Windows Server Reviews

Windows Server is the operating system we run on our servers. We use it in the IT department, primarily as the OS for our servers.

Windows Server is the OS for servers in our IT environment. Its features depend on the servers we're running, such as web servers or file servers. It's a well-known server OS, making it suitable for all our needs. For security, we have no issues as we use several security applications like BlackPoint and Kaspersky, along with backup systems, and we keep the server up-to-date.

I think there is room for improvement in the stability of older versions. Additionally, Windows Server could be more power-efficient, especially for individuals doing labs or studies on personal computers or laptops.

I have been working with Windows Server for eight or nine years.

I have not faced any deployment issues.

The stability is better with the newer versions like 2019. Older versions like the 2008 servers had several issues. The current version is stable, and I rate it between eight and nine.

Windows Server is very scalable. We use it everywhere, and it serves approximately two thousand users in our company as a backend service.

I have never contacted customer service.

Windows Server has been my only experience.

The initial setup process for Windows Server is very straightforward and easy. There is plenty of documentation and tutorials available online to aid in the setup.

I did not evaluate other operating systems before using Windows Server.

Windows Server is a well-known and well-established OS, heavily used in organizations in Kuwait. It's the only option for companies, with a usage rate of 95 to 98 percent. Anyone wanting to work in a reputable organization should gain experience with Windows Server. I rate the latest versions of Windows Server at around eight or nine, providing room for improvement.

On-premises

We are using Windows Server to connect our client software. We use it to access client systems and work on SQL databases.

Rather than purchasing and setting up infrastructure, we are using Windows Server, which obviously saves some costs.

Windows Server is fulfilling our daily work-life purposes. We use it to connect to client systems and are happy with the performance and its features. 

Also, it has a user-friendly interface. Rather than purchasing and setting up infrastructure, we are using Windows Server, which obviously saves some costs.

Sometimes the performance goes down, which might be due to the stability zone or network issues. It can also depend on our network.

I have been working with Windows Server for more than eight years.

Sometimes the performance goes down, so it may be due to the stability zone or network issues. It can also depend on our network.

I had the opportunity to connect with Microsoft support. They resolved our problems within the defined SLA. I would rate my experience nine out of ten.

Positive

I haven't done any initial setup on it. Whatever we are getting from our vendor, I'm using the same application. We don't have access to install and setup.

I am not an expert in Windows Server, however, am aware of using it alongside Azure virtual machines.

I would rate Windows Server nine out of ten. It has a good user interface and is user-friendly. I would definitely recommend it.

On-premises

Windows Server has been idle for a while, but it is quite stable for running your application, specifically web-based applications, databases, or any front-end applications. And it's in the industry you are used to, along with Flex. Newer and enhanced versions are being introduced because Windows has recently started to design as per the cloud environment so that it can integrate well with Azure Cloud. If you are running the Windows Server and SQL on Azure, you will get the benefits of saving costs and licenses. Also, it can be tightly integrated with cloud services so that it can manage the patching, backup, and everything end to end if you talk about the life cycle of an operating system.

If Windows could make the OS part lighter, especially starting and restarting the Windows Server, which needs to be quick, then it would be great since this is an area where the tool lacks a bit. The tool should also offer more security.

I have experience with Windows Server for more than ten years.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

Windows has had a long journey since it started off in 1998 and now it has been almost 22 years. From the last decade, the tool has improved a lot, and offers good stability. There are no errors, and problems coming up in the tool like how it used to come up in the initial days.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

The product's initial setup phase is pretty straightforward and simple without any challenges.

For the on-prem version, you need to go for a perpetual license. An organization can buy licenses in a bundle. If I am planning to run ten operating systems, I will buy a pack of ten licenses, which will be cost-effective for me. If one goes bad, I can get another one by just putting it to use the same license, meaning I can reuse the license if something goes bad on any of the PCs. When it goes to the cloud, I can purchase the monthly licenses from Windows.

In terms of the product's abilities associated with virtualization, I would say that it is actually the biggest leap in technologies when, earlier, whatever applications you needed to run, you had to spin up a physical server. When the virtualization started happening, you could run multiple servers on one physical server. Multiple VMs can have different applications and tiers. Virtualization is the best thing that happened, and a lot of people and organizations use it.

The best part of the security feature in the tool is the firewall because it is the first line of defense for the operating system since you can lock down your OS to a certain level and only allow one or two ports for whatever communication you want, and the rest can all be blocked for safety purposes. You keep getting security updates every month or every second Tuesday so that you can keep your environment up to date and safe from outside malicious activities. Microsoft is always on top of security updates, and the tool is very careful to keep the environment safe.

Speaking about the benefits of AD in Windows Server, I would say that AD is actually the backbone of any organization. AD was, in fact, my first love. When I started working with technologies, I was baffled to see how strong and amazing the technology AD had, how it would let me spin up users, groups, and objects, and how you manage those objects because those are very important areas. In any organization, the most important thing is the security of your identity. For any user who is trying to access any of the computers in the organization, it is very important for the company to authenticate and authorize the user to ensure the identity of the person. He or she has to move with the proper way of writing a username and the right password. There are a lot of security features in the tool. If a person is trying to enter a system with some fake passwords, then there are lockouts. After three incorrect passwords, the account gets logged out, and in such a manner, you can secure that entity.

