Which Server OS would you recommend?

[williamp0044]

Hello everyone... I have a server built just sitting there. I was using Windows 2003 Enterprise Edtition with it orginally. The problem is that the OS was just a preview and i can not afford the retail price. So i would like to know what up-to-date OS can serve as a:
domain controller
mail server
and allows me to host web sites and ftp sites
i heard redhat was good but im not sure if it is capable of doing the things i want
if you guys have any suggestions on the best/ easy to use server OS i will take that into consideration and buy the book/OS
thank you

[mireland]

I think windows 2000 server will do what you want..Of course server costs a lot more than workstation but I think win2k is the best OS out therehttp://www.fancysplace.com/smileys/indian.gif

[Bigjakkstaffa]

2000 Server or Advanced Server (should set you back about 800 quid :eek:)...ive not heard much about 2003 which is kinda discouraging and what little i have heard seems to be negative rather than positive :(

--Jakk:t

[sm8000]

FreeBSD

[williamp0044]

well since no one has any objections...i will go with windows 2000...the only thing i destest about it is that it is such an old OS but i guess that should not matter.

Does anyone know where i can get the OS for dirt cheap or for nothing?
Im running a small business..so im looking to save as much money as possible.

[sm8000]

Win2k Server family ain't old. It's probably your best bet for a Microsoft server OS at the moment, and they are still maintaining it with updates. If you want to find it cheap (it retails for several hundred bucks!) you could try and find a used copy somewhere.

FreeBSD is a very good choice, but only if you're willing to take the time to learn it, being a UNIX derivative. Plus, it's free :)

[Bigjakkstaffa]

2k is not old by any stretch of the imagination, it is currently the industry standard OS for servers and i reckon it will be for quite some time yet, 2k is across all platforms, home and server, the best thing MS have ever done IMO

--Jakk:t

[finger51]

I'm using SuSE 8.0 (apache, qmail, ftpd and samba for PDC) for all of the things you've mentioned. Works great.

My record so far is 8 months without a restart. I'm approaching 6 months right now. I'm hoping to go for a year without restarting this machine.

show me any M$ server with uptime like this! Oh, sorry... I meant any M$ server which won't cost you a dime... oops thats right it doesn't exist!

[rraehal]

Win2K Server, SuSE, Redhat, FreeBSD - they are all good in my Opinion.

Red Hat
I use Apache for Web Pages
qmail for E -Mail
proftpd for FTP
?? for telnet (can't remember which package)
Samba for Windows atentication/file access/printers
MySQL or postgresSQL for SQL
PHP that installed with redhat

Win2k Server
Authentication by User
IIS 5.0 for webpages
IIS 5 for SMTP Mail (I did not set up POP 3 - use Lotus for that)
IIS 5 for FTP
(never set up telnet)
MySQL for SQL
PHP 4 for php pages


They will all do the same things. Linux is simply more cost effective, but has a higher learning curve.

[BipolarBill]

The price difference between Server and Server 2003 is not worth mentioning. What's the difference n price between Win2K Pro and XP Pro? Nothing.

If you can't afford the $700 asking price for these, you'll have to use a Linux distro and do some quick learning - or get Windows used or by illegitimate means. We won't discuss the last option at all beyond that.

[Midknyte]

shadow volume copy in 2k3 server is pretty sweet. Most of the default services in win2k like IIS are not turned on in w2k3. you gotta manually enable these things. why? security.

if you can't afford win2k or w2k3, then Linux is definitely the way to go. how can you beat free? :p