Windows Server Reviews

Windows Server can be used for any kind of application. It is an operating system that supports enterprise applications. There is no application that doesn't go with Windows.

It could be more stable. Windows has certain problems that Unix platforms don't have. It requires more administrative effort as compared to Unix. I don't know why Microsoft has not changed that. It generates a lot of trash data, so slowly and steadily, you find more and more space being utilized. There is some kind of administrative load, which doesn't happen with Unix.

I have been using this solution for many years.

It is stable, but its stability can be better.

We have a maximum of 50 or 60 users. 

We didn't use their support much. 

It was very easy to install. The time period for installation depends on the complexity. If we want to simply install with the default option, it doesn't take much time. If you want to enable all of the service options that Windows provides, such as SNMP, it will take longer. If you have to install IAS and all such things, it will take time.

I would recommend this solution to others. We plan to keep using it.

I would rate Windows Server a seven out of ten.

We use these servers for databases and applications.

The most valuable feature of this solution is the ESRP that is used with the Windows Platform.

Windows Platforms become rather complicated. We started with the Windows Platform because they simplified it, but now, it has become quite complicated.

The administration has become quite heavy and also the specialization. 

We are a rather small factory, not a big system. We are small with a thousand employees, and we need a simplified environment.

In the next release, I would like to see the administration simplified.

I have been using Windows Server for more than 20 years. 

The version we are using is quite new, 2020.

Windows Server is stable.

It is scalable, but the administration becomes quite complicated.

We have not used the technical support, we have had contact with the third-party partners.

The initial setup of Windows Server is straightforward.

In our country, the Windows platform is widespread, which means there is a high amount of usage. We primarily use Windows Solutions. Some also use Linux, but Linux is the minority.

I would rate Windows Server a seven out of ten.

We are in the waste logistics industry and we are using this product as the central server for our file systems. The SQL server is running on top of this.

Windows Server could be more secure.

We have been using Windows Server for six or seven years.

This is quite a stable product.

Windows Server is scalable and we have six users in the company. We plan to increase our usage in the future.

I don't have any experience with technical support.

I did not use another similar product before this one.

The installation is quite straightforward.

We completed the deployment ourselves.

I was responsible for the deployment and also handle maintenance.

This is not an expensive product.

I can recommend Windows Server.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

We use this solution for common management and group policy management. Within our organization, there are between 300 to 400 people using this solution and we intend to expand and continue using Windows Server in the future.

The user interface could be simplified. Sometimes I feel like there are too many things going on at once. It should be easier to navigate and find the functions that I am trying to implement. 

I have been using this solution for roughly 20 years.

Windows Server is reasonably stable.

The technical support is okay. Sometimes Microsoft cannot answer our questions quickly or precisely. There are times when we need to trouble-shoot on our own.

The initial setup was straightforward. We had it fully installed within one or two hours.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of eight.

I primarily use Windows Server as a hypervisor, running Hyper-V.

I would like to see the security features improved in the future.

I have been using Windows Server for about 15 years.

This is a stable product and we plan to continue using it in the future.

There are more than 10,000 users for the services that we have running.

I have not needed to contact technical support for Windows Server.

We only use Microsoft products, so we did not use another product before this one.

The initial setup with Microsoft products is always straightforward. The length of time for deployment depends on the services that are being implemented.

In some cases, I use a consultant to assist with deployment. However, this is not always the case because our in-house team can also do it.

We have about five people in our team for deployment.

We did not evaluate options by other vendors. Microsoft is a well-known brand and the only company to use for some services.

This is a good product and one that I can recommend.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We primarily use Windows Server for Citrix desktops and domain controllers.

The domain controller features are useful.

The price should be reduced.

I have been using Windows Server for 10 years.

Windows server is a stable product and we will continue to use it.

Scalability has not been a problem. In one of the jobs I was doing, there were 700 users.

I have never had to log a case with Microsoft so I don't have any experience with technical support.

I have always used just only Windows.

The installation is straightforward and it takes about 20 minutes to deploy.

It is a manual installation and I handle the deployment myself.

The licensing fees are expensive.

This is a product that I can recommend.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We're primarily using the solution mostly for the file server and communication and so on.

Every time they perform a new release, the solution gets better and better.

In the past year, Microsoft has done a lot of work around security. There have been a lot of improvements made in that respect.

Overall, the solution works well.

Right now what is needed on the server-side is an easier release process. Every year or every third year they are releasing a newer version and it could go smoother.

The solution lacks a few features here and there.

Although they've done a good job updating security, there's more to be done, and they should continue improving this aspect of the product.

We've been using the solution for what feels like forever. I can't recall a time we didn't actually use it.

The solution is reliable. I believe it to be stable. There aren't bugs or glitches that affect it. It doesn't seem to crash or freeze. It's good for the most part. I can't complain.

The solution is scalable. You can expand it if you need to, for the most part.

I don't have any experience with Microsoft's technical support. I wouldn't be able to speak to how effective they are at troubleshooting or solving issues. The solution works well, and we haven't had any issues, so there's been no reason to reach out. That probably speaks to how well the solution runs in general.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward. You just click through, and it's pretty easy.

That said, some setups seem to have some more complex configurations. Most of the time, things are pretty straightforward.

We're just a customer. We don't have a business relationship with Microsoft.

We're using a standard out of the box deployment.

We always update the solution to the newest possible version. We update regularly.