The tool's integration feature with the existing IT ecosystem has been easy. The integrations are absolutely fine because Windows is designed to allow for easy integrations, even though Linux is also getting integrated easily these days. Mostly, Windows carries a GUI. For users, it is easier to maintain Windows Server than some other tools.

I would just suggest others always try to use the latest OS or operating system for servers and laptops because the latest servers come with new features and security enhancements, which can keep one's environment safe. If one weak PC or one weak OS is there in your environment and if it is outdated and not getting security updates, then it can be hacked, or there could be some virus that can try to harm your network and infect other operating systems. It is very important that each and every operating system is up to date.

I rate the overall tool a ten out of ten.

I use Windows Server to run our IT infrastructure. Almost everything is located on Windows Server, including our SQL database, our system, web server, and virtualization via Hyper-V.

Windows Server offers easy-to-use features, support, a web interface with a Windows interface, and security. The security features, such as Windows Defender, are excellent. I can manage the firewalls on the server easily, open or close ports to manage security traffic, and use encryption on the hard disk to keep data secure.

I have been using Windows Server for about twenty-five years, starting with Windows 2003.

I would rate the stability of Windows Server between eight and nine. Sometimes Microsoft publishes updates that aren't compatible with the system, which they then pull back. In general, stability is between eight and nine.

I rate the scalability of Windows Server as eight out of ten. There are some systems that do not work on Windows or are complicated to deploy on Windows, especially those that operate in a Linux environment and cannot be installed on Windows.

I had one experience with Microsoft's technical support, which was very good. I would rate them nine or ten. I don't have extensive experience with IT support because I don't often need it. Most issues can be resolved through public websites and forums. When I had an issue with Hyper-V, the support was excellent.

Positive

I use Red Hat Linux alongside Windows Server.

The installation is straightforward and easy to install.

My colleagues and I deploy the servers ourselves.

I get the features I am looking for from the price, despite it being a bit expensive. I benefit from Microsoft 365, Azure, and the features and services I need.

The price of Microsoft products has become expensive over the last two years.

I recommend Windows Server to others. Based on my experience, I rate this solution as a ten out of ten.

Hybrid Cloud

Microsoft Azure

The complete setup is running on the Microsoft platform, including Active Directory and Azure, and servers which are running various applications for business purposes.

In my opinion, the ease of use of Windows Server is the most effective feature. The recent versions of 2009 and 2002 show valuable enhancements, making Windows Server highly effective and reliable.

I find the recent versions of 2009 and 2002 to be good. Currently, I do not have any suggestions for improvement.

I have about fifteen years of experience with Windows Server.

I find Windows Server to be very stable. Very rarely do I see any blue screens or crashes.

Windows Server is highly scalable; I can upgrade the hardware capacity or storage capacity smoothly. I rate the scalability nine out of ten.

I find technical support to take some time, and the answers or resolutions are not straightforward. Sometimes necessary people may not join, and I end up needing someone else. I rate support between seven and eight.

I find the initial setup to be straightforward.

Based on my overall experience, including the service support, I rate Windows Server between nine and ten. I definitely recommend Windows Server to others.

On-premises

All our IT infrastructure is Windows. We run our banking applications on Windows Server, along with Oracle databases. In addition, our digital banking section utilizes AI and Copilot to enhance processing in the bank and serve customers.

Windows Server meets our needs; no one works without Microsoft these days. We run applications on top of Windows Server, and all our banking applications use Windows Server. Although we have some Oracle databases and Unix systems, most of our servers are Windows Server, totaling around seven hundred. Our strategy is to move everything to the cloud, decreasing the operational cost.

I don't know exactly how to enhance Windows Server, but it meets our requirements. We can work with both virtual and physical setups. If there are new features from Microsoft, we are happy to test them.

We have had an enterprise agreement with Microsoft since 2008 for Windows Server.

Windows Server is stable.

I would rate the scalability nine out of ten. It has supported our organization's growth well.

Support is okay, but sometimes it takes time to get assistance unless it is opened as a security issue. I would rate Microsoft tech support seven out of ten.

Neutral

For me, it's only Windows Server. Our organization's database admins use other systems, but I have only used Windows Server.

We are familiar with Windows Server. There are no hassles, especially with virtual machines, which take about ten to fifteen minutes to set up.

We observe cost savings through virtualization and the use of Microsoft Cloud, which decreases running costs.

Previously, server licenses were purchased. Now, it's core-based licensing, which costs more. This is now Microsoft's licensing approach.

Without the need for recommendations, everyone uses Windows Server. I rate Windows Server nine out of ten.

Hybrid Cloud

Other

At the office, the main use case for Windows Server involves different functions, for example, file server or firewall and the IIS server, Microsoft Internet Server, Internet Information Services. Basically, we use it as a file server for other applications on the server.

