Windows Server Reviews

We are using Windows Server as an operating platform. It's an Operating system.

We host our products on the Windows Server.

The performance is good.

While it is easy to use, it could be easier. 

The performance is good but we have had some issues when we use virtual machines. Loading and processing a lot of data leads to memory-related issues. As such, while the performance is good, it could still be improved.

We are using version 2012 and it could be that other versions have improved this feature.

We are currently using Windows Server 2012. We have been using this solution for approximately 12 years.

I have no issues with the stability of the Windows Server.

It's scalable. I am satisfied with the scalability of this solution.

We don't have plans to increase our usage.

We don't deal with Microsoft support directly. Our service team is in contact with them if there is an issue.

Previously, I did not use another solution.

The installation was straightforward and easy.

We have a team of server maintenance and network engineers to maintain this solution.

We had help from the Server team to implement this solution.

Licensing fees are paid on a yearly basis.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I  would rate Windows Server an eight out of ten.

This solution can be used for a lot of things, such as email, file servers, authentication, network access protocol, DNS, active directory, and accessing the main controllers.

The main features are ease of use and simple administration. 

 I have been using this solution for a couple of years.

I have found the stability to be good but it could improve.

The solution is scalable and we plan to increase usage.

I have used Linux Red Hat previously.

The installation is straightforward and takes approximately 10 minutes.

I have done the implementation myself but sometimes I require assistance because some environments have a lot of servers. The more servers you have the more administrators you will need for the maintenance.

There is a license required and it is on an annual basis.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Windows Server a seven out of ten.

We are providing services to our clients using this solution.

The only problem we have faced is when we are upgrading the solution it is complex. 

I have been using this solution for more than 20 years.

The solution is stable.

My whole company is using the solution and we plan to continue using it.

The technical support could have a faster response.

We have been installing the solution for years and it has always been straightforward.

There is a license required for this solution.

I rate Windows Server a six out of ten.

We use it for a system that we have in our company. We are using Windows Server 2016.

It is stable and scalable.

It is not easy to use. It can be more user-friendly to make our routine work a bit easy.

It could also be cheaper.

I have been using this solution for four or five years. 

It is stable.

It is scalable. We have around 1,000 users.

Support is handled by another department.

We didn't use any other solution.

I didn't handle its installation, but based on what I know, it was easy to install.

We install and maintain it with the help of another team in our company. They have three engineers for deployment and maintenance.

It could be cheaper. Its licensing is on a yearly basis.

I would recommend this solution. I would rate Windows Server an eight out of ten.

We used Windows Server for file sharing and centralized authentication.

We stopped using Microsoft Server in 2012 due to hardware failure and licensing costs. For these reasons, we decided to move to open-source solutions.

Compared to other solutions, the ease of administration is great. 

In regard to the next release, I would like to see a more scalable solution. I would also like to see any future developments on the market because there was a time when most companies would run away from centralized authentication systems, like Active Directory — they moved to cloud solutions. If the service could be better integrated with the Azure Cloud, I think it would be a plus for Windows.

I used Windows Server from 2003 until 2012.

Windows Server is absolutely stable.

I can't comment on the scalability as we were only using two to three servers and we never attempted to scale out any further.

The technical support is okay. As I have a special relationship with them, It's quite easy for me to get a hold of them. 

I started with FreeBSD, then moved to Solaris. Right now I am only using and recommending Linux.

The installation was easy compared to other operating systems, but the documentation part took longer than usual because I typically specialize in Linux-based operations.

I usually handle the implementation myself. If I encounter a specific issue then I may have to apply for a consultant.

Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of eight. If your environment requires it, I would absolutely recommend Windows Server.

I use this solution for running applications that my clients use.

The solution is user-friendly, the UI looks good, and there are new versions every year. Each new version is very different, better, and cleaner.

I have been using the solution for five years.

We have not had an issue with the stability of this solution. However, there could be some improvements.

The scalability is good.

I was satisfied with the technical support from Microsoft.

The installation is very easy.

I did the implementation of the solution.

I rate Windows Server a nine out of ten.

We use a variety of applications that are hosted on our Windows Server.

This product works well for the applications that we have hosted on it.

Stability-wise, there is room for improvement.

We have been working with Windows Server since it was first released.

This is a scalable product. We have thousands of users.

I have not been in contact with technical support.

We have an in-house team responsible for deployment and maintenance.

This is a product I can recommend and as far as I know, we plan to continue using Windows Server in the future.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We use Windows Server for hosting web pages, our SQL databases, and other things.

The interface is easy to use.

We had some complaints about the initial setup.

We have been using Windows Server for a couple of years.

This is a stable product.

We have approximately 600 users and there are two engineers responsible for management.

I have no direct experience with Microsoft technical support.

We do not have any Linux-based systems.

This is a normal installation and the initial setup is of average complexity.

It did not take too long to install, although we had some complaints while doing it.

I installed it myself.

Licensing fees are paid on an annual basis, and the price could be improved.

Overall, this is a good product and I recommend it.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

It's easy to set up and deploy. 

It could be more secure. We don't like it because if you compare it to Linux, Linux is better. 

We have been using Windows Server for over 20 years.

Scalability depends on the project. We have more than 1,000 users in our organization.

The initial setup is straightforward. 

I don't install Windows Server by myself anymore. We have a full Department for that.

We pay for the license every month.

I would recommend this solution to potential users.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Windows Server an eight. 

We use the solution as a server for our information at our company.

The most valuable features I have found to be the flexibility and wide range of support training available.

In the future, there should be better protection for this solution.

I have been using the solution for approximately 20 years.

The solution is stable. However, you can receive a lot of cyberattacks. We need to invest more in security when we are using Windows. It tends to be the target of attacks and hacks compared to other operating systems, such as Linux. 

We have approximately 400 users using the solution in my organization.

We used Ubuntu Linux previously.

The installation of the solution is easy. The time depends on what you are going to configure on the server. The install itself can be done in approximately 10 minutes.

We did the implementation ourselves and we use a team of two developers and three administrators for maintenance.

I would recommend this solution. However, I would advise investing in more security measures. We plan to continue using the solution in the future.

I rate Windows Server a seven out of ten.