What advice do you have for others considering Windows Server?

We have various security measures, such as antivirus software and firewalls. Additionally, on the network side, we utilize different types of firewalls to manage and enhance the security of the infrastructure itself. Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

I have never used Microsoft's virtualization features. Windows is one of the most common operating systems. Many applications are available for it, so it's hard to go wrong if we have the money to pay for it. Overall, I rate the product a 9 out of 10.

The security features offered by the product to protect our enterprise's resources are good. Though there is a scope for improvement in the product's security features, it is one of the most used solutions in the world when compared to the other tools in the market. It is one of the cleaner systems available in the market that can be tailored to fit into your environment. Most people have experience using Windows Server in their environment. Windows Server is the easiest option my company chooses, considering the amount of experience we have with it in our environment. I don't think that I have any special comments on how the product has improved our company's system performance area. I rate the overall tool an eight out of ten.

Windows Server’s integration with Active Directory enabled a single technology to manage multiple applications. Additionally, the feature for centralized management has proven beneficial in enhancing overall efficiency and meeting evolving requirements compared to Linux. It is primarily suitable for enterprises as the cost would be a concern for smaller organizations. It is a user-friendly platform. I rate it a nine out of ten.

I rate the overall product an eight out of ten.

Overall, I would rate Windows Server as a seven out of ten.

I rate the product a nine out of ten. We use Windows Server and Red Hat Linux, depending on the application. If the application is designed for Windows, we opt for Windows Server as it is easier to install and deploy.

I recommend Windows Server to others and rate it an eight out of ten. I advise using Windows Server or Linux, depending on the specific needs and compatibility of the applications.

I will recommend the tool to others. Overall, I rate the solution a seven or eight out of ten.

My main advice is to understand the business first. Then, see if the solution will work on that platform. Also, check which applications it supports. If they're using data and Microsoft, in some cases, we use applications verified by Microsoft. You can be sure they're compatible with Windows and find support from both ends. So, understand the business in terms of its goals, turnaround time, risk factors, and skill requirements. Consider if they have enough skilled people to support it, both for daily use and when issues arise. You need to know these things before making a decision. Not every time is Microsoft the right choice. Some systems or platforms they want to run may not be supported by Microsoft. So, it's crucial to understand the business requirements first; then you know which platform or solution works best for you. Overall, I would rate the solution a seven out of ten.

Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten. I'd recommend to make sure you have security checkups before deploying Windows Server. That's the first thing. And you need to consider your licensing options.

I would recommend Windows Server to other users. Users should be trained or familiar with operating the solution before using it. Overall, I rate Windows Server ten out of ten.

I rate the product a nine out of ten.

I recommend Windows Server to users working on multiple projects and have an in-house team with enough resources. I rate it a seven out of ten.

I advise others to ensure updating patches regularly for Windows Server. It is a flexible product. I rate it a nine out of ten.

I have used all the versions from 2003 to 2022. You can change the host and IPs and switch on the whole configuration. The users do not notice anything as long as DFS is active and the file system is the same. The product is a good choice for small-scale environments. Overall, I rate the product a seven out of ten.

I would rate Windows Server a nine out of ten.

I would recommend this solution to others. I rate Windows Server a nine out of ten.

I'm using both Windows and Linux operating systems. We have a team who does the installation of Windows Server, so I'm unable to give information on whether it's easy or complicated to install. For deployment and maintenance, we have five to eight people in charge. We have 30 to 50 end users of Windows Server within our company, and currently we don't have plans of increasing usage. Whether the technical support for Windows Server is fast or is knowledgeable, it would depend. It's a case to case basis, but I'm not the one who's creating the tickets, so whenever we have any issues, we send it to our team who's in charge of creating the tickets for the Windows support team. Windows Server is a solution I can recommend to others, if we're basing my recommendation on my satisfaction with it. I'm rating Windows Server a five out of ten.

I would recommend this solution to others. I rate Windows Server a seven out of ten.

We use various deployment models, including on-premises, on the cloud, and hybrid. I'd rate the solution at a seven out of ten. If the pricing was more flexible, it would be better for the customer.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

I would recommend this solution to others. I rate Windows Server a nine out of ten.