The best features of Windows Server include the interface. The interface is so easy and friendly. I know the Linux environment, but I think the user interface of Windows Server is the best.

Our customers use the Active Directory integration in Windows Server, and our application connects to this Active Directory.

I don't have experience with Windows Server containers and Kubernetes for deploying cloud-native applications.

I cannot provide specific improvements for Windows Server because I don't have extensive experience with Hyper-V operations. I have only completed two tests.

I have 10 to 15 years of experience with Windows Server. I have worked with versions since 2008, 2012, 2016, and the current version 2019.

I don't use or have had any contact with Microsoft support in the last few years.

In this case, it saves money.

Regarding the amount saved, I would estimate the resource savings to be about 50 to 70%, approximately 60%.

Regarding pricing or licensing for Windows Server, there are options for CPU or core numbers. There are licensing options for on-premise and other options available in the cloud.

I think the pricing is expensive because if you know how to administer or manage Linux, a file server is cheaper to use. However, if you know how to administer Linux, then Windows Server is still the best option for its friendly interface.

I am familiar with Hyper-V technology but I tested it some years ago. I am currently using Oracle VM VirtualBox, and the other option is VMware.

I am referring to Hyper-V technology within Windows Server.

We are a Lenovo administrator and purchased a Lenovo server five or six years ago.

In the company, we have five servers with Windows Server and we are users of Microsoft 365, and we use other Microsoft Office software.

The main cloud provider for Windows Server is Nexus.

Some customers use enterprise version, while others are standard version users.

We have services for other companies in different business sectors including finance, education, and manufacturing.

We are not managing the Active Directory services; we are just users for this security. Our application connects to the customer's Active Directory and validates credentials with this service.

We have Windows Defender on laptops without needing any other tools.

We have sensitive information at our organization, and we maintain a backup on Amazon for this information.

For documentation, I find resources on the internet, YouTube, and Microsoft Docs, as there is extensive information available online.

I receive help from colleagues in the office, as some collaborators and employees manage this information and administration.

My company acts as resellers for Microsoft. For selling licenses for Windows Server or other Microsoft products, we contact Nexus, which is the big partner for Microsoft.

I would rate Windows Server eight out of ten.

On-premises

Other

Even though there were changes in my job role or company, I continued to use Windows Server.

In recent times, improvements are required since everything is going to be very granular. If you give access to a particular group or particular user in a particular product line and if you want someone to be a part of that group which has different rights from another team, like an SME, who has more rights compared to an ordinary person, and if a new person or novice person comes in, he will have lesser rights.

Nowadays, everybody wants a user-friendly dashboard and interface. People don't want to know about complex commands and want everything to be available in just a few clicks on the dashboard, where they can see the top trends, what commands are being used, how many logins, and other such related information. The integration process should be smooth if I have Microsoft Active Directory deployed on an on-premises model and I want to connect it to a Microsoft Active Directory on the cloud. Even if you are involved in complex things on the back end, from the front end, the tool should be made easier for users to understand so that they can identify the credentials or keys they use.

If you want to integrate or connect with multiple integration points or ecosystems, then such a process should be something that is easily doable for users. Whether the tool is connected to an API, on-premises model, or cloud, it should be made a process that is easy for users.

I have experience with Windows Server. I have used Windows 95, Windows 98, Windows 2000, and Windows NT.

When it comes to volume, the performance decreases. I have seen a lot of companies claim that their tools can support a certain amount of capacity, but when we, as users, come near the prescribed capacity limit and are unable to use the product, the company claims that the capacity limit details were given to them by their engineering team. I feel that the engineering team hardly tested the product at the required level to see if the product could support it when the actual production load came to the level they figured out earlier. If a particular product claims to be able to support 1,000 units or users, I see the performance decreasing after the tool is used by 800 or 900 users. If you go for a storage tool, the company claims that its product will support one petabyte, but when users actually have that much capacity, they realize that the product doesn't offer much support.

Around seven people in my company use the product.

My company uses the solution's technical support if we are not able to solve a problem related to the product.

Since migrating to the product from another solution, my company faces challenges in using complex security support when there is a high volume.

If an architecture is complex, the setup phase takes time. If you need to integrate multiple touchpoints, then the setup process takes time.

The deployment process can be done with the help of our company's in-house team.

Speaking about how the product enhances our company's data management capabilities, I would say that based on my long experience with the product, I feel that presently, the solution is totally different. Nowadays, users get Version 21H2 (OS build 22000)​​ Windows 11, which is totally different from its past offerings. Previously, Windows Server fell under a totally different domain or technology, but currently, it's a totally different tool.

I would say that I have stopped using the product at an individual level and have started working with the team in my company that takes care of its deployment and manages the virtual environments.

The tool has been beneficial for our company's IT infrastructure since I feel that Windows is preferred by many for the domain controller and for using SSO authentication along with Active Directory services. With SSO authentication and Active Directory services, users' contact domains and everything are available. It can help users benefit from the tool while sharing authentication, user access, rollback, and other areas.

In terms of security features, users need more in areas like authentication and location.

There is no multi-vendor support to help deal with the area of integration.

I rate the product a seven out of ten.