Win2K or WinME better? when used for....

[Variable]

Which one would be better suited for my "server" PC?
I will use it mainly to share my DSL-Connection with all the other PC's in my house, it will serve as a data-backup System, I will use it to burn CD's and I will use it sometimes for watching TV.
So wich OS would be better suited?
Until now I had WinME installed but I have to do a re-install and maybe I will change to Win2K.
I know that WinME will probably run faster on this System but maybe the advantadges outweigh the speed loss.

AMD K6-2 533@582MHz
64 MB RAM (and I don't want to upgrade anymore)
Viper V550 16MB
2 NIC's
CD-Burner
Hauppauge WinTV

[Variable]

Ohh I forgot:
This system will run my Firewall, AntiVirus and all the other stuff.

[Warthog]

I would say Win2k because ME/98 just sucks.

But I am no expert...

Warthog

[NDC]

You wouldn't have to be an expert to know that! http://sysopt.earthweb.com/forum/wink.gif

[GroundZero3]

yeah wart is right if its gonna be a sever you want an os with good memory management. stay away from Winme. its not good for anything. i use the cd as a coaster now. Sad

Jason

[Variable]

Well I was quite happy with WinME (about 20-30% faster then Win98SE at least) and I thought it would be the OS for a comp with only 64MB RAM.

[Variable]

And now I heared in the Networking forum that a slow PC running Win2K and acting as "server" for a small home network might slow down the whole network! http://sysopt.earthweb.com/forum/Forum6/HTML/002086.html

And I also remember that on LAN parties and at home I (and others) had BIG!! problems getting a Win2K PC to be seen on the network by other Win9x PCs!

[jad1097]

Since you do not want to upgrade your ram then W2K is out of the question and Win ME will still be a slow server with only 64MB of ram.

I would drop a 256MB stick in it and run W2K. $90 is a cheap upgrade for much better performance and even 128MB is cheap @ $50

To quote Wart "But I am no expert..."

[This message has been edited by jad1097 (edited 03-02-2001).]

[Jonesy]

jad's right. The Microsoft recommended minimum requirement for Win2K Server is 128MB, and you usually want to go a little higher than the minimums (depending on what you want to do).

Anyways, spend a little extra cash and go with win2k - it will be well worth it.

[RobRich]

You have a great box for a Linux or BSD server. You could also try this really cool FREE commercial server/firewall/router package based on a secure Linux implementation:


Securepoint Firewall Server (http://softseek.zdnet.com/Utilities/Networking/Proxy_Servers_Firewalls_and_Network_Security/Review_52655_index.html)

Please note, this software package is an 80mb download.

However, if you are interested in Windows, you system would be fine if you can find a cheap copy of WinNT 4. I have installed Win2K on 64mb systems before, but be prepared for some serious hard drive thrashing. The amount of needed transfers to the page file can bring such a system to a crawl.

Robert Richmond

[Variable]

Thanks Rob for the Link it sure looks interesting (and now that I'm in Germany again I have my DSL back and 80MB isn't very much) but I didn't see what I would gain.
1. I have a Firewall software
2. I was quite happy with ICS from MS (ok could be better, but is it?)
3. I didn't have to install anything on my client PCs thus keeping them faster
4. The other network stuff worked totally fine

BTW I will probably go with WinME again.

[Variable]

I don't want to really upgrade this PC anymore since I will only use it as a router, for burning&backups and watching TV!

But I will soon upgrade my Laptop with more RAM (144PIN 3,3V) even if it is more expensive than standard PC RAM because right now I only have 64MB!
I will upgrade with a 128MB stick and try to sell the one I currently have (if I can sell it I will buy another 128 ;-)

[Variable]

Rob, what I would gain with this software?
1. I have a Firewall software
2. I was quite happy with ICS from MS (ok could be better, but is it?)
3. I didn't have to install anything on my client PCs thus keeping them faster
4. The other network stuff worked totally fine

[RobRich]

What you gain is corporate level security through packet level filtering with LAN level packet encryption. Performance is another aspect, as this package is optimized for maximum network efficiency with minimal system overhead. Currently, when properly configured, I know of no usable outisde exploits or attacks for Securepoint.

MS ICS has both security and performance concerns at the internal LAN level. Also, what firewall are you currently using? Securepoint is a commercial solution, much more powerful than ZA, Sygtate, or even WinRoute Pro.

Robert Richmond

[gauge]

I ran both ME and 2000K. I was have several different problems with ME and sence i have installed 2000K not one problem (knocking on some wood). I agree- spend a little cash on some memory and try 2000K. I think you will be surprised. Good luck.

[Variable]

@Rob: I'm currently running Sygate (or better I think I am because it doesn't show this little icon in the taskbar).

@all the others: I went with WinME again. It is very fast on this machine and when properly configured it just keeps running no problems.

[MiKe85]

Since Linux isn't one of the choices, i'd say Win2K because i've heard better feedback for servers with Win2K then WinME

Mike