I rate Windows Server a ten out of ten. I would recommend Windows Server to others, but it depends on their requirements. We can meet our requirements with Windows because we have a Microsoft ERP. It has good performance with the Windows Server, which is why we use this solution.

I rate Windows Server an eight out of ten. I would recommend it to others who are considering implementation.

Everyone knows how the graphic user interface looks with Microsoft Windows Server. In terms of whether I would recommend Microsoft Windows Server, it depends on their use case. If their application is running only in Windows Server, they should use the server. On a scale of one to ten, I would give Microsoft Windows Server an eight.

I would recommend Windows Server because it's just easier to use for some people than Red Hat. That's the main thing - it is easier to use and maintain versus other operating systems within the Linux space. On a scale of one to ten, let's be generous and give Windows Server an eight.

I would recommend this solution to others, it can implement easily, it is very stable and reliable. I rate Windows Server a ten out of ten.

I rate Windows Server as a nine out of ten.

I rate Windows Server nine out of 10. I would recommend it to others.

I rate Windows Server about a nine out of 10. It's very robust, but there is always room for improvement in monitoring and other features.

I would rate Windows Server five out of 10. I would recommend it to others.

I would recommend this solution to others. I would rate Windows Server an eight out of ten.

We use the solution both on-premises and on the cloud. I'd rate the solution at a five out of ten. I'm neutral on it. It doesn't impress me. It just does what it does. I'd advise those considering the solution that if they want to run some Microsoft-specific applications, then there's a lot of choices.

There are around 300 users making use of the solution in my organization. I would certainly recommend the solution to others. I must, as it simplifies the administration and operation. I rate Windows Server as a seven out of ten.

I would rate Windows Server an eight out of ten.

I recommend the solution to others. I rate Windows Server as a ten out of ten.

I would recommend this solution to others who are interested in using it. It is very popular, I would rate Windows Server a ten out of ten.

I rate Windows Server an eight out of ten.

Right now, we are not on the latest version of the solution. I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten. For the most part, we have been happy with its capabilities. I'd recommend the solution to other users and companies.

I would rate Windows Server at seven on a scale from one to ten.

I would recommend this solution to others. I rate Windows Server a nine out of ten.

With my experience, I would definitely recommend this solution. From a performance perspective, I would rate Windows Server a nine out of ten. Because I have only used Windows Server, I can't give you a comparison with other solutions such as Linus or Unix.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate Windows Server at eight.

I would recommend this solution to others. I rate Windows Server nine out of ten.

I would recommend this solution. I rate Windows Server a seven out of ten.

We are end-users and customers. We use multiple deployment models, including cloud and on-premises. I'm using the latest version of the solution. I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten overall. I'd recommend the solution to other users and companies. It's worked well for us so far.

We use various versions of the product. Right now, for example, it's a mix between the 2015 and 2019 versions. Users need to be aware that they need to manage the solution properly. It could be pretty unsafe if you don't manage it properly. I wouldn't outright recommend the solution per se. It depends on what you want to achieve or if you have the knowledge of what you want to do. I would only recommend it if you have to integrate it with other Microsoft products. There are other server platform products that are much more secure and better than Windows. That said, if you are integrating into a Microsoft environment, yes, Windows is your best option. In general, I would rate the solution at a seven out of ten. It's great for Microsoft-heavy environments, however, it could be more secure.

I would recommend Windows Server to others who are interested in using it. I would rate Windows Server a nine out of ten.

I would recommend this solution to others. I would rate Windows Server an eight out of ten.

I would recommend this solution to others. I would rate Windows Server an eight out of ten.

I rate Windows Server a nine out of ten.

We are customers and end-users. While the deployment models we use are mostly on-premises, we do sometimes use cloud deployment as well. We use a variety of versions of the solution, including 2019, 2016, and 2012. We actually use a lot of 2012. I'd rate the solution at a seven out of ten. It's a step up from older versions. I'd recommend the solution to other companies. However, it depends on the use case. If you were hosting SQL or Exchange server, certainly. However, in other circumstances, if it was between this and Red Hat Linux, you might choose Red Hat Linux.

I would recommend this solution to others. I rate Windows Server a seven out of ten.

We are just a customer and an end-user of the solution. We don't have a business relationship with Microsoft. We are currently using the 2016 version and have plans to upgrade to the 2019 version. I would recommend the solution to other users and organizations. I'd rate the solution at a seven out of ten. It's an okay product, however, there are many areas that could be improved.

