Comparing Windows 7 to Server 2008 R2

D

Doubl3KiLL

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 13, 2002
Messages
2,759
Well, I have access to both, I have 7 installed right now, and I'm wondering if there would be any difference between using standard work station 7 and setting up an install of R2 and converting to it to be an everyday workstation.

I ask because I was thinking about the Server 08 over Vista thing, and how it was smoother/faster/whatever. I never really cared because I never really had an issue with Vista, but I wonder if there is some sort of speed, reliability, any sort of useful improvement in dumping 7 Pro, and going the workstationized R2 route instead.
 
the only differance would be that some apps would not work due to them seeing a "server OS" and not a client. also the vista-server08 claims were also placebo's, they just saw what they wanted to see.
 
Like spoonman said, it's virtually the same, same code base etc. Some things are turned off, that might speed up performance a slight bit and enhance stability, but you could just turn those things off in Vista or 7 for the same effect - I doubt the difference would be enough to be worth it in most cases though. Win 7 (and Vista with SP1 or SP2) are already fast and stable.
 
As far as the server placebo effect goes, I kind of figured that. Like I said, Vista never really gave me a bit of trouble. Unfortunately I don't have a 64 bit version of 7, so after my upcoming upgrade I may run R2 for that reason alone. Unless I can get my hands on a 64 bit copy of 7 by then.
 
The main thing Server 2008 R2 is missing compared to Win7 Ultimate, is Windows Media Center.

Its main advantage for workstation use would be the inclusion of Hyper-V, if you have a use for that.

Its main disadvantage would be companies who want you to pay exponentially more for a 'server' version of their software, and if no 'server' version is offered, the program may refuse to install, as mentioned in the previous posts.
 
Last edited:
You might as well keep Windows 7 installed. By the time you turn everything on in 2008 to make it a viable workstation OS you are esentially running a workstation OS with the limitations pointed out above.
 
Eiolon said:
You might as well keep Windows 7 installed. By the time you turn everything on in 2008 to make it a viable workstation OS you are esentially running a workstation OS with the limitations pointed out above.
Click to expand...
It amazes me, time and time again, this question comes up each time Microsoft releases new OSes for desktop and servers. The answer is always the same, but it is still asked over and over.

Anyway, you are comparing apples to oranges. A server OS is configured and intended to be a server. A desktop OS is intended for just that...to be run by a single user on a desktop. They may share a codebase, but that doesn't make them identical, especially not in compatibility. Use a screwdriver where it is needed, and use the hammer where it is needed, but don't confuse them. Same concept here.
 
Doubl3KiLL said:
Well, I have access to both,.
Click to expand...

These days with under 20 minute install times....it makes sense to "Try both, and see which one you like".

I ran Server 08 on my laptop for quite a while when Vista first came out. Vista was too damned slow on the laptop early on, I found myself booting to OpenSUSE out of hatred for the long bootup time and sluggishness of Vista. So out went Vista, in went Server 08. Server 08 booted up faster and ran more responsive, so it was usable. Same laptop, thus same exact hardware specs. Since then..Vista got improved with service packs and a few kajillion other little updates which gave it some performance..so the difference isn't there much.

I ran Server03 on a laptop years ago too. Damn fine OS as a desktop OS.

Yes you will have to recognize that you lose some multi-media functions, and some common desktop programs will not want to install on a server OS. For me, since I'm always working on clients networks and servers and such...my laptop has a specific purpose, I'm not gaming, I'm just using remote desktop and web interfaces and VPNs and basic MS Office stuff.

The debate will be endless. Bottom line is, an awful lot of IT guys over the years do run server on their laptops..experienced techs who have been doing this a long time, and there are reasons.

That being said, Windows 7 is so much dang better than Vista, and its power management/hibernation/suspend works so great, I haven't used anything else on my laptop since I installed the official release in August. It's been absolutely 100% on the money. I don't think R2 improved 08 enough to think it would be more responsive on your laptop than W7.
 
vsboxerboy said:
Oh this can of worms again - in before the eventual lock!
Click to expand...

Oh, I apologize, I'll stop making threads about legitimate questions.

Using search didn't yield any sort of useful information when I tried, nor did Google really. So I figured I'd ask on the [H] to get some useful answers, which I got from everyone but you.
 
Out of the box, Server OS variant is generally 5-10% faster in benchmarks. However, they don't have sound, advanced UI, usability services (superfetch/indexing) etc., that speed up the system enabled, no themes, no DX support. etc etc etc.

You can turn Server 2008 into a workstation with all the bells and whistles of Vista/7, but the performance just ends up being the same. I've tested it a few times.
 
bigdogchris said:
Out of the box, Server OS variant is generally 5-10% faster in benchmarks. However, they don't have sound, advanced UI, usability services (superfetch/indexing) etc., that speed up the system enabled, no themes, no DX support. etc etc etc.

You can turn Server 2008 into a workstation with all the bells and whistles of Vista/7, but the performance just ends up being the same. I've tested it a few times.
Click to expand...

Funny, I can fire up "MOST" games on my Windows Server 2008 R2 partition and play with no problems. DX11 downloaded and installed the other day with no hitches either.
 
Doubl3KiLL said:
snip So I figured I'd ask on the [H] to get some useful answers, which I got from everyone but you.
Click to expand...

My apologies for the threadcrap - not so much directed at your post necessarily, but at the childish arguments that tend to follow in the comments from everyone else (many times including the OP).


I guess my question to you would be given that things like antivirus programs, etc. won't be licensed for use in Server as opposed to Pro, is there anything wrong with Pro that is causing you to look at server?
 
vsboxerboy said:
My apologies for the threadcrap - not so much directed at your post necessarily, but at the childish arguments that tend to follow in the comments from everyone else (many times including the OP).


I guess my question to you would be given that things like antivirus programs, etc. won't be licensed for use in Server as opposed to Pro, is there anything wrong with Pro that is causing you to look at server?
Click to expand...

No nothing wrong, other than I don't have a 64bit copy of 7 pro. I can get the 64 bit version, I just wanted to weigh out wether or not it's worth it to save the small price I'd spend on it and just run R2. I understood the compatibility problems, and have checked on most of the programs I run and everything seemed to come up a go, so I was just interested if anyone had tried running R2 as well as 7, and if there was any way it improved on 7's already stunning (IMO) performance.

Ill be moving into a long overdue upgrade soon and Im going to have to move into a 64bit OS to support it, just a matter of figuring out which one. :D
 
The Cobra said:
Funny, I can fire up "MOST" games on my Windows Server 2008 R2 partition and play with no problems. DX11 downloaded and installed the other day with no hitches either.
Click to expand...
Out of the box ... I never said isn't compatible. DX can be installed on the system, which most games at least do or update DX when you install them. I said I tested it, which was gaming benchmarks. Anyways, I tested Server 2008, not R2. There is a Direct X patch or some feature you can enable for better DX support as well with 2008. I just used a tool that did it for me so I can't say specifically what it was I had to change.
 
Not to stir the pot, but I'm about a week into using 2008 R2 as a desktop. If the limitations are known and are accepted, it beats paying for Windows 7 if you still have an educational email address. Biggest problem I'm having is Bluetooth seems to have been striped out. It seems there are ways to get it back, but it looks long and tedious. I'm content to sit and wait for someone to come up with a better way to skin the cat.
 
The only reason I could see running 2k8 as a workstation would be for Hyper-V.
 
almost all Windows 7 keys are interchangable across languages and 32/64-bit. all you need is a 64-bit ISO and your current key will work.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top