume" -
Server 2012 = Super Windows8

Server OS's have MANY additional features not found on "Consumer"/"Business" versions. Like... being a Server (Domain Controller, DHCP Server, full-blown Web/FTP Server, Media Content Server, etc). Servers can do EVERYTHING the others can do AND THEN SOME! Some folks actually Disable many Services just to make it more non-Server-like unless/until they want/need a given Service. Even how to add "unsupported" Components to it that aren't included from the next-lower (if you have that OS as well).

Server2k3->Workstation
http://www.msfn.org/win2k3/index.htm
Server2k8->Workstation
http://www.msfn.org/...to-workstation/
Server->Workstation - Why?
http://www.msfn.org/...orkstation-why/

See? You're a User! (mild snark... please don't be offended).
edit - LOL

Well I still don't know what Windows server is. The question I was trying to ask was-Is it an operating system like Windows Vista and Windows 7? And can you use it in the same way as you can Windows XP and Windows 7? Andrea Borman.

[Tripredacus]

You can, but why would you? You use server to "serve" out services. For example:

- Active Directory
- Exchange
- DHCP
- DNS
- Web Server (IIS)
etc

[JorgeA]

Tripredacus, on 06 June 2012 - 05:24 PM, said:

You can, but why would you? You use server to "serve" out services. For example:

- Active Directory
- Exchange
- DHCP
- DNS
- Web Server (IIS)
etc

That's right.

Some people also use Windows Home Server flavors of Windows to run a (Windows) Media Center system, with a central network hard drive(s) sending recorded programs out to several TVs and/or Media Center extenders. Over time, it beats paying the cable company for "whole-house DVR" subscriptions, if you can handle the technical aspects.

--JorgeA

[Fredledingue]

Bear in mind that Windows Server is 5 to 10 times as expensive as "normal" Windows.
And its features are useless if you are not a high tech person. Or if you don't need to connect more than two computers and/or network devices.

[jaclaz]

Just wanted to share this nice thingy, I am not alone in thinking that the paradigm shift is towards more "passive" use of the technoology, Scott Adams (Author of the Dilbert strips) has put it down way more nicely than I did (obviously):
http://www.dilbert.c...ess_of_instant/

Scott Adams said:

Another interesting phenomenon of the iPhone and iPad era is that we are being transformed from producers of content into consumers. With my BlackBerry, I probably created as much data as I consumed. It was easy to thumb-type long explanations, directions, and even jokes and observations. With my iPhone, I try to avoid creating any message that are over one sentence long. But I use the iPhone browser to consume information a hundred times more than I did with the BlackBerry. I wonder if this will change people over time, in some subtle way that isn't predictable. What happens when people become trained to think of information and entertainment as something they receive and not something they create? I think this could be a fork in the road for human evolution. Perhaps in a million years, humans will feel no conversational obligation to entertain or provide useful information. That will be the function of the Internet. Someday a scientist will identify the introduction of the iPhone as the point where evolution began to remove conversation from the list of human capabilities. And when the scientist forms this realization, he won't tell his spouse because conversation won't exist. He'll put it on the Internet.

jaclaz

[ColdFlo]

Windows 8 is the future it is superior, faster, and with fast fade slide metro there is no longer an argument for pulling the mouse all the way to the left side of the screen to click in tiny menus. Its faster and more hot key integrated which should have happened a long time ago. Adapt or perish; the time it takes you to learn a new interface is nothing compared with the reduced stress from using it. Sure it will have to be hammered out, but business never upgrades to the newest os anyway. All your points are moot. You will change nothing. Being blunt is not trolling..................... it's helping you let go of your clinging delusion.

[andreaborman]

ColdFlo, on 11 June 2012 - 03:13 AM, said:

Windows 8 is the future it is superior, faster, and with fast fade slide metro there is no longer an argument for pulling the mouse all the way to the left side of the screen to click in tiny menus. Its faster and more hot key integrated which should have happened a long time ago. Adapt or perish; the time it takes you to learn a new interface is nothing compared with the reduced stress from using it. Sure it will have to be hammered out, but business never upgrades to the newest os anyway. All your points are moot. You will change nothing. Being blunt is not trolling..................... it's helping you let go of your clinging delusion.

But you can install start menu software like Classic Shell and other to get the Windows 7 start menu back. This helps a lot of Windows user,including me who are not used to the Metro theme. Andrea Borman.

[jaclaz]

ColdFlo, on 11 June 2012 - 03:13 AM, said:

All your points are moot.

Well, at least we have a few of them , unlike you:

Spoiler

Noone said that Windows 8 is not:

• the future
  
• faster
  
• *whatever* better than current OS

everyone is saying that it's interface sucks big.

jaclaz

[Tripredacus]

andreaborman, on 11 June 2012 - 03:19 AM, said:

But you can install start menu software like Classic Shell and other to get the Windows 7 start menu back. This helps a lot of Windows user,including me who are not used to the Metro theme. Andrea Borman.