I rate Windows Server a six out of ten.

I would recommend this solution. I would rate Windows Server an eight out of ten.

Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of eight. If your environment requires it, I would absolutely recommend Windows Server.

I would recommend this solution to potential users. On a scale from one to ten, I would give Windows Server an eight.

I rate Windows Server a nine out of ten.

We are just a customer and an end-user. We have servers deployed within the company's headquarters right here in Tunis which we use for internal purposes. For other clients, it's deployed in other data centers, and they have access to them from our company. I'd recommend this solution to other companies and users. There are some clients that require this particular server and there are some older solutions that require deployment on a Windows Server. That said, we've moved to .net code to support both Microsoft and Linux. I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

Overall, this is a good product and I recommend it. I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

This is a product I can recommend and as far as I know, we plan to continue using Windows Server in the future. I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

I would recommend this solution. However, I would advise investing in more security measures. We plan to continue using the solution in the future. I rate Windows Server a seven out of ten.

We are just a customer and an end-user. We don't have a business relationship with Microsoft. I would recommend this solution to other organizations. I'd rate the solution at a ten out of ten. We've been very pleased with its overall capabilities.

I would tell potential users that it depends on the solution and the setup. If it's related to security, maybe it's better to go for Linux. If they're looking for usage and administration, they can go for Windows. On a scale from one to ten, I would give Windows Server a seven.

We plan to continue to use this solution and would recommend it to others who are interested in using it. I would rate Windows Server a seven out of ten.

We are going to continue using the solution until everything is on the cloud. I would not recommend it. I rate Windows Server a five out of ten.

I would recommend this solution to potential users. On a scale from one to ten, I would give Windows Server a seven.

I would recommend this solution to others who are interested in using it. I would rate Windows Server an eight out of ten.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate it at nine. For authentication and identity management, without a doubt, I would suggest using the Active Directory with Microsoft Windows Servers.

I would recommend using this solution to others. I rate Windows Server an eight out of ten.

I would recommend this solution to others. I would rate Windows Server a seven out of ten.

We are using the latest version of the solution. I'm not sure what the version number is. We have it deployed both on-cloud and on-premises. I'd recommend the solution to others. I'd rate the solution ten out of ten.

I will continue using and recommend the solution. I rate Windows Server an eight out of ten.

I rate this solution a nine out of 10.

We are going to continue to use the solution and I recommend it to others. I rate Windows Server a ten out of ten.

We are not using the latest version of the solution. We're using N-1, one solution behind the most recent release. We use multiple deployment models - both on-premises and cloud. I'd rate the product eight out of ten at this point. Overall, we've been pretty happy with it.

We have servers that range from 2012 to 2016 to 2019. We're using both the older and the newest versions of the solution currently. I would definitely recommend this product to other organizations. If you look at Linux, for example, it's not really a viable option as very very applications run on Linux. In the case of Windows, you don't have that shortcoming. You can run many, many applications on it, which is a good selling point. Many people who have legacy products like to use Windows. I would rate the solution six out of ten overall.

We only really use Windows Server for one thing. We don't have too complicated of a setup. I would recommend the solution to other organizations. I've mostly been happy with the product overall. I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten.

I am going to continue to use this solution in the future. I rate Windows Server an eight out of ten.

We have so many customers with Windows Servers that we are obliged to use the same technical path. We don't have any significant issues with Windows. I would rate Windows Server an eight out of ten.

Definitely, I would recommend this solution to others who are interested in using it. I would rate Windows Server an eight out of ten.

I would tell potential customers of Windows Server that they need to study it. They need to understand their business case very well. If features are available in Windows Server, they can safely go for it, but they need to study the design very well. On a scale from one to ten, I would give Windows Server an eight.

Microsoft has done a great job with Windows. Nothing is perfect, there is always going to be some issues with software at some point but when there are problems they are normally fixed easily. I would recommend this solution to others. I rate Windows Server a seven out of ten.

Windows Server is a stable product and there's no way we will change it for something else. I would rate Windows Server an eight out of ten.

I recommend this solution to others who are interested in using it. I would rate Windows Server a seven out of ten.

