I had some wiggle room (meaning huge client wasn't going to kill me if
the server had a few hiccups), and upgrading to 2003 in 6 months or so
didn't look likely...it might be worth it to bite the bullet now
rather than be stuck with old tech for the foreseeable future.
I've been running Win2k3 on my home machine since release and have
found two specific issues so far.
IIS6 by default caches all static files for one minute, makes
development a headache. The cache can be turned off in the
metabase xml file.
I haven't confirmed it on any other machine, but the ODBC Text Driver
is broken on my machine. It just doesn't work.
As far as advantages go, IIS6 is much faster than IIS5, and has
lots of new features. Shadow Copy can be handy for quite a few things,
and the new Task Manager is nice too. Just to name a few.
The permissions system has had quite an overhaul in 2003...I think it
is a lot more drastic than even the change from NT4 to 2000 was. I'd
want to hit the books for a week or so just to understand the changes
before implementing a production system on 2003.
--
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thursday, October 2, 2003, 4:00:55 AM, you wrote:
RS> Hi all,
RS> I'm looking at setting up a new CFMX installation and have been given
RS> the option of Windows 2000 Server , or 2003 Server.
RS> Which would be the safer option?
RS> Not had having a great deal of experience with 2003 I was going to say
RS> 2000, but are there any significant advantages of 2003?
RS> thanks, bye!
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