Unfortunately, the percentage of users who are even aware of such things is extremely small compared to the amount of people who would end up using Windows 8.

[JorgeA]

ColdFlo, on 11 June 2012 - 03:13 AM, said:

Windows 8 is the future it is superior, faster, and with fast fade slide metro there is no longer an argument for pulling the mouse all the way to the left side of the screen to click in tiny menus. Its faster and more hot key integrated which should have happened a long time ago. Adapt or perish; the time it takes you to learn a new interface is nothing compared with the reduced stress from using it. Sure it will have to be hammered out, but business never upgrades to the newest os anyway. All your points are moot. You will change nothing. Being blunt is not trolling..................... it's helping you let go of your clinging delusion.

Mentioning only in passing the patronizing, gratuitous insult about a "clinging delusion," unlike you I will keep to the substance of the issue.

"Adapt or perish." Microsoft already tried to get its customers to "adapt" to Windows Me and Vista -- how did that work out for the company? Businesses such as Microsoft are the ones that must adapt to their customers' preferences, not the other way around -- or else run the risk of perishing.

Now go back to the First Impressions and Deeper Impressions threads and consider the actual usability problems that we have been reporting (or linked to) with this abomination called Windows 8.

You can say all you want for Metro but if speed is your thing, then when it comes to opening the Start Menu nothing beats simply pressing the Windows key. Oh, and the cursor will already be sitting in the search window so that -- as with the Metro screen -- you can start typing the name of the program you want... if you can remember it. The Metro start screen offers no functional improvement there, but (because it takes over the whole monitor screen) calling it up does get in the way of anything else you might be doing.

--JorgeA

[belgianguy]

Tripredacus, on 11 June 2012 - 09:13 AM, said:

andreaborman, on 11 June 2012 - 03:19 AM, said:

But you can install start menu software like Classic Shell and other to get the Windows 7 start menu back. This helps a lot of Windows user,including me who are not used to the Metro theme. Andrea Borman.

Unfortunately, the percentage of users who are even aware of such things is extremely small compared to the amount of people who would end up using Windows 8.

Not only that, but by being third party it will also mean that it will not be an option in most (if any) installers that a person uses in Windows 8. Up until now the features to add items to the Start Menu came with an installer as the Start Menu was certain to be there as an official part of the OS. In Windows 8, that is no longer the case. And with the vehemence with which Microsoft seems to be willing to push their long-time supporters off a cliff, I wouldn't put it next to them to try and block any other experience than the Metro experience. As they seem to have the deluded belief that an unnatural, cramped and ugly way of interacting with my previous powerful and flexible desktop will make me consider buying another one of their products.

It's blatantly obvious at this point that Windows 8 is Microsofts' desperate answer to the iPad (and to a lesser extent, Android tablets), after Ballmer flat out s*** himself when he saw the market getting sedated by yet another product he didn't foresee becoming succesful. The desktop, for better or for worse is an afterthought for Microsoft here, they really couldn't care less if you want to use Windows 8 on the Desktop. If you do, they'll be laughing all way to the bank and at the poor fools who fell for their marketing ploy. They only want one thing from Windows 8: to fish in the pond Apple's been fishing in and they're betting their farm on it that most people will cling to Windows 7 for the desktop until the next 'desktop friendly' Windows comes around.

Sadly, where Ballmer and Sinofsky think they can use the Windows mothership to break into the tablet market, I think their Metro delusion will backfire and the bad press of Windows 8 will blemish their core Windows product just like Vista did (where Vista was a fine product running on less than capable hardware, not so with Metro, where the hardware is fine but the software is crippled). They can make amends, but even when the major backlash would occur and they would offer their users a *gasp* choice, they wouldn't even be able to afford to drop Metro completely, as they'd make themselves look bad worse. So even in the best case Metro will hang around like the red-headed stepchild it already is.

This post has been edited by belgianguy: 11 June 2012 - 10:13 AM

[submix8c]

ColdFlo, on 11 June 2012 - 03:13 AM, said:

Windows 8 is the future it is superior, faster (bla bla...) change nothing (bla blah) blunt is not trolling (bla bla) clinging delusion.

I note that you've been a member since 2007 and have jumped from Vista->7->8 and... what? Nobody's knocking your point, but maybe you should go to Linux and post there as a fanboy instead.

I consider the post a troll due to... please reread your post.

If you're the "same ColdFlo" found via Google, yes, you are rather opinionated... Do yourself a favor... Free Your Mind!

This post has been edited by submix8c: 11 June 2012 - 10:33 AM

[CharlotteTheHarlot]

belgianguy, on 11 June 2012 - 10:09 AM, said:

... where Vista was a fine product running on less than capable hardware, not so with Metro, where the hardware is fine but the software is crippled

A most excellent point.

There are many reasons to call Windows 8 the next Vista, but as you point out in one important way, they are completely opposite.

