Skip to main content
TrustRadius
Windows Server

Windows Server

Overview

Recent Reviews

Windows Server

9 out of 10
June 04, 2021
Incentivized
Windows Server is used in our Information Technology department and most of our applications hosted on it. Our databases are also deployed …
Continue reading

Windows Server Review

9 out of 10
May 20, 2021
Incentivized
The most basic feature in Windows Server is obviously the Active Directory. This is basically a central place where you create, update, …
Continue reading

Windows Server Review

9 out of 10
May 19, 2021
Incentivized
We leverage Windows Server as the primary backbone for most of of the applications that the University runs. This includes deployments in …
Continue reading
Read all reviews

Awards

Products that are considered exceptional by their customers based on a variety of criteria win TrustRadius awards. Learn more about the types of TrustRadius awards to make the best purchase decision. More about TrustRadius Awards

Return to navigation

Product Demos

MIME type : How to add or configure in IIS 8 on Windows Server 2012

YouTube

Windows Server 2022 Demo!

YouTube

Multipoint Server 2012 Virtual Desktops demo

YouTube

How to Install and Configure VPN On Windows Server 2012 Full Step by Step

YouTube

Windows Server best practice you’ll want to implement today

YouTube
Return to navigation

Product Details

What is Windows Server?

Windows Server Technical Details

Operating SystemsUnspecified
Mobile ApplicationNo
Return to navigation

Comparisons

View all alternatives
Return to navigation

Reviews and Ratings

(831)

