Windows Server Reviews

Window Server is fairly well suited for pretty much any scenario where an on-premise server is warranted. It is fairly easy for most users to administer compared to other server platforms that require much more in-depth knowledge to maintain and reliance on an open community for some support instances.

Windows server is suited for environments from small to large. It's an easy entrance point for many small businesses to start with. Many applications still require a Windows server to run the product.

It may not be as attractive to tech-centric businesses with employees well versed in Linux or Apple products. It may not be a good fit for cash-strapped businesses or start-ups.

Perfect for an environment of 10 or more people. It makes managing not only user accounts but PCs much easier. It also makes managing the network just as easy because you can go to one place in order to control everything.

The need for Windows Servers is becoming less popular but depending on your application needs, Windows could be great! For a domain controller, it is great with active directories and group policy' as well as providing great tools to enhance its overall functionality.

It's really not necessary to recommend Windows Server to a colleague. Nearly all IT professionals have experience using Windows Server. It would be like asking a cow to recommend grass. It's just something that everyone uses and acknowledges that it is a requirement for being an IT professional. I would definitely discuss my positive and negative experiences, but recommending or not recommending this is not something that anyone, including me, would ever do.

Windows file server is well suited to hosting on-premise and Azure connected domains. No other platform, in my opinion, is suited to this. I also find Windows file server offering SMB file sharing Microsoft implement this better than any third party solution such as SAMBA. Windows File server still has a built-in S3 storage client or server implementation and hopefully, this is on the product roadmap soon.

In our case, if you needed a low-cost server that was already set up, this is a great solution for you. Such as, you can buy a low-end server via Dell or HP, and have it delivered with all the software and drivers already installed and tested. I know Linux is a good option for those who are more tech-savvy, but Windows does make it easy to buy it and be up and running quickly.

Windows Server excels as a Domain Controller with its comprehensive set of tools to manage users and computers. There isn't another software package out there that has the capabilities Windows Server does when it comes to Active Directory and Group Policy. In addition, Windows Server has a massive tool set, thus increasing both its functionality and flexibility.

Unfortunately, the flexibility and comprehensiveness of Windows Server causes it to be overly complicated to set up and manage, especially for a small organization. In addition, for things such as a file server, there are other options out there that are easier to use and more affordable - specifically in the NAS (network attached storage) space where both Synology and QNAP have very attractive options.

Perhaps the most frustrating aspects of Windows Server are the unnecessarily complicated and confusing licensing terms Microsoft has put forth. Sadly, this is not unusual when it comes to Microsoft, as the licensing even for their consumer-oriented products is burdensome.

Microsoft is well-suited for a small accounting office that has no mindset for growth.

Microsoft products do not belong in an organization that wants to grow or wants to keep its costs down.

Windows Server is well suited to applications that effectively require it, there's no way around it. They're also suitable if you don't have Linux proficient admins.

I would argue that with the robustness of nginix running on Linux, if you are deploying a web application, there isn't a lot of reason to deploy it on Windows via IIS rather than Linux unless you have specific vendor support requirements being that nginix is understood to handle more concurrent connections.

An excellent on-premise solution for small to medium-sized business networks. Perhaps less suited as an on-premise solution for extremely large organizations.

It is well suited for managing server applications which can be hosted on the server and accessed from various locations within the organisation (as long as every site is on the server subnet). Hardware applications can be managed as well from the server such as network devices.

Windows Server is perfect for any organization that wants to control what users do on their network. Even if your company only has 10 employees I would still recommend configuring a Windows server instance, the benefits are huge and worth it. Securing HR documents, preventing users from installing bloatware on their machines, sharing documents between users and of course, securing your network. I can't think of any reason not to install it apart from the high cost.

Windows is suited for just about any general purpose scenario such as file shares, printing, LDAP, DHCP/DNS, general purpose app servers and such. But when it comes to running specialized applications like Cisco Unified Communications Manager, these tend to run much better in a Linux environment than on Windows and they are also more stable on Linux. When Cisco CUCM used to run on Windows, the updates alone caused many headaches. With Linux, you don't do any regular updates; you just install a patch if you have an issue or upgrade to the next version. Storage appliances also run much better on customized versions of Linux or Unix than they do on Windows.

Windows Server is well suited for organizations of different sizes. We utilize Windows Server from a small two person office up to 50 users in a large office setting. I would not recommend using Windows Server in a single user office setting unless the application is server specific for it to work correctly.

The domain model is the key to using Windows Server. In the past with Windows Server NT organizations were exploded with multiple domains up into the hundreds at some cases. Now server technologies and replication has brought the domain model down to one in most organizations.

For VMs it's easy install and use. Administrator tools are available to manage all resources on the server.

Windows Server is logical and easy to manage. Server Manager Dashboard allows you to have an fast overview of what is installed and an easy way to install more roles. It also gives you a fast way to see if there are any issues.

Unless you are building a super computer, or a website with millions of hits a day, Windows Server 2012 has suited the needs of our clients in nearly every venue. Clustering services with windows has improved but not enough for me to trust it in large scale web hosting or SQL environments (mainly due to pricing over free Linux/Unix, at those scales the cost of a unix admin is far less then the licensing around 1000 server cals or MS SQL.) But when it comes to the standard enterprise or SMB servers, Windows 2012 has significant advantages and ultimately costs less to support due to the number of resources available that can support the product at a reasonable or even fixed price (like and Managed Services Provider).

Usually Linux is a better option, but it depends on what you need to do and what kind of expertise you have.

Windows server is well suited for organizations with over 20 employees. A lot of solutions in the cloud are now competing with the local File Server model that Windows server addresses. If you have less than 20 employees it may not justify the cost of licensing/server hardware and time to maintain windows server to justify the benefits. The Microsoft Licensing model is very confusing and can be costly. If you are a non profit Microsoft has generous price cuts through tech soup. Because windows server is a traditional software model you will need to maintain it and upgrade it after the product is replaced with the next version. If you have over 20 employees and want the fastest possible access to files than Windows server is probably well suited. Many on site software solutions also require running on Windows server as well.

Windows server is a simplest server to install for internal LAN operations. It becomes way too difficult when applied in a WAN environment. Most clients rely on sophisticated firewall appliances or third party vendors to manage proxy or NAT for the WAN. Not many put a windows server directly in the wild.

Windows Server works well for most scenarios as it scales so well - from a standalone server in a small business to a hybrid model backed by Azure Directory Services to large businesses with an established Microsoft platform of dozens or hundreds of servers. My experience of Windows server is in medium businesses of around 300-500 staff with several dozen instances.

Specifically, if you want to use Microsoft SQL Server, and I do, you must install it on Windows Server. Well, you can also install some editions on the end-user versions of Windows, but I wouldn't recommend that for production systems.