not enough ram for that os to run smoothly.

yes, i realize 256 is a bit short of ram for a server os. But it did not do this to me at the start. Thx Whitehat, but unfortunately that didn't fix it I'll dig around and see what i can find tho.

I see you realize 256 is a bit short for ram, but "server" edition of winblows (being that its all gui based and bloated) needs some serious hardware, try a 2-way xeon board with 4gigs of ram...and I'm sure you will see no lag.

Of course we could run linux with much less for the same results but since were talking about 2003 I'll stay on topic.

I have a P4-3.0/800MHZ fsb 2x512M DDR400 OCZ ram 2x40g 8M cache 7200RPM raid 0 array, blah blah (I wont bore you) Oh and radeon 9800 AIW PRO 128M (thats new so I had to mention it)

Anyway, as fast as this box is I still wouldn't run 2003 Server on it because thats not what its meant for, I have XP installed atm. I have been thinking about running linux as a desktop again but...well I made a really long post about accounting software that nobody replied to so I think I'm stuck with XP for the moment (slackware is on my server which just got rebooted during the major blackouts this summer, my UPS held out for 1 hour after that it went down...lost my 265 Day uptime )

This box uptime isn't an issue since its near my head when I sleep and I reboot it at least once a day (and shut off at night) hardware gets changed frequently and it plays all my games/tv/dvd that I want/need.

As soon as someone who has a computer at this level advises me of their success using everything to the max in linux I may switch (and I need my accounting software questions answered!)

Chado

Just a quick note. I have Windows Server 2003 running on a Compaq Deskpro Desktop at work. It's 733MHz, 384MB RAM, and a 10 Gig IDE drive. I use this box for testing stuff. It runs Windows Server 2003 just fine. Seriously. I don't know why you folks have problems with it. I am running DNS, DHCP, Active Directory, and some other stuff for testing.

What do you call fine? I'd probably find it slow At least getting off this box and climbing on it I'd be doing alot of finger drumming.

With all this ram and this HT cpu I actually haven't caught myself waiting, I usually have to sit and wait when my computer loads because I hammer out most of the office apps, winamp, icq, inet xplorer and firebird (I use them both) and they load instantly.

This machine is sick.

Chado

Poster placed on Ignore...this is a linux forum.

This is the most funniest joke I've heard in my life.

Yes... this is a Linux forum, and I don't even want to discuss Windows.

Still my choice is Windows 98, but NOT the Secondary Edition. The newer Windozes are bloated and don't probably even work on my Celeron 333MHz 128 Mb RAM Voodoo3 AGP + small HD. So my choice is Linux. I've had absolutely now problem with Slackware and latest KDE. So I dual-boot because of my studies.

Let's freeze this thread...

Regards,
Bamse

NT 4.0 with service pack 6

so I'm told.

gonna try 3.1 now. :]

titanium_geek

What most of the windows users are needing is a gaming platform. If you play a lot of old games you will need to use some form of 98 to have them all working. Win 2000 will not work with some games and is usually a little slower. It also has problems with some of the the joystick device software. XP has a little support for compatibility mode but still not everything works on it.

So, now you have a choice if you can't give up the games,.

98
98 SE
ME

They are all buggy and lock up, maybe even become hosed and need reinstalling. But they are your only option.

The best thing to do is move on to games that work in 2000 or XP. Or better yet Linux.