We are primarily using the solution for implementing some of our applications.
The applications that are running are very easy to handle. Most of the applications are on the Linux environment, as well.
We are primarily using the solution for implementing some of our applications.
The applications that are running are very easy to handle. Most of the applications are on the Linux environment, as well.
The solution is very easy to use due to the fact that it has a broad base. It is very easy to use for the end-user.
The installation is straightforward.
Technical support has been very good overall.
A lot of attacks are monitored however, there are a lot of things coming into it. This is why we need to provide more security with respect to the Linux platform. There's more security on Windows and not enough on Linux.
The licensing for the solution is expensive.
I've used the solution for a very long time. I can't recall the exact number of years, however. I just know it's been a long while. I've definitely used it over the last 12 months.
We have around ten technicians and they are all using the product. However, the server itself is used across the organization.
We do plan to continue to use the server going forward. We have no plans to change just now.
Technical support is very helpful and supportive. They have been knowledgeable and responsive. We're satisfied with the level of support we get.
The initial setup is quite straightforward It's not too complex. It's easy to execute on both Windows and Linux.
The deployment was pretty quick and only took about one and a half hours.
We handled the implementation ourselves.
You do have to pay for licenses to use the solution. It's quite expensive in general. However, that's just for Windows. Linux is not supported right now.
We are using the latest version of the solution. I'm not sure what the version number is.
We have it deployed both on-cloud and on-premises.
I'd recommend the solution to others.
I'd rate the solution ten out of ten.
We use this solution to install and use applications on it.
This solution is very user friendly, easy to use for any system administrator, simple to deploy applications, has a wide range of applications available, great UI, and takes less technical skills to operate than some other competitors. Additionally, the active directory has great functionality, if we want to integrate any assets, then we can easily do it.
When it comes to the performance of this solution others are slightly better such as Linux. This solution promotes its services only, in some of the integrations, it does not support external ones.
I have been using the solution for the last three years.
The solution is stable and the updates are done automatically. I have not had any major critical issue, but if there was, there is a big online community we can find a solution that is great. Otherwise, it is supported by Windows diagnostic within the software.
We have approximately 45 users using the solution in my company.
The support for Microsoft is very good.
We use Windows Server and Linux, they have different strengths and weaknesses in use cases. Linux feels a little lighter than this solution.
The installation is straightforward, there is not any difficulty and took approximately 35 minutes.
We did the implementation ourselves and a single person can do the deployment.
There is a license for this solution and the price could be cheaper.
We are going to continue to use the solution and I recommend it to others.
I rate Windows Server a ten out of ten.
We primarily use the solution as a database.
The product, overall, is very simple. It's easy to use and navigate. It's got a good design.
The implementation is very easy. It doesn't give you any trouble.
The stability is okay, however, it could be better. It's an area that they could improve on if they wanted to.
I've been using the solution for two years at this point.
The stability is somewhere in between good and bad. It's so-so. It could be better.
We have 15 people that use the solution, and five engineers that manage everything as necessary.
We do plan to continue to use the product going forward.
I don't really need the assistance of technical support. I'm an engineer. Typically, I can fix any issues that may arise. Therefore, I don't contact Microsoft. I can't speak to their support service and how helpful they are.
We found the initial setup to be very simple and straightforward. It's not complex. We didn't have any issues.
I can't recall how long the actual deployment took. It was a while ago now.
I handled the installation by myself. You only really need one person to deploy the product.
We have engineers that can handle maintenance on the solution in our company.
I handled the implementation myself. I didn't need to have the installation done by a consultant or integrator.
We only really use Windows Server for one thing. We don't have too complicated of a setup.
I would recommend the solution to other organizations. I've mostly been happy with the product overall.
I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten.
We have many brands that we use here in our firm. As an example, we use Dell for our Laptops, we use Lenovo, we use IBM for our computers, Cisco for our switches, and Microsoft.
It's important to us that it is easy to use and has easy maintenance because we don't have specialists. It is necessary for us to have very simple maintenance procedures.
The initial setup could be simplified.
We have been using Windows Server for more than two years, maybe five or more.
It's a stable solution. We have not had any issues with stability.
We have 200 users in our organization who are using Windows Server.
We have plans to keep using this solution.
We have not contacted technical support.
I only use the support online.
We use Windows Server, and Windows 10 for our laptops and PCs.
The initial setup depends on the preparation of the units.
If it is prepared by a specialist then the installation is easy.
We have to make sure that it has been configured properly.
We have a team of 20 for the deployment and maintenance of this solution.
It is important to have the cheapest price for all of the material and licenses.
We have so many customers with Windows Servers that we are obliged to use the same technical path.
We don't have any significant issues with Windows. I would rate Windows Server an eight out of ten.