Attribute Ratings

Reviews

(1-5 of 5)
Companies can't remove reviews or game the system. Here's why
Score 1 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
  • File support
  • Remote access
  • Whole organization
  • Support from Microsoft
  • Not able to use
  • User interface.
  • [In my experience,] not user friendly.
  • Actual support from Microsoft, as [I feel] they are terrible for customer support.
Suited for people extremely versed in Server. [In my experience,] not suited for anyone that isn't already versed in Server.
  • File control
  • Remote access
  • [In my experience,] wasted time & money.
5
Office management
1
IT
  • File control
  • Remote access
  • Organization
  • 0
  • File organization
  • Remote access
[In my experience,] Microsoft offers no support for their products.
Yes
Standard file transfer
  • Product Features
  • Product Usability
Was wrong in my assumption and from the description of the product.
I would not purchase.
  • Implemented in-house
No
  • Installation
  • Interface
  • Support
[I believe it was] not as advertised.
[In my experience,] Microsoft offers little to no support in the initial stages after purchasing Server 2022. Called, told to fill out a support request. Did that. Support called, had to transfer to [the] business department. Business dept. told me to contact another dept. (forgot name). Told them all that has happened [and] I got thrown into a transfer loop. [I feel that they] didn't care a single bit. [In my experience they] kept re-reading [their] script.
No, I already spent $650 for the Server 2022 program and needed help switching from COR to GUI.
No
No.
Must be expert for Core.
  • [In my experience,] none.
  • Core
No
Score 10 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Incentivized
We use Windows Server for our primary server operating system. It's primary used for our hypervisor as well as VM's. We use various Windows Server roles and functions such as AD, DNS, DHCP, file server, printing, web, and more. This allows us to have an easy to manage operating system that is centrally managed.
  • Hypervisor
  • Active Directory
  • DHCP
  • Ease of Deployment
  • Security Updates
  • Lengthy update times
  • DoH DNS Forwarders
  • More thorough update vetting
If you're a Windows shop, or heavily use O365 and Office, Windows Server fits in nicely with its ability to manage Windows clients using Active Directory. Likewise, Active Directory and Exchange integrate well with O365. If you are primarily a Mac client enterprise, Windows Server is less appropriate. Using Windows Server as a hypervisor, regardless of workstation OS, is also a great use case.
  • Security
  • Reliability
  • Longevity / Long End of Support Cycle
  • Hypervisor
  • AD DS
  • Ease of deploying new servers
  • Easy management of Windows workstations
  • Painless hypervisor cluster failover
We were comparing Windows Server with Hyper-V to VMware ESXi, and decided on Windows Server as we are primarily a Windows server/workstation shop, and the familiarity allowed us to spin up new Hyper-V servers quickly without much additional training required. We also have a Microsoft agreement and this allowed us to set up new hypervisors without needing to make additional purchasing of a different product.
750
Primarily users use Windows Server due to their workstations being bound to Active Directory, use Windows DNS and DHCP, and security policies through GPOs. The majority of our users also use it for Windows file sharing for network shares and home directories. We have a smaller subset of users that use Windows Remote Desktop Gateway for various accounting platforms.
1
I am the sole systems administrator for our organization. We have additional technicians who use their technical skills and knowledge of Active Directory, DNS, and DHCP to do occasional AD DS work like resetting passwords. For me, I have a thorough understanding of systems administration, multiple roles and features, and networking knowledge.
  • Workstation Management
  • DHCP
  • DNS
  • NPS
  • File deduplication
  • Powershell Commands
  • Improved NPS Customization
  • Remote Desktop Gateway for future applications
  • VPN Server
Windows Server is unbeatable in the features it offers, the ease of deploying new roles and features, and the seamless integration between multiple servers and their roles and features. We primarily use Windows workstations which work best with Windows Server for management as well.
No
  • Price
  • Product Features
  • Product Usability
Product features was the most important factor for us. We are a small IT department with a lot of devices and end users, and need a server OS platform that is robust, reliable, secure, and easy to manage. Windows Servers offers a platform for all of our server needs.
While we would look more closely at Linux OS's, I don't see ourselves seriously considering any other platform or vendor for our server operating systems other than a select few use cases. Windows Server has worked very well for us, and many of our evaluation criteria's were only matched by Windows Server.
  • Implemented in-house
No
Change management was minimal
I learned that a slow migration is better than trying to rush and get everything migrated all in one go. Many factors took significantly longer than anticipated, included the amount of time it takes to install the latest updates, how long it takes to install certain roles and features, and when something doesn't work it often led to us having to start from scratch.
  • Long update process
  • Long role and feature install time
  • Inability to quickly revert after installing a role
Make sure that you have detailed processes in place for every server instance you plan to install/upgrade, if possible get the base OS loaded and Windows Updates applied ahead of time, and if using a VM take a snapshot prior to installing each role, as well as along the way.
  • no training
Windows Server was relatively easy to learn and use without official training. Microsoft has a vast expanse of tech articles and guides, along with thousands of other websites and blogs documenting how processes are done. Using both these resources, I was able to learn and implement everything I needed to.
I believe the configurability for Windows Server is just right. Windows Server offers a vast array of configuration options for most roles and features, and has a very robust PowerShell/CLI library to do almost anything you could need. For more advanced enterprises, there may be some limiting factors that other platforms offer, but that is not the case in our organization.
Review Microsoft's security and best practices guides and articles before configuring roles and features for Windows Server. Make sure you're reading up to date guides, as these change frequently.
No - we have not done any customization to the interface
No - we have not done any custom code
We have not done any additional customization or configuration.
Microsoft has poor support when you need something that can't be found online. For most issues, their knowledge base, tech net forum, etc. offer solutions to most problems. However if you have a specific situation that needs tech support, getting a hold of a knowledgeable rep is very difficult.
We did not, as the price was too expensive for our historical needs for premium support. We can typically get our issues resolved using Microsoft knowledge base articles and Tech Net forum posts.
No
This has not happened for us.
Microsoft does a great job at making their interface, roles, and features very use friendly. They have guides as you're setting up new roles, as well as when you are trying to configure roles for the first time. The interface is very intuitive and very little needs to be done via command line or other hidden means of configuration.
  • DHCP
  • DNS
  • Active Directory
  • AD FS
  • NPS
  • DFS-R / DFS-N
  • Group Policy
No
Score 10 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Incentivized
Windows Server is our organizations primary server operating system. It's used to support needs across the entire organization, from authentication, file and print to database, application and web servers.
  • Easy to manage
  • Wide Application Compatibility
  • Stable operating system environment
  • Flexible, suitable for a number of different roles
  • Security, always room for improvement there
  • UI driven platform makes doing things from the CLI difficult at times.
  • Patching process can turn into a nightmare with the way security updates are bundled and documented
Window Server is well suited for internal infrastructure functions like authentication, DHCP, DNS and file and print services via Active Directory. Highly recommend for application server roles as well, web server via IIS assuming the correct security is put in place or for internal use, Database via SQL Server or 1,000's of third party applications. We tend to avoid placing Windows servers directly on the internet but assuming you have the correct security place in it's a great platform.
  • Flexiability
  • Ease of use
  • Total Cost of Ownership
  • Product Support
  • Stability
  • Allows us to meet SLA requirements
  • Returns good ROI
For our purposes it came down to picking between Windows and Linux and at the end of the day we picked both. We use Windows for 80% of our server needs to run our Web, File, Print, DHCP, Internal DNS, Active Directory, SQL, Web and other windows based servers. We use linux for our Oracle Database Servers and a handful of other tasks since it's better support by Oracle.
Microsoft SQL Server, Oracle Database, Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)
No
  • Price
  • Product Features
  • Product Usability
  • Product Reputation
  • Prior Experience with the Product
Compatibility. We needed something that could run on any hardware and run every application and that's windows server.
We were happy with how our evaluation and selection process played out and don't see anything we would need to change at this time.
Good deep tech support, a bit price unless you purchase software assurance (which I highly recommend you do) .
We purchased software assurance (SA) which includes unlimited support and software updates. We mainly purchased it for the software updates but the support is a great benefit as well.
No
Too many times to list.
Score 7 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Incentivized
Windows Server is being used across 3 clients that I manage. It is primarily being used as a Domain Controller (with Active Directory), DNS server and file server. In addition, some clients are using the Hyper-V functionality built directly into Windows Server to create a virtual domain controller. In the organization that I manage that are using Windows Server, All business computers are apart of the Domain created by Windows Server and users are authenticated against the Active Directory.

