Kent gets it...

Kent Sharkey writes:

Of course, I have something else on my mind. I noticed it first internally when the Windows Media 9 toys were launched a week or two back, and I've been seeing it externally now that Windows Server 2003 has become available. People complaining/commenting that X client software doesn't run on Server 2003. Blogging add-ins for Windows Media player, w.bloggar, etc. I think back to the glory days of Novell, when YOU WOULDN'T EVEN THINK OF USING A SERVER FOR YOUR DESKTOP MACHINE. Sorry, but Windows Media Player shouldn't even install on W2K3. It's server software, not workstation. Using it as your primary OS (especially as I'm guessing most of you log in as Administrator) increases your security hole. IMO, run XP Pro, install VMWare/Virtual PC if you must run a server on the same box. Ideally, however, install server on another box, disconnect the monitor, don't attach a mouse, and even don't attach a keyboard if you can get away with it. Use it as a server.
[Kent Sharkey]

All I can say to this is AMEN! Much like my rant on Request Validation, I'm often baffled by the fact that people can even ask the question, "why isn't X software supported on Win2K3 Server?" DUH! Because it's SERVER software. Can you force Win2K3 to run like a workstation OS? Sure. But that doesn't mean that you should.

I'm with Kent...if you need to run Win2K3 on your primary machine, do it in a VM. And stick with Windows XP Pro for your base OS. Use the right tool for the job.

[Listening to: Desire - Toad - Coil (03:36)]

1 Comment

  • The quote doesn't mention who is complaining and/or ignoring the client vs. server distinction. Linux does a commendable job supporting both server and client software on the same system. Perhaps these people are accustomed to there being no distinction. If I went back and used Windows, I'd be frustrated by the distinction as well.

Comments have been disabled for this content.