Windows Server Reviews

The product is primarily used for applications, data storage, and communications. We also use it for the directory.

The solution is very user-friendly. 

The scalability is very good.

You can deploy the solution either on the cloud or on-premises. 

The solution needs more integration capabilities. 

I've been using the solution for 15 years at this point. It's been well over a decade. I've used it for a long time. 

The scalability of the solution is good. It's not a problem to expand it. 

Likely the entire company is using the solution, however, I cannot speak to exact numbers that are on the solution right now. 

I've never been in touch with technical support in the past. I cannot speak to how helpful or responsive they are. 

We did not previously use a different operating system.

I wasn't a part of the installation process. I can't speak to how straightforward or complex it was.

We have 12 to 15 team members that can handle deployment and maintenance tasks. There are a manager, an admin, and engineers.

I don't handle the licensing costs. I don't have any visibility as to how much the company pays for licenses. 

We use multiple deployment models, including on-premises and cloud. 

I'm not sure which version of the solution we're using. 

I'd recommend using the solution to other companies.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten. 

The solution integrates well with other platforms.

The solution could improve by making it more secure.

I have been using Windows Server for approximately 30 years.

The stability has been good.

We have approximately 100,000 customers.

The installation of the solution is becoming easier every year after new releases. The first installation can take an hour but you can use templates to make the installation very quick.

We have six to eight engineers that do the implementation and maintenance of the solution.

We are with Microsoft's Cloud Solution Provider Program and we pay for a monthly license for this use of this solution and we support our customer subscriptions. The overall price of the solution is good.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Windows Server a seven out of ten.

We use the 2016 version. 

We use the solution for our applications. 

The performance is very good.

The security could be improved. 

We have been using Windows Server for three-and-a-half to four years. 

The tech support is great.

Prior to using Windows Server we used DBN. 

I handled the installation on my own. 

There is a licensing fee. It is possible that the Windows Server OS was built with this server. 

I recommend the solution to others.

I rate Windows Server as a ten out of ten. 

We are in service and sales. We are serving and selling products to our customers.

It is easy to use.

It is also very easy to configure.

The security policies need improvement. The port mapping and the backdoor entries need to be improved.

I would like to see improvements with the security policies and there should be some other policies inbuilt with the server addition.

Windows Server is a stable product.

It's a scalable solution. I would rate the scalability an eight out of ten.

80% is scalable and 20% has limitations.

I have not had contact with technical support.

It is easy to set up.

I would rate Windows Server an eight out of ten.

I'm using the Windows Server to manage all the printers and all the additional hardware. I have a mini virtual server. We are customers of Windows and I'm a network system administrator.

The solution is very easy to configure.

I'd like an improvement in being able to separate all the services offered. 

I've been using this solution for seven years. 

I have some technical assistance if I need it, but it's not through Windows. 

The initial setup is very easy. You connect to the internet and it's easy. 

I rate this solution a seven out of 10. 

The product is stable. It's reliable. 

Microsoft is a trusted brand and I enjoy working with it.

The graphical user interface could be better. It's a little dated. 

I do not like Microsoft's intrusive policies. 

We've used Windows Server for quite a long time. We've used it since around the 2012 version at least. 

The stability of the product is relative. Certain services are better handled by the Microsoft system. For example, the active directory. Microsoft Hyper-V, we use in many, many cases. However, with Linux systems, we don't have the ability to use some features of these systems. For example, with the authentication server, we use the Windows Server in most cases. If we do that, it's stable.

We have 100 people, more or less, on the solution.

We have technical support. We pay in order to have access to them.

I'm also familiar with Linux, although I prefer Windows.

I wasn't a part of the initial setup. It was already in place when I arrived at the company.

I was not involved in the acquisition of the solution, so I do not have exact details about the pricing.

We do pay for technical support. We have that until December and then we will need to re-subscribe. 

We are a public company, a government company, and, due to legislation, most of the time, we can't simply choose a vendor. If we need to acquire a contract solution, we make a technical study where the features are evaluated and the final specifications are always based on features, not on vendors, or manufacturers.

We are service providers. We are implementers and sometimes we do the plans of the implementation.

We are a customer of Windows Server. Our company has an active contract for technical support as well.

We use the current version and past versions too in a hybrid environment.

The local infrastructure is hybrid in the sense of we maintain a large spectrum of systems. For example, legacy systems are on the same infrastructure as a Windows Server 2019, for example. Basically, legacy systems are on the same network as the most recent system.

I'm note of a Windows guy than a Linux guy. I like this product.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

I use Windows Server for applications.

I like that Windows Server is easy to use.

It would be better if they improved the user interface.

I have been using Windows Server for a few years. 

Windows Server is a stable solution.

The initial setup is straightforward.

It's easy for me to install or set up the Windows Server, but I have some technicians who do it.

There is a license for Windows Server, but we have got the license from a local supplier,
Black Neuron Technology. They also provide tech support locally.

I would recommend this solution to potential users.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Windows Server a nine.

I use Windows Server 2015.

We have data center and now we use the software to do the virtualization. We develop certain functions. 

While the solution is stable, it could be more so. There are times when there is a need to make corrections. 

It would also be nice to see more integration. 

I have been using Windows Server for awhile, at least for a couple of years. 

Although the solution is stable, this could stand some improvement. 

Owing to the distance which is sometimes involved, the technical support can stand improvement. 

Windows Server is very easy to install. There is no issue in this regard. It can be done on one's disc, if he has one. 

The deployment can be done with rapidity and much ease. 

While I have five people in my organization, the deployment can be handled by a single engineer in my company. 

There are no fees involved in the solution. 

The government directly pays the licensing fees for all public organizations, of which we are included. The organization's name is IDU, which does license development for the country in the computer science department. They give us the SQL Server and Microsoft Office to install in our public hospital.

I work in MS Office, Oracle and SQL Server. Our company primarily uses MS Office. 

We have, perhaps, 200 users. 

I would recommend the solution to others, as I have done so in the past. 

I rate Windows Server a ten out of ten. 

We are using it for Windows Active Directory, DHCP Server, and application servers.

Its performance is very good, and it is stable. All applications are working perfectly, and there is no issue.

It can have more integration, which will be useful for the data integration process. More integration with different applications and different OS would be quite good.

We are using Windows Server for the last eight years.

It is stable.

We have three to four Windows Servers, and all users are connected to these servers.

They are customer-friendly.

Its initial setup is very simple and easy. It normally takes 20 to 30 minutes. After the installation is done, the configuration takes some time, but it depends on what type of configuration is required.

I did it myself. We have four technical guys who are connected to the deployment and maintenance of these servers.

We have perpetual licenses.

I would recommend this solution to others. I would rate Windows Server an eight out of 10.

We use Windows Server as a business operating system.

The solution is easy to use and it supports multiple applications compared to other basic systems that are currently in a production environment. Many people prefer the Windows environment because they are used to it from previous experiences.

The solution could improve by having more integration and some of the new features that are being released in Windows 11.

We have been using the solution within the past 12 months.

Windows Server is highly stable.

The solution is scalable.

We have 100 users using this solution in my organization.

The technical support from Microsoft has been good.

The installation is easy and it takes approximately 10 minutes.

I did the implementation of the solution.

There is a license required for Windows Server and Microsoft the cost is based on the number of ports that you have on the production server.

I would recommend this solution for enterprise use.

I rate Windows Server a ten out of ten.