Windows Server is an extremely large and complex piece of software capable of a LOT of different functionality, some of it good and some of it bad, thus creating a truly comprehensive review is difficult. This review consists primarily of how it is used as a Domain Controller and file server within an organization.
  • Windows Server acting as a domain controller allows for very comprehensive management of computers and workstations across an organization, specifically when it comes to Active Directory and Group Policy.
  • Active Directory allows for comprehensive managements of users within a domain (or organizational unit). User groups can be created with different permissions for various network resources, and users can be added to multiple different groups. In addition, login scripts can be created that are linked to each user allowing for automatic mapping of network drives and printers (among other items) every time a user logs in. As such, with the correct login script, a new user can login for the first time and have access to all the necessary resources within an organization.
  • Once a domain is created, adding computers to it is quick and easy. Any computer that is a part of a domain can be logged in by any domain user. Removing a computer from a domain, via Active Directory, immediately revokes all domain users ability to login to that computer.
  • Group Policy, an integral part of Windows Server, is a vast and comprehensive tool to push out settings to domain computers and users. Settings can be anything from adding or removing mapped network drives, adding or removing printers, turning on and off specific Windows settings. Group Policy can be managed on both a computer basis and a user basis.
  • Windows Server's built-in file sharing capabilities allow it to be used as a powerful file server. Permissions for shared folders can be set on a per-user basis and/or via group membership. Using advanced sharing features, a file or folder can be shared via multiple names with different permissions for each shared name.
  • Windows Server includes a powerful DNS server that works in conjunction with the Domain Controller functionality. The DNS server supports forward and reverse zones as well as manually adding items into a DNS zone.
  • Hyper-V is included with Windows Server, providing a powerful and first-party way to create virtual machines.
  • Windows Server includes a built-in DHCP server that can be used in place of a standard network router.
  • Windows Server includes a built-in web server hosting functionality via IIS (Internet Information Services)
  • Windows Server is extremely complex, and while newer versions have eased the initial setup process, setting up a server is still a very time consuming and difficult task.
  • The complexity of Windows Server also makes troubleshooting any problems that arise extremely difficult, both in tracking down the actual issue and then resolving the issue. Often times a problem can manifest itself in more than one way, making searching for the specific problem also difficult.
  • Windows Server is also very expensive, with complex and confusing licensing terms. In fact, Microsoft provides a 32-page PDF guide on Windows Server licensing, which is in and of itself dense and confusing to follow. To make matters more complicated, there multiple different version of Windows Server itself - Nano, Essentials, Standard and Datacenter edition, and each edition has different licensing terms. Licensing terms include items such as the physical processor's cores of the server, how many users will be accessing the server (called a CAL - client access license), and a plethora of other items.
  • Microsoft's support for Windows Server can be extremely frustrating at times. While Microsoft hosts a very active user forum, Microsoft employees who frequent those forums often provide only stock answers to questions (without actually reading the details) or no answers at all. For more in-depth - phone support can be quite expensive.
  • Upgrading a Windows Server from one major version to another (i.e. 2012 to 2016) is a frustratingly complex and dangerous procedure, as many things can go wrong during the upgrading, essentially breaking the entire setup. In fact, Microsoft doesn't even suggest doing an in-place upgrade, but to perform a backup of the existing server, doing a clean install of the new version, and migrating the information from the older version to the new version. In general, it is not even recommended to upgrade from one version to another as the risk significantly outweigh the benefits.
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.
  • Positive ROI - Once set up properly, Windows Server's ability to manage an organization's users and computer drastically reduces the amount of time necessary to set up a new computer or a new user.
  • Positive ROI - Windows Server has a very large feature set, which can result in finding an additional use for it that was not initially intended. Specifically, Hyper-V has allowed some of the organization I've managed to create a number of virtual machines that have saved a considerable amount of time and money put into setting up a new piece of hardware.
  • Negative ROI - the initial setup of Windows Server is long and complicated. If your organization does not need the capabilities of Active Directory and Group Policy, the initial setup costs may not be worth it.
  • Negative ROI - the maintenance cost of keeping Windows Server functioning properly can be high, especially if any unforeseen issues arise. Again, if your organization does not need the capabilities of Active Directory and Group Policy, the initial setup costs may not be worth it.
  • Negative ROI - for many of the features of Windows Server (DNS server, DHCP server, web server, file server, etc.), there are less expensive, easier to setup, and easier to manage alternatives, especially in the NAS space.
There are other options out there that can provide many of the same functionalities of Window Server. Specifically, Synology NAS servers, in conjunction with Synology's excellent DSM (DiskStation Manager) software include a number of features that Windows Server includes, but in an easier to set up and less complicated manner. Specifically, DSM includes its bread and butter file server capabilities, a powerful DHCP Server, DNS Server, web server functionality using Apache, LDAP directory service (similar to Active Directory, but not as powerful), and even additional functionality not found in Windows Server such as powerful VPN server that can provide PPTP, L2TP, or even OpenVPN services.