We use Windows Server as our certified server for compatibility.
It could be more compatible with other platforms.
The compatibility and the ease of use are areas that I would like to see improved.
We have been using Windows Server since 2016.
We are using the latest version.
It's a stable solution.
It's a scalable product. We have approximately 3,000 users in our organization.
We plan to continue to use this solution.
We have not contacted technical support.
The initial setup was straightforward. It was easy to install.
The deployment took three to six months.
We have a team of 50 admins for deployment and maintenance.
We had the help of a system integrator.
Definitely, I would recommend this solution to others who are interested in using it.
I would rate Windows Server an eight out of ten.
We use Windows Server to host applications, host files, emails, Windows server emails, and data exchange. But for the most part, we use it to host applications, directory services, and DNS services.
I like the views in the user interface.
It would help if Microsoft made it lighter to run on the servers and made troubleshooting much easier. I have to deal with unexpected errors and faults that happen in Windows. It also crashes.
When it's a big environment, especially in an industrialized environment, we see unexpected errors. They create instability, or unexpected errors happen in the infrastructure. You need to restart the server or restart the services. You don't know the root cause of these errors.
I've been working with Windows Server for about 20 years.
Sometimes we have to deal with unexpected errors that create instability.
Windows Server is mostly scalable. However, you run into problems if it's going to be very big. If something happens, troubleshooting it will be very difficult.
Microsoft technical support is good.
The initial setup is mostly straightforward.
The Windows Server standard edition is affordable. But the cost of the data center edition is high, especially compared to some competitors. Some competitors are offering their operating systems for free.
I would tell potential customers of Windows Server that they need to study it. They need to understand their business case very well. If features are available in Windows Server, they can safely go for it, but they need to study the design very well.
On a scale from one to ten, I would give Windows Server an eight.
We are using Windows Server 2016 for our organization's backend applications which reside in a data center. HP provides us with our Windows platforms, and we also have Unix platforms from them as well.
We have been using Windows environments since I joined my organization, which is close to 20 years now. Currently, we're doing what you can call a hosted private cloud with colocation and we are running some huge workloads using Windows Server in this cloud.
From our side, the organization's 2800 end users are mostly running Windows 10 in a highly virtualized environment. So whenever we need more resources, it takes just a couple of minutes to get it up and running.
Overall, Windows Server 2016 provides a stable environment for some of the very large workloads that it is subjected to in our organization, and it is very easy to use.
There are lots of improvements that can be brought by Microsoft, although for us Windows Server works mostly as expected. For how we're using Windows Server, security is a top priority, so when talking security, it can always be improved upon, no matter what.
Then there's the performance side, which is not bad, but we are currently looking to increase capacity and we have found that we need to enhance the hardware to get the performance we are looking for. Because of this, we are going to be refreshing the hardware and moving to new infrastructure in the next few weeks.
I have been using Windows Server for many years now.
It is very stable.
We have enterprise support with them which I cannot personally comment on.
We are running a form of Windows Servers, from our side, which are highly virtualized. So from where we're sitting, to provision Windows Server takes just a couple of clicks and it is up and running.
For the backend systems where we implement Windows Server at the data center, the entire IT team is around 120 people. Then, from a user perspective, much of it is self-service, meaning users can request to provision as needed from the pool of virtualized resources.
Our current license is an enterprise license agreement which gives you a whole lot of possibility, especially when you go through an R&D process. For example, you can provision everything, spread the service use over six months, and then wrap it up. It gives you a lot of flexibility.
Windows Server is a stable product and there's no way we will change it for something else.
I would rate Windows Server an eight out of ten.
We primarily use the solution for the Arctic directory, SharePoint, or the Information System's company.
The operating system is the solution's most valuable aspect. Many people on the team are extremely familiar with it.
We haven't had any issues with the server whatsoever. It's been very reliable.
The patching could be better within the solution. There are many updates, however, if you compare it with other parts of Windows, the patching has a different management structure.
The scalability could be improved a bit.
I've worked with a company that has had the solution on and off over the course of maybe ten years or so. I've worked with them over the last two months.
The solution is quite stable. I consider it reliable. I don't have issues with bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's been good overall.
We have at least 2000 uses on the solution currently in my organization. About 60 of those are software engineers and data scientists and other related positions.
I find the scalability to be pretty good. We don't have any issues in that sense. However, it could be a bit better.
We do plan to increase usage in the future.
Technical support is good however, you do need to sign a contract with premier support in order to get excellent service.
I don't deal with the pricing aspect of the solution and therefore can't really comment on how much it costs or if we are charged on a monthly or yearly basis.
We're just customers. We don't have a business relationship with Microsoft.
We're using both the 2012 and 2016 versions of the solution right now.
Overall, I would rate the solution eight out of ten.
