williamlee
n00b
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2009
- Messages
- 25
Hi all-
I wanted to see if anyone had opinions on using 2003 versus WHS here? Let me give you some background first...I have a license already for 2003, but am debating whether it is worth spending $100 for WHS as a home server. I have installed the trial version of WHS, but have not really played around with 2003 yet to compare the two. While I realize WHS is basically a modified version of 2003, I'm not sure how easy it would be to get the same functionality out of 2003 compared to WHS.
I already run two RAID5 linux boxes, but my main PC is Vista, and we have some XP machines in the house also. I thought it might be fun to play around with WHS and set up automatic backups / imaging for the Windows PCs in the house. I would also use it as a media server and additional backup server on top of the RAID5 boxes.
Anyways, if anyone has run both 2003 and WHS in a home environment and has opinions, I would love to hear them.
Thanks!
I wanted to see if anyone had opinions on using 2003 versus WHS here? Let me give you some background first...I have a license already for 2003, but am debating whether it is worth spending $100 for WHS as a home server. I have installed the trial version of WHS, but have not really played around with 2003 yet to compare the two. While I realize WHS is basically a modified version of 2003, I'm not sure how easy it would be to get the same functionality out of 2003 compared to WHS.
I already run two RAID5 linux boxes, but my main PC is Vista, and we have some XP machines in the house also. I thought it might be fun to play around with WHS and set up automatic backups / imaging for the Windows PCs in the house. I would also use it as a media server and additional backup server on top of the RAID5 boxes.
Anyways, if anyone has run both 2003 and WHS in a home environment and has opinions, I would love to hear them.
Thanks!