jwcolby
jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com
Tue May 15 06:13:41 CDT 2007
I absolutely agree that WindowsXP is rock stable and I recommend it highly. With the handful of driver issues I have seen for 2003, I do recommend XP (Pro) for workstation use. One thing that is materially superior on the 2003 side however is the ability to remote desktop in to a machine without booting a logged in user. John W. Colby Colby Consulting www.ColbyConsulting.com -----Original Message----- From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Gustav Brock Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2007 5:26 AM To: accessd at databaseadvisors.com Subject: Re: [AccessD] Which Windows version (was: VB.Net - seeingthe messagebox) Hi Jim (and John and Robert) Because the workstation version is optimized for workstation apps like Access and VS and the use of these, and the server version is optimized for server apps like SQL Server, IIS, or Exchange. The kernel is the same and a server version can be tweaked for workstation use and vice versa, but why waste time on this when MS has done this for us? We all have our preferences, but claiming that WinXP is "less stable" or that Win 2003 "is better" than the other Windows 5.x versions is doubtful. Based on experience from our clients which run Win2000/XP on 99% of all workstations, these run rock steady. I just checked, and we've only once seen a blue screen of death on these machines and that was caused by a malfunctioning ram module. /gustav >>> accessd at shaw.ca 14-05-2007 18:47 >>> Why is having a server as a desktop not a good idea? -- AccessD mailing list AccessD at databaseadvisors.com http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com