Well, As of Red Sky Macromedia caters for 2003. I'm also looking at the box as an excercise in skill development, having had a unix box before hand.
Unfortunately I am sooo snowed under with work, that getting anywhere near the box and messing around has been almost impossible. I honestly haven't had any issues with my one lonely box. Adam > -----Original Message----- > From: Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX) > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 31 October 2003 10:35 > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > Subject: RE: [ cf-dev ] New servers , use 2003 or 2000 > > > LOL :-) the Grolsch (?) advert where everythings "not ready yet"! > > We are a 99.9% Microsoft house and we are rolling out Windows > 2003 / Windows > XP (and beyond) across our global network - something like 37,000 > machines...... We did not go for Windows 2003 as, we know that with all > Microsoft products its got at least 2-3 Service Packs awaiting it > - with one > already in the making. Obviously our case is extreme as we have so many > nodes to cater for etc... > > Macromedia did not support 2003 out of the box as far as I know....and in > that instance, Neo was never really tested against it - so it's a case of > why upgrade when I know its been tested on 2K... > > If I need to upgrade when SP1 comes out.....then all the better ;-) > > Besides.....if you are not likely to use any of the Windows 2003 features > other then IIS then why bother? > > Just because its new doesn't mean its better.....think of how many people > still use NT!! > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Adam Reynolds [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 31 October 2003 10:12 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [ cf-dev ] New servers , use 2003 or 2000 > > I know this is being pedantic, but which advertisement? > > I had to make a decision on this a couple of months ago, and decided that > win2003 was a better future proof option. > > I have had no issues with the machine. Quite solid really. > > Adam > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX) > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: 31 October 2003 09:28 > > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > > Subject: RE: [ cf-dev ] New servers , use 2003 or 2000 > > > > > > I really do disagree.. As the advertisement states...."it's not ready > > yet"..... Seriously give it at least one service packs...to go > > for it due > > to the lock down features (which can be actioned manually in > > 2000) is not a > > reason to upgrade. > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Adam Reynolds [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: 30 October 2003 23:35 > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: RE: [ cf-dev ] New servers , use 2003 or 2000 > > > > Go with 2003. > > > > Starts off all locked down and you open up the services you need. > > > > Adam > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX) > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sent: 30 October 2003 14:49 > > > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > > > Subject: RE: [ cf-dev ] New servers , use 2003 or 2000 > > > > > > > > > Personally I would stick with Windows 2000 as Windows 2003 is still > > > a tad flakey with CF....too many workarounds....give it at least one > > > more Service Pack methinks......and for Native 2003 support out of > > > the box regarding MM. > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Justin MacCarthy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sent: 30 October 2003 14:53 > > > To: Cfuk > > > Subject: [ cf-dev ] New servers , use 2003 or 2000 > > > > > > I haven't used Win 2003 yet, is it ready for prime time, with > > > CFMX6.1 or should we install win 2000 on a new server? > > > > > > Thanks Justin > > > > > > > > > -- > > > ** Archive: > > > http://www.mail-archive.com/dev%40lists.cfdeveloper.co.uk/ > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > For human help, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > -- > > > ** Archive: > > > http://www.mail-archive.com/dev%40lists.cfdeveloper.co.uk/ > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > For human help, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > ** Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/dev%40lists.cfdeveloper.co.uk/ > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For > > human help, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > -- > > ** Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/dev%40lists.cfdeveloper.co.uk/ > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For > > human help, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > -- > ** Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/dev%40lists.cfdeveloper.co.uk/ > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For human > help, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- > ** Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/dev%40lists.cfdeveloper.co.uk/ > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For human help, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- ** Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/dev%40lists.cfdeveloper.co.uk/ To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For human help, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
