Hi Bob,
I just returned from the TS2 Seminar here on Windows 2003 Server this afternoon. The best part of the seminar was that I received both a 360-day trial version of Windows 2003 Server as well as a fully functional licensed copy of it. There are quite a few enhancements in this version, but in my personal opinion, most are administrative tools and more 'conveniences' than anything else. Other than the builtin net framework, there are many new configuration wizards that make deploying the server much easier and changes in server roles down the road easier too. It comes with Terminal Server 2003 which I did not see that many enhancements (other than printer redirection fixes which I think should have been a patch) to justify the new costs the Terminal server licenses. While XP and Windows 2000 came with Terminal Server 2000 Client licenses, they do not include licenses for Terminal Server 2003. If you deploy Terminal Server 2003, you have to purchase client licenses for ALL clients regardless of the OS. That could get costly and puts it more on scale with Citrix without Citrix capabilities. The active directory enhancements are welcome (renaming domains, etc) and will make an upgrade from Windows NT to Server 2003 easier. The most important enhancement in my opinion is security. Out-of-the box Server 2003 is locked down (like Novell always was) and you have to add rights instead of remove them by default. If you setup a new share for instance, all users have read-only access by default and you have to grant full access. The same is true of intranet and internet zones. That is a major improvement (as I used to be the Information Systems Security Manager for an installation it was important to me) but also will be a new problem for those that used to install and walk away. You won't be able to do that anylonger, you will have to grant access. I did not see anything myself that would make me switch from 2000 Server to Server 2003, but I would upgrade from NT to Windows