I'd advise that new users learn about the solution before jumping in. It's always good to take a class or study up on it a bit so that you know what you can do with the server and how to navigate around in it. It's a good idea to take a certification course.

That said, users can always Google answers or use the Microsoft Flow tool.

I'd absolutely recommend the solution. I'd rate the solution nine out of ten overall. There's always room for improvement, of course. However, generally speaking, it hasn't given us any issues and does what we need it to do. There are always ways to improve security, stability, and scalability.

Windows Server is very easy to use.

The command-line interface should be improved. Using the command line is less-resource intensive so we use it sometimes. The additional RAM and CPU usage needed by the GUI is something that we were not used to after using Linux. When I switched to the command line, I found it more difficult than Linux.

I have been working with Windows Server for several years, since 2013.

Windows Server is a stable operating system and I haven't had any problems with it in that regard. For example, I had ransomware on my computer and even when I was logged in as an administrator, it did not affect the server.

I have not needed to contact the Microsoft technical support team.

I am currently learning about different Linux servers and I am finding it very difficult compared to Windows Server.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

Most of the time we use it for user account access. We also deploy Microsoft on machines that must run on Windows. Beyond that, we use it for the remote desktop, and obviously for its mobile Microsoft features.

The active directory that the server provides is the solution's most valuable aspect.

The solution continues to improve and develop and we appreciate that it's always evolving. We've been working with the solution so long, we've seen a lot of changes for the better happen over time.

The pricing aspect of the solution needs improvement. It could be lowered. Over time, the pricing itself has fluctuated, and now, especially pricing around mobile aspects of the solution really seems to be driving everything up.

They also need to work on the license model for virtualization.

The solution could offer higher availability.

Users would benefit if the solution offered better management features.

I've been using the solution for 15 years. I've used it from version NT 4.4 to version Studio 1.6.

The solution is quite stable and continues to grow its stability reputation year over year. The latest version was much more stable than the previous versions.

The solution is easy to scale. If a company needs to expand this solution, they can do so easily. We have a variety of customers that may have as many as 1,000 users at any given time. We typically sell to medium-sized enterprises across three different localities.

Our company uses the solution quite extensively on a regular basis.

We have reached out to Microsoft's support for critical issues in the past to get their assistance.

When we get the support from Microsoft's Shanghai division, the support is very good. I would say, in the case is Iraq to the other regions, such as India, the support is not as good there.

We've used different solutions in the past, however, they don't really fit with most our use cases, and we feel much more comfortable with Microsoft.

The initial setup is easy. It offers a quick download time and easy deployment. I would describe the process as straightforward. It's not complex.

IN a physical environment, deployment wouldn't take more than an hour. On average it might take 30 to 45 minutes. The virtual deployment is much, much quicker.

You only need one person to deploy the solution.

We're resellers, and we sell IT products, so we're able to deploy the solution ourselves. If our clients need help, we can certainly help them deploy the service as well.

If you buy a standard license, you can only buy two towards your machine. If you need more than that, you need to buy another type of licensing. It changes the cost and makes it much more expensive.

We handle both on-prem and cloud deployments. We're in IT services, so we often sell these solutions to our clients. We use the Windows Server ourselves as well.

I'd recommend the solution. It works well, however, users still have to understand Windows and the Windows interface in order to use it correctly.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

It's a platform, so it brings on a system for the servers themselves. I have multiple services running over Microsoft Servers, for example.SAP, Exchange . All of my services already running are running over this platform.

I also using it occasionally for application access.

The most valuable aspect of the solution is its operating system. It's just like Linux or UNIX. 

I'm using all the features within it and find them all quite helpful.

I love using it for the DHCP server, DNS services, and using a computer to map sites on our domain.

The security should be improved, specifically from port security & Allowed protocols,The improvement should retire all marked ports & protocols as a security breach to enhance platform risks & stability . 

Overall, from a security perspective, Microsoft needs to improve.

The Server platform GUI seems to take up a lot of resources unnecessarily.

I've been using the solution for twenty plus years for now.

While the solution hasn't always been stable, starting from the 2012 version, it's increasingly gotten more stable.

Since the 2012 version, we find it to be quite stable. The OS between the resources, between applicators, technical support, etc., is all very easy to handle. We don't have issues with it; it seems to be quite reliable.

The company here is using this solution. Sometimes it's for remote access, however, even if they don't use it for that, they already using is as it's implemented over the Windows Server.

I'm not sure if we'll be scaling any more as everyone is using it.

Registration is very easy, so we didn't need technical support for that aspect of the solution. However, it still requires continual study in order to use everything properly. In terms of speaking with someone directly, I don't have any information about that, and therefore can't comment on the quality of their service.

The initial implementation was not complex. I'd describe the setup as straightforward.

You have to sign off the approach of the planned service, make a timeline, and start to implement a POC. Once you're done with that, you can apply for it online. 

For Microsoft platforms, we have not needed any outside assistance. For the other services, like ERP,  we are already using consultants for implementation.

We're just a customers. We've been using multiple versions of the solution up to the 2016 version.

I would recommend the Microsoft platform and Windows Servers in particular. It's great for implementation into any environment and is easy to use. They have enhanced some security, however, there needs more done in that respect.

That said, from an efficiency, performance, business continuity, and integration standpoint, I'd highly recommend the Microsoft platform. While Linux has a better security layer, if that is your concern, be aware it will require investment in a lot of resources, training. 

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. To get higher marks, the solution really needs to do something about the GUI & its security, which currently consumes a lot of resources & allowing breaching.