Windows storage server vs 2003 standard?

  • Thread starter Thread starter pez
  • Start date Start date
P

pez

Guest
I am in the process of trying to implement some additional storage on
our network. Why would you want to buy windows storage server?
Wouldn't it just be better to have the flexibility of 2003 standard?
 
Re: Windows storage server vs 2003 standard?

pez <peter.zelonis@gmail.com> wrote:
> I am in the process of trying to implement some additional storage on
> our network. Why would you want to buy windows storage server?
> Wouldn't it just be better to have the flexibility of 2003 standard?

That depends on your needs, doesn't it? If the server is meant to do
file/print only, WSS is plenty good enough, and has some nice management
features.
 
Re: Windows storage server vs 2003 standard?

On Apr 16, 6:33 pm, "Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]"
<lanwe...@heybuddy.donotsendme.unsolicitedmailatyahoo.com> wrote:
> pez <peter.zelo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I am in the process of trying to implement some additional storage on
> > our network. Why would you want to buy windows storage server?
> > Wouldn't it just be better to have the flexibility of 2003 standard?
>
> That depends on your needs, doesn't it? If the server is meant to do
> file/print only, WSS is plenty good enough, and has some nice management
> features.

For the time being the server only needs to be a print/file server,
but what if I want to use it for something more in the future.
Wouldn't it just be a no brainer to use full blown version of 2003
server. I guess I just don't understand why you would ever choose
WSS. Would it be only for economic reasons?
 
Re: Windows storage server vs 2003 standard?

pez <peter.zelonis@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Apr 16, 6:33 pm, "Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]"
> <lanwe...@heybuddy.donotsendme.unsolicitedmailatyahoo.com> wrote:
>> pez <peter.zelo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I am in the process of trying to implement some additional storage
>>> on our network. Why would you want to buy windows storage server?
>>> Wouldn't it just be better to have the flexibility of 2003 standard?
>>
>> That depends on your needs, doesn't it? If the server is meant to do
>> file/print only, WSS is plenty good enough, and has some nice
>> management features.
>
> For the time being the server only needs to be a print/file server,
> but what if I want to use it for something more in the future.

Then you shouldn't buy WSS.

> Wouldn't it just be a no brainer to use full blown version of 2003
> server.

For you, perhaps.

> I guess I just don't understand why you would ever choose
> WSS. Would it be only for economic reasons?

That's one possibility, but as I said, there are also some nice management
tools in WSS. Your question is impossible to answer as so much depends on
what you yourself need.
 
Back
Top