Server 2008 r2 VS windows 7 VS Windows 2008

Hey guys i have an xps 1530 and im wondering which os would run better..

Server 2008 r2 VS windows 7 VS Windows 2008

 

each works well (so does vista, and by a big chance, xp, and win2003).

wich works best for YOU depends on what you want to use it for. but mostly, you don't want it for using it as a real server => that's overkill to install.

install vista (it's not beta, so you can rely on it, and request support when having problems) or win7 (beta, unsupported), and use server operating systems, as needed, in some virtual machine. vmware, virtualbox, virtualpc, doesn't matter.

there are those that use the server os as the ordinary os. but i never get those. they have something in their head about "it being more clean and thus more fast". they are identical, just preconfigured to server tasks.

 

Well i mainly use my system to study.. I been using linux for about 4 years and havent use windows that much on my personal computer.. Reason im changing is because my studies simulators and videos only run in windows (have tried tons of times with wine and no go so i have to use windows). So my xps has 4gb of ram, 2.5 Ghz CPU, 200gb, 8600 GT video card. So the only benefit i see using server 2008 is hyper-v so i can install linux and dont have to dual boot. Also im going to be working on my MCSA cert so i may run windows 2k3 in hyper-v...

 

you can install linux in a virtual machine as well. that's exactly the same as doing it with hyper-v.

do you have some windows licence with your notebook? if so, use that one. else, ask which licencees you get for free from the university. may be some version of windows server 2008. so you could install that one, then. don't know if your version would support hyper-v with it's licence actually.

if you use a server os as your main os, there is some tool that can make it behave more workstationlike again. so you get close-to vista out of windows server 2008. but be aware, that things like windows live messenger don't install on server os' at all (don't know if a tweak exists, yet)

 

well i forgot to mention, that i have an external monitor connected to the system and to study i need to use both. So when i install a virtual machine in linux i can only use one monitor at the time sucks.. Licencing i can get almost any us trough my university. Are there any benefits on using server 08 instead of vista? I mean i saw in few placeds that it runs a bit faster.. and i have the option to use hyper-v but not sure if this is a benefit or not

 

no. vmware at least should have multimonitor support.

 

it doesn't run faster. you can (close to) configure one into the other.

but as you don't plan to use your os as a server os, don't use a server os for it. that doesn't really make much sence, now, does it?

 

sure... but hyper-v is not the same as vmware workstation editon..

 

Using a server-grade OS as a workstation is generally not such a good idea. Hyper-V is great, but it's not worth the trouble of using Server 2008.

A better solution would be to use Vista, and purchase VMWare Workstation. It's not hardware assisted like Hyper-V is, but the speed should be reasonable enough.