«

On Wed, 10 May 2006 17:27:11 +1200, ChickenMan wrote:

> I have to build a new server, what's the benefits of 32bit vs 64bit for
> Win2k3?

Nothing - if there is no 64bit version of Windoze.

But, I imagine that the advantages would include much greater address
space, and much greater ability to move large quantities of data about
quickly.

If all you use your computer for is to type letters, then you won't really
see an advantage.


Have A Nice Cup of Tea

--
1/ Migration to Linux only costs money once. Higher Windows TCO is forever.
2/ "Shared source" is a poison pill. Open Source is freedom.
3/ Only the Windows boxes get the worms.

On Wed, 10 May 2006 20:06:00 +1200, GraB wrote:

>>All things equal and a very naive answer, for the same speed of electronics,
>>a 64 bit server would chomp through the work twice as fast.
>>
> Would it, given Win2K isn't a 64bit OS?

There is no true 64bit version of Windows.

Remember how there wasn't a true 32bit clean version of M$ Windows for
several years after Win 4.x ws released.


Have A Nice Cup of Tea

--
1/ Migration to Linux only costs money once. Higher Windows TCO is forever.
2/ "Shared source" is a poison pill. Open Source is freedom.
3/ Only the Windows boxes get the worms.

Nathan Mercer wrote:
> ChickenMan wrote:
>
>>All it's going to do is host exchange, it won't get any other software
>>loaded on it other than Win2k3 and Exchange, then upgraded to the new
>>versions upon release...
>
>
> I recommed you purchase a Server that is x64, but run Windows Server
> 2003 32bit. Then you are future proofed to migrate over to x64 bit
> version of Windows & Exchange in the future
>
>
>>Is it best to wait a while before jumping into 64 bit? Reason for this is
>>Exchange 2k7 is 64 bit only from readings...
>
>
> Exchange 2007 will only be supported on x64, correct
>
> Read these: (if you only read one, read the first link)
>
> How to choose server hardware for Exchange 2003 that can be effectively
> re-utilized for Exchange 12?
> http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/20...13/421914.aspx
>
> http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/20...18/414796.aspx
>
> http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/20...11/407529.aspx
>
> http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/20...29/416613.aspx
>
> Cheers
> Nathan
>

very interesting link....

Thanks

thing

Nathan Mercer wrote:

> ChickenMan wrote:
>> All it's going to do is host exchange, it won't get any other
>> software loaded on it other than Win2k3 and Exchange, then upgraded
>> to the new versions upon release...
>
> I recommed you purchase a Server that is x64, but run Windows Server
> 2003 32bit. Then you are future proofed to migrate over to x64 bit
> version of Windows & Exchange in the future
>
>> Is it best to wait a while before jumping into 64 bit? Reason for
>> this is Exchange 2k7 is 64 bit only from readings...
>
> Exchange 2007 will only be supported on x64, correct
>
> Read these: (if you only read one, read the first link)
>
> How to choose server hardware for Exchange 2003 that can be
> effectively re-utilized for Exchange 12?
> http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/20...13/421914.aspx
>
> http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/20...18/414796.aspx
>
> http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/20...11/407529.aspx
>
> http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/20...29/416613.aspx

Interesting domain name. Can be read a slightly different way

--
Chris Hope | www.electrictoolbox.com | www.linuxcdmall.com

On , , Thu, 11 May 2006 00:47:18 +1200, Re: 32bit vs 64bit, Have
A Nice Cup of Tea <> wrote:

>On Wed, 10 May 2006 20:06:00 +1200, GraB wrote:
>
>>>All things equal and a very naive answer, for the same speed of electronics,
>>>a 64 bit server would chomp through the work twice as fast.
>>>
>> Would it, given Win2K isn't a 64bit OS?
>
>There is no true 64bit version of Windows.
>
>Remember how there wasn't a true 32bit clean version of M$ Windows for
>several years after Win 4.x ws released.