We're just customers. We don't have a business relationship with Microsoft. We're using both the 2012 and 2016 versions of the solution right now. Overall, I would rate the solution eight out of ten.

I would recommend this solution to others. We plan to keep using it. I would rate Windows Server a seven out of ten.

Windows Server is a nice product, but it does have some small problems. I would recommend potential customers to do some research first. It's a little more difficult to implement this operating system with functionality in the cloud. Everything, including the files and interface, keeps us in a Microsoft environment, and when moving applications to the cloud, some people might find it challenging. They have training for all the features that Microsoft offers. Technology is evolving quickly. Although I've been in this market for 25 years, I can see that I'm getting a little bit left behind because of a lack of formal training in the new functions that Microsoft and many other companies are implementing. On a scale from one to ten, I would give Windows Server an eight.

I'm not really a customer. I'm just a student learning the ins and outs of the product itself. We are using in virtual machines the Windows Server 2019. I'd recommend this solution. It's quite complete. For a company that wants all the necessary components to administer their infrastructure and so forth, it's quite good. Overall, I would rate the solution eight out of ten. If they offered better documentation that wasn't as dated I might rate it higher.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

Overall, this is a good product that is easy to use, it has very good features, and I can recommend it. I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

In our country, the Windows platform is widespread, which means there is a high amount of usage. We primarily use Windows Solutions. Some also use Linux, but Linux is the minority. I would rate Windows Server a seven out of ten.

I can recommend Windows Server. I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

I would recommend this solution to others who want to use Windows Server. I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

This is a good product and one that I can recommend. I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of eight.

This is a product that I can recommend. I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We're just a Windows customer. We don't have a business relationship with the company. We're using the latest version of the solution. I'd recommend the solution to other companies. Overall, from one to ten, I'd rate this product at a nine.

I would recommend this solution but it depends on the software you are going to use it on. When it's about a high performance web server, I would prefer Linux because you would choose to stick to engines as a web server and this product does not run very well on Windows, so you'd end up with Linux anyway. I would rate this solution an eight out of 10.

They had an issue in version 2016 related to the slowness of update management, but they already solved it in version 2019. It was impacting batch management. The time that Windows required was a lot, but it was fixed in version 2019. That was the only issue we faced in Windows Server. Other than that, it's fine. I would advise on the version, not on the solution itself, that is, whether to use Windows Server or not. If Windows Server is a required solution, you have to take it. It's not an option. However, I would advise to not use version 2016. I would rate Windows Server a ten out of ten. If your application is required on Windows, it's not comparable to any other solution. If an application can work with Windows or Linux, for sure, I'm going with Linux.

This is quite a good product and one that I recommend. I wouldn't recommend anything that does not integrate well with remote working tools, as most people are now working remotely. We are able to manage our systems from home. Overall, deployment is quite straightforward, the technical support is quite good, and we are happy with the product. That said, nothing is perfect. I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We're just a customer. We don't have a business relationship with Microsoft. We're using a standard out of the box deployment. We always update the solution to the newest possible version. We update regularly. I'd advise that new users learn about the solution before jumping in. It's always good to take a class or study up on it a bit so that you know what you can do with the server and how to navigate around in it. It's a good idea to take a certification course. That said, users can always Google answers or use the Microsoft Flow tool. I'd absolutely recommend the solution. I'd rate the solution nine out of ten overall. There's always room for improvement, of course. However, generally speaking, it hasn't given us any issues and does what we need it to do. There are always ways to improve security, stability, and scalability.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

We handle both on-prem and cloud deployments. We're in IT services, so we often sell these solutions to our clients. We use the Windows Server ourselves as well. I'd recommend the solution. It works well, however, users still have to understand Windows and the Windows interface in order to use it correctly. I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We're just a customers. We've been using multiple versions of the solution up to the 2016 version. I would recommend the Microsoft platform and Windows Servers in particular. It's great for implementation into any environment and is easy to use. They have enhanced some security, however, there needs more done in that respect. That said, from an efficiency, performance, business continuity, and integration standpoint, I'd highly recommend the Microsoft platform. While Linux has a better security layer, if that is your concern, be aware it will require investment in a lot of resources, training. I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. To get higher marks, the solution really needs to do something about the GUI & its security, which currently consumes a lot of resources & allowing breaching.