Web Hosting Talk : Web Hosting Main Forums : VPS Hosting : Windows Server 2008 VPS - why?

[Jon12345]

I have used Windows Server 2003 VPS before and that was fine and dandy. I'm looking for another VPS and wondered if I should go the Windows Server 2008 route.

I want it for remote desktop use and running of apps on there, not to host a website.

What does it have that is better than 2003? Also, does it allow me to run software in a virtual machine on the 2008 server so that it is separate from the main programs on the server?

Thanks,

Jon

[(Stephen)]

2008 is good, but a bit more memory required. No you generally can't run a VM inside a VM. you may be able to get away with using full software emulation on virutualbox or older editions of ms virtual pc, but it will be soooo slow.

[kpmedia]

2008 is better than 2003, yes.

There's really no comparing the two of them. PHP/MySQL stacks are better (Zend-optimized FastCGI), it has native rewriting (use Micronovae Mod-Rewrite if you want to have htaccess translation), and the .NET/SQL stacks are newer and better. Some of the permissions and security is much better, too.

You can't run a VM in a VM, either due to tech reasons, or due to unusable speeds.

Many, many, many hosts are lousy at Windows.
I only suggest three hosts for Windows host: EuroVPS, JaguarPC and SolarVPS.
Each has proven themself excellent.

[Softsys Hosting]

As stated above Windows 2008 is having lot of benefits - especially from security + performance of web applications. However, since you are not going to host websites on it but just execute your apps - you will need to ensure that your app is compatible to run in Windows 2008 environment since Windows 2008 R2 (and all future server server OS) is available in 64 bit edition only.

[kpmedia]

2008 is 32-bit or 64-bit
2008 R2 is 64-bit

[Motiv]

Why not use the latest and greatest? Should be the same price..

[paperwastage]

Originally Posted by kpmedia

You can't run a VM in a VM, either due to tech reasons, or due to unusable speeds.

*unless you have the right combination of hardware and software (eg modern hardware with VT-x and the right virtualization technology

Windows host, ubuntu guest via VirtualBox, WebOS emulator running inside ubuntu guest via VirtualBox. usable

2500k system with 8gb ram

http://imgur.com/yGsn8

[(Stephen)]

Originally Posted by paperwastage

*unless you have the right combination of hardware and software (eg modern hardware with VT-x and the right virtualization technology

Windows host, ubuntu guest via VirtualBox, WebOS emulator running inside ubuntu guest via VirtualBox. usable

2500k system with 8gb ram

http://imgur.com/yGsn8

WebOS is basically a phone emulator, and more like a 'chrome phone' that is an advanced browser, a lot less intensive than running windows in windows yes in windows, or windows in windows, on linux.

While it may be technically possibly, the usable speeds will be diminished greatly. the SVM/VT-x is available only at the first level, the direct hardware level, the guest can't access those functions for security reasons, but yes full emulation, of a lightweight OS, is viable.

[ByteMaster]

Hello,

I think KPMedia and SoftSys hit the nail on the nail on the head. 2008 is your best bet...obviously it is the latest and greatest. What you need to be careful on is the bit rate. 32 is the older version and will run all your older apps fine. However; 64 bit is the newer and better technology. Most all current applications will run in 64 bit. But if you want to install and run any older apps, you may have a problem. Check and be sure all your apps will run in 64 bit.

[kosi]

I think it's possible to run a VM in a full hardware virtualization machine

[coolvserver]

If you don't have any application that is not compatible with Windows server 2008. Definitely go with Windows 2008.
Windows 2008 is more secure and much faster.
For example, if you reboot a Windows 2008 server. It can be back and running within 30 seconds.

Always choose 64-bit Windows 2008 if you can.

[wpmaster]

If you don't want to host a website on the server, any OS would be good, you may just get one which has lower price.

[jhon_barron]

Originally Posted by Jon12345

I have used Windows Server 2003 VPS before and that was fine and dandy. I'm looking for another VPS and wondered if I should go the Windows Server 2008 route.

I want it for remote desktop use and running of apps on there, not to host a website.

What does it have that is better than 2003? Also, does it allow me to run software in a virtual machine on the 2008 server so that it is separate from the main programs on the server?

Thanks,

Jon

Hello Jon,
As per your requirement you can consider any windows server os, there is no need to choose windows 2008. Windows 2008 is advance and bit different as compared to windows 2003.
And if you are already having windows 2003 server then you should consider same os for your another server, if you are going to use same applications on both server. Because you are already having windows 2003 server and you are properly aware with that.

And you can reply this thread or PM me you need any help


Jhon Barron.

[coolvserver]

Originally Posted by wpmaster

If you don't want to host a website on the server, any OS would be good, you may just get one which has lower price.

Most data centers use Microsoft Solution Provider licenses.
Under such licensing, Windows 2008 and 2003 are priced the same.