Win 4.x has never been released.
---

On Thu, 11 May 2006 09:01:54 +1200, Chris Hope
<> wrote:

>Nathan Mercer wrote:
>
>> ChickenMan wrote:
>>> All it's going to do is host exchange, it won't get any other
>>> software loaded on it other than Win2k3 and Exchange, then upgraded
>>> to the new versions upon release...
>>
>> I recommed you purchase a Server that is x64, but run Windows Server
>> 2003 32bit. Then you are future proofed to migrate over to x64 bit
>> version of Windows & Exchange in the future
>>
>>> Is it best to wait a while before jumping into 64 bit? Reason for
>>> this is Exchange 2k7 is 64 bit only from readings...
>>
>> Exchange 2007 will only be supported on x64, correct
>>
>> Read these: (if you only read one, read the first link)
>>
>> How to choose server hardware for Exchange 2003 that can be
>> effectively re-utilized for Exchange 12?
>> http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/20...13/421914.aspx
>>
>> http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/20...18/414796.aspx
>>
>> http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/20...11/407529.aspx
>>
>> http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/20...29/416613.aspx
>
>Interesting domain name. Can be read a slightly different way

I don't think I'll be changing!

Bette Noir wrote:

> On , , Thu, 11 May 2006 00:47:18 +1200, Re: 32bit vs 64bit, Have
> A Nice Cup of Tea <> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 10 May 2006 20:06:00 +1200, GraB wrote:
>>
>>>>All things equal and a very naive answer, for the same speed of
>>>>electronics, a 64 bit server would chomp through the work twice as fast.
>>>>
>>> Would it, given Win2K isn't a 64bit OS?
>>
>>There is no true 64bit version of Windows.
>>
>>Remember how there wasn't a true 32bit clean version of M$ Windows for
>>several years after Win 4.x ws released.
>
> Win 4.x has never been released.
> ---

Win98 - My Computer - Properties: Windows 4.0.1998 etc.
WinMe - My Computer - Properties: Windows 4.9 etc.

Fran

On 2006-05-10, GraB <> wrote:
> On Wed, 10 May 2006 17:49:22 +1200, Peter <>
> wrote:
>
>>ChickenMan wrote:
>>
>>> I have to build a new server, what's the benefits of 32bit vs 64bit for
>>> Win2k3?
>>>
>>
>>All things equal and a very naive answer, for the same speed of electronics,
>>a 64 bit server would chomp through the work twice as fast.
>>
> Would it, given Win2K isn't a 64bit OS?

only if you're doing lots of integer math using 64 bit applications

it depends what services the server is providiing.


--

Bye.
Jasen

On Thu, 2006-05-11 at 00:18 +1200, Have A Nice Cup of Tea wrote:
> On Wed, 10 May 2006 17:27:11 +1200, ChickenMan wrote:
>
> > I have to build a new server, what's the benefits of 32bit vs 64bit for
> > Win2k3?
>
> Nothing - if there is no 64bit version of Windoze.
>
> But, I imagine that the advantages would include much greater address
> space, and much greater ability to move large quantities of data about
> quickly.
>
> If all you use your computer for is to type letters, then you won't really
> see an advantage.

Incorrect, if this individual is wishing to setup a server, there is
Windows 2003 in the x86-64bit edition.

Matty

On Sat, 13 May 2006 00:33:33 +1200, Kaiwai wrote:

> Incorrect, if this individual is wishing to setup a server, there is
> Windows 2003 in the x86-64bit edition.

It that individual is wishing to set up ANY server, all they need to do is
to download a CD of FreeBSD, or a few CDs of Linux - and they'll have all
the software they will ever need for running servers.


Have A Nice Cup of Tea

--
1/ Migration to Linux only costs money once. Higher Windows TCO is forever.
2/ "Shared source" is a poison pill. Open Source is freedom.
3/ Only the Windows boxes get the worms.