Specifically, I've heard that IIS6 kicks butt. In 1999, we replaced our servers with the then new Windows 2000 server and were pretty happy with it.
One small thing - the latest security alert only applied to IIS4, 5 and 5.1 and did not affect IIS6 (not enough to be the farm on IIS6 yet, maybe, but a good sign). Regards, Howie ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Randolph" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 9:15 PM Subject: Re: Windows 2003 Server > Hello Howie, > > I've not heard any glaring bad things from our users, but gosh Microsoft > just got 2000 working right, I'd wait just a bit. Most of the applications > for 2003 specific are mostly still vaporware/alphaware including the > competitor to Macromedia's communications server products. We just got rid > of our last NT 4.0 server, as it was stable and doing it's job at the > time. Microsoft wants you to do this, but I'd wait for a reason. What is > the specific benefit your looking to achieve form your upgrade? > > Kind Regards, > Mike Randolph > > At 08:57 PM 5/29/2003 -0400, you wrote: > >Well, it's time to replace our aging Windows 2000 servers and my > >suggestion was to look at Windows 2003 running IIS6. Does anyone have any > >experience running this in production yet? > > > >Thanks, > > > >Howie > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=5 Host with the leader in ColdFusion hosting. Voted #1 ColdFusion host by CF Developers. Offering shared and dedicated hosting options. www.cfxhosting.com/default.cfm?redirect=10481 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
