Performance: Windows 2003 64 bits Terminal Services + Office 2003

Discussion in 'Windows 64bit' started by Lolo, Aug 4, 2006.

  1. Lolo

    Lolo Guest

    Anybody has tested a Windows 2003 Server Enterprise Edition 64 bits
    with Terminal Services, Office 2003 and Internet Explorer as published
    applications? In other words, is better Windows 2003 32 bits if you
    plan run a applications a 32 bits? What's the difference performance??

    In my case, the real problem is the famous limit of 4 GB RAM. My server
    has 6 GB.

    Exists the flag /1G in boot.ini to force the kernel run in 3GB an the
    aplication in 1 GB??
    Lolo, Aug 4, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Yes, I've run Server x64 with Terminal Services. This is a key target
    audience for x64, which performs much better than 32-bit as a Terminal
    Server. Office 2003 loads and runs just fine, as does OE.

    There is no such switch. But not to worry - with x64 Edition as your base OS
    you won't need it.

    You might find this whitepaper I wrote for the launch of interest. Terminal
    services was a key deployment scenario discussed in it.
    http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/64bit/x64/deploy.mspx Also, there
    are good FAQs and additional technical content there, and linked off my blog
    site, that can help you understand the benefits (and concerns) of x64
    Edition.

    (BTW, you didn't specify, but you do NOT want to run the Itanium 64-bit
    version of Windows Server as a Terminal Server. It's a bad fit.)

    --
    Charlie.
    http://msmvps.com/xperts64


    Lolo wrote:
    > Anybody has tested a Windows 2003 Server Enterprise Edition 64 bits
    > with Terminal Services, Office 2003 and Internet Explorer as published
    > applications? In other words, is better Windows 2003 32 bits if you
    > plan run a applications a 32 bits? What's the difference performance??
    >
    > In my case, the real problem is the famous limit of 4 GB RAM. My server
    > has 6 GB.
    >
    > Exists the flag /1G in boot.ini to force the kernel run in 3GB an the
    > aplication in 1 GB??
    Charlie Russel - MVP, Aug 4, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Lolo

    mabra Guest

    Re: Performance: Windows 2003 64 bits Terminal Services + Office2003

    Hi !

    From my point of view - and sad to say - the time is not really ripe
    for x64TS.

    TS is mostly used to replace fat clients in the office environment, ok,
    not only. In the office environment, you'll usually have all that
    difficult things like printer/scanner combinations, copiers with scan
    and print functions and so on. I would like to migrate to x64, but I
    found not one driver, which supports x64 :-(

    Even MS does'nt offer the "Office Document Printer" as a x64 version ....

    Have a look for your special applications also and test them before you
    go this way. There are lot of, which are failing, mostly due to
    incorrect use of the WIN32API. A correct written x86 program usually
    works fine and without problems. Regard:I am testing Mozialla Firefox
    and this is the only application, which crashes on my box regularly :-(

    Just my two cents ;-)
    Manfred

    Lolo wrote:
    > Anybody has tested a Windows 2003 Server Enterprise Edition 64 bits
    > with Terminal Services, Office 2003 and Internet Explorer as published
    > applications? In other words, is better Windows 2003 32 bits if you
    > plan run a applications a 32 bits? What's the difference performance??
    >
    > In my case, the real problem is the famous limit of 4 GB RAM. My server
    > has 6 GB.
    >
    > Exists the flag /1G in boot.ini to force the kernel run in 3GB an the
    > aplication in 1 GB??
    >
    mabra, Aug 4, 2006
    #3
  4. Re: Performance: Windows 2003 64 bits Terminal Services + Office 2

    Hi Charlie,

    Question for you. We have just installed x64 version of Windows 2003 server
    and will make it a Terminal Server. Should the 32bit Windows 2003 license
    server be able to serve licenses to the x64 Terminal Server?

    Bob

    "Charlie Russel - MVP" wrote:

    > Yes, I've run Server x64 with Terminal Services. This is a key target
    > audience for x64, which performs much better than 32-bit as a Terminal
    > Server. Office 2003 loads and runs just fine, as does OE.
    >
    > There is no such switch. But not to worry - with x64 Edition as your base OS
    > you won't need it.
    >
    > You might find this whitepaper I wrote for the launch of interest. Terminal
    > services was a key deployment scenario discussed in it.
    > http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/64bit/x64/deploy.mspx Also, there
    > are good FAQs and additional technical content there, and linked off my blog
    > site, that can help you understand the benefits (and concerns) of x64
    > Edition.
    >
    > (BTW, you didn't specify, but you do NOT want to run the Itanium 64-bit
    > version of Windows Server as a Terminal Server. It's a bad fit.)
    >
    > --
    > Charlie.
    > http://msmvps.com/xperts64
    >
    >
    > Lolo wrote:
    > > Anybody has tested a Windows 2003 Server Enterprise Edition 64 bits
    > > with Terminal Services, Office 2003 and Internet Explorer as published
    > > applications? In other words, is better Windows 2003 32 bits if you
    > > plan run a applications a 32 bits? What's the difference performance??
    > >
    > > In my case, the real problem is the famous limit of 4 GB RAM. My server
    > > has 6 GB.
    > >
    > > Exists the flag /1G in boot.ini to force the kernel run in 3GB an the
    > > aplication in 1 GB??

    >
    >
    >
    =?Utf-8?B?Qm9i?=, Oct 24, 2006
    #4
  5. Re: Performance: Windows 2003 64 bits Terminal Services + Office 2

    I don't know of any reason why not.

    --
    Charlie.
    http://msmvps.com/xperts64


    "Bob" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Hi Charlie,
    >
    > Question for you. We have just installed x64 version of Windows 2003
    > server
    > and will make it a Terminal Server. Should the 32bit Windows 2003
    > license
    > server be able to serve licenses to the x64 Terminal Server?
    >
    > Bob
    >
    > "Charlie Russel - MVP" wrote:
    >
    >> Yes, I've run Server x64 with Terminal Services. This is a key target
    >> audience for x64, which performs much better than 32-bit as a Terminal
    >> Server. Office 2003 loads and runs just fine, as does OE.
    >>
    >> There is no such switch. But not to worry - with x64 Edition as your base
    >> OS
    >> you won't need it.
    >>
    >> You might find this whitepaper I wrote for the launch of interest.
    >> Terminal
    >> services was a key deployment scenario discussed in it.
    >> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/64bit/x64/deploy.mspx Also,
    >> there
    >> are good FAQs and additional technical content there, and linked off my
    >> blog
    >> site, that can help you understand the benefits (and concerns) of x64
    >> Edition.
    >>
    >> (BTW, you didn't specify, but you do NOT want to run the Itanium 64-bit
    >> version of Windows Server as a Terminal Server. It's a bad fit.)
    >>
    >> --
    >> Charlie.
    >> http://msmvps.com/xperts64
    >>
    >>
    >> Lolo wrote:
    >> > Anybody has tested a Windows 2003 Server Enterprise Edition 64 bits
    >> > with Terminal Services, Office 2003 and Internet Explorer as published
    >> > applications? In other words, is better Windows 2003 32 bits if you
    >> > plan run a applications a 32 bits? What's the difference performance??
    >> >
    >> > In my case, the real problem is the famous limit of 4 GB RAM. My server
    >> > has 6 GB.
    >> >
    >> > Exists the flag /1G in boot.ini to force the kernel run in 3GB an the
    >> > aplication in 1 GB??

    >>
    >>
    >>
    Charlie Russel - MVP, Oct 24, 2006
    #5
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Abbyss

    win XP 32 bits on a 64 bits processor..

    Abbyss, Nov 12, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    554
    Ralph Wade Phillips
    Nov 13, 2003
  2. Tigerr

    Windows Server 2003 Terminal Services Problem

    Tigerr, Jun 18, 2004, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    417
    Toolman Tim
    Jun 19, 2004
  3. Al Dykes
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    1,106
    Tony Spadaro
    Dec 29, 2003
  4. =?Utf-8?B?SmVhbi1TdGV2ZSBTaGFrZXI=?=

    UPHClean for Windows 2003 Terminal Services 64 bit

    =?Utf-8?B?SmVhbi1TdGV2ZSBTaGFrZXI=?=, Mar 1, 2006, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    3,423
    =?Utf-8?B?SmVhbi1TdGV2ZSBTaGFrZXI=?=
    Mar 1, 2006
  5. Jordi Maycas

    windows xp64 bits and vista 64 bits beta2

    Jordi Maycas, Jun 15, 2006, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    490
    Jud Hendrix
    Jun 15, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page