There is no way for Microsoft and sycophantic fanboys to spin that yarn again. Current hardware like i3, i5, i7 can tear up any software that Microsoft creates, and then some. Vista was at least 2 years ahead of the average hardware and should never have been used on anything less than dual-core but it often was. They really had always been doing that exact same thing forever really. Releasing Windows (and even DOS) designed and tested on bleeding edge hardware to a consumer market where the average system was lagging by at least a year.

So we are really at an unprecedented time here. This will be the first time in my memory where the Microsoft OS release is easily handled by current average hardware. For example we can even easily run Win8 in a VM on Win7 or WinXP, or run WinXP or Win7 in a VM on Win8. The way this whole thing pans out may be in a different direction than we ever guessed. Perhaps the hardware will simply make Microsoft and their idiotic decisions completely irrelevant. Then Microsoft can limp away and succumb to their self-inflicted wounds.

[Fredledingue]

ColdFlo said:

Adapt or perish; the time it takes you to learn a new interface is nothing compared with the reduced stress from using it

Sure I'll adapt... and find a solution to avoid w8.
Not because we don't like it, in fact there are good things in it, it's just very badly, horribly implemented.
No, I'll avoid losing time with W8 because it will be dead in a few months.

There is no point in learning to use something that won't exist save on small hand-held devices which work completely differently anyway.

As the market is concerned Windows 8 will be DoA (Dead on Arrival).

You can already see it whith Micrososft backpedalling fast as they try to improve the app screen to make it closer to a classic desktop and pretend to put a fake start menu at the same place of the real one.
But it won't be enough to avoid a total fiasco.

You know ColdFlo, the poeple are not stupid: They will see very quickely that the only goal of Metro is to put advertisements on your monitor screen.
Just like you have adds on TV and on the radio, media companies find normal to bring adds to computer screens and Metro just serves this function.
It will not work. Poeple will reject it massively.

It's OK to have sponsor adds on websites, it's less OK to have adds everytime you turn on your PC.
There is a red line here which MS is crossing dangerousely.

Anyone who had used a PC before and who will be confronted with Metro will return their machine to the store and ask the vendor to remove this garbage.
___________________

JorgeA said:

JorgeA said:

Windows 7 is a step back from this precisely because of what you described. Grouping taskbar items means that I need an additional click to see what's open.

CoffeeFiend said:

That's definitely not what I'd personally call a step back.

This illustrates well why user choice is so important.

Personally, I find the wordless taskbar icons harder to use, as they don't immediately convey as much information to me as the wide verbose taskbar buttons.
.....

The bottom line, of course, is that Windows has been eminently customizable to suit the user's way of working/thinking, but with Windows 8 and Metro this aspect starts getting palpably curtailed.

Yes, With W8 the MS team has lost touch with the userbase and its need of customization.

Out of respect, we are not telling which taskbar configuration is the best.
We give our opinions based on pesonal experience.
JorgeA and me we prefer text labelled buttons, Coffee prefer large visaly, rich icons.

Important Note: when a non-grouped taskbar is too cluttered, quickely drag it up and the buttons align on two rows instead of one.
It makes them already much easier to read.
Drag it one floor up and on 3 rows and you have almost the full text caption on all of them.

Now drag it even higher, to 1/4 of screen height. Wow, it's like you have a cool new "task arranger" without installing any freeware! (You just had to know that you can do it)

Then go even further and drag it to half of the screen. Wooah! ... Metrofied! :dazed: The uLtiMATE C*00*L!

And that's why it was important to remind.

Maybe someone will like the W8 Metro interface, why not.
The point is to have the option.
The option to enable or disable Metro.

This post has been edited by Fredledingue: 11 June 2012 - 02:38 PM

[CoffeeFiend]

ColdFlo, on 11 June 2012 - 03:13 AM, said:

Windows 8 is the future it is superior

That's your opinion. To reuse your own words, one could say it's a delusion too. I'd say it's vastly inferior, and if that's the future of Windows, then my future is bound to be mostly Windows-free.

ColdFlo, on 11 June 2012 - 03:13 AM, said:

Adapt or perish

With Metro, Microsoft picked the "perish" option

ColdFlo, on 11 June 2012 - 03:13 AM, said:

the time it takes you to learn a new interface is nothing compared with the reduced stress from using it

It's easy to learn the new stuff, just like it's always been. It's just too bad that Metro is just a gimmicky hindrance, merely getting in your way. Win8 feels like a crippled version of Windows -- and borderline not calling it Windows anymore (closer to a phone OS)

I wouldn't say it will be another Vista. It'll be far worse than that!

[JorgeA]

While researching something else, I came across this discussion of a performance problem for Windows 8.

There are questions as to whether the DPC Latency Checker works properly in Win8, but even if we ignore that data, the first eight lines of the chart and the observations at the top of the OP don't exactly put MS's new operating system in a favorable light.

And now, for some dark humorous relief, a quip seen in another thread on the same topic:

Quote

Install Windows 8 and make your PC as awesome as your phone!

--JorgeA