However, there isn't a single piece of software or hardware that provides the same level of functionality as Windows Server's Active Directory and Group Policy management tools.
No
  • Product Features
  • Product Usability
  • Prior Experience with the Product
The single most important feature was Windows Server Domain Controller functionalities - specifically in regards to Active Directory and Group Policy. There simply isn't a better tool on the market for managing Windows-based user and computers. While a Linux server or a NAS server can be set up with an LDAP directory that can allow network users to log in to a computer connected to the LDAP directory, the functionality isn't even remotely as powerful as Active Directory. Login scripts can be used to replicate some functionality of Group Policy, but Group Policy is vastly more powerful and flexible than login scripts.
If the organization is small enough, and doesn't have positions that turn over regularly, the need for Active Directory is minimal, and is most likely overkill. The best option is to evaluate what your organization needs out of a server. If it is simply for hosting files that everyone can access, a high quality NAS is a better option.
There are simply too many different parts of Windows Server to make it a cohesive piece of software. While some of the newer features found in Windows Server 2012 and 2016 have nice UIs that are logically laid out, there are enough parts of the system that is still based on old code with clunky UIs and confusing options to make Windows Server a particularly user-friendly experience.
Score 10 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Incentivized
Both Windows and Linux were used by the organization. Windows for most end users and many of the servers but Linux was used for many of the web servers and when Oracle was being used.
  • Ease of installation because it's easy to script/automate.
  • It's familiar/recognizable to many people because it's familiar to anyone who uses an end-user version of Windows on their personal machine.
  • It's the only OS that SQL Server runs on so it's extremely important to me because I'm a SQL Server DBA.
  • I really don't know because it does everything I've ever needed and I have no experience with other OSes.
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.
  • I used SQL Server and there's no choice. If you want to run SQL Server, you have to install Windows Server, end of story.
The only other server level OS I've ever used was OS/2, and there's really no point in trying to compare against it anymore.
Global IT and application development teams
5
Extremely technical and self-motivated so they can keep up on the latest information.
  • SQL Servers
  • SharePoint Servers
  • Application Servers
Because I'm a SQL Server DBA and SQL Server only runs on Windows Server.
No
  • Prior Experience with the Product
  • Existing Relationship with the Vendor
SQL Server only runs on Windows Server and SQL Server was required so Windows Server was required.
Until/unless Microsoft supports some other operating system with SQL Server, there's no chance of me choosing a different OS.
  • Implemented in-house
No
  • I'm not aware of any issues at all, keeping in mind that it was implemented before I joined the company and there is a dedicated Windows OS team at the company.
Nope, wasn't around for the first installations.
Yes
If our servers go down they can have a severe impact on our business so we need really good support immediately.
Because I haven't used Windows Support personally so can only pass along what I've heard. I haven't heard anything bad, but nothing tremendously good either.
No
  • Installation of SQL Server is easy and that's really all I'm concerned about.
  • I did find it relatively easy to install and configure Hyper-V as well. In fact, easy enough that I set up a failover cluster in Hyper-V on my home machine.
  • It can be a bit tricky to set up a domain, but there are numerous resources available online to guide you through it.
It's relatively easy to do anything I've ever tried to accomplish in Windows.
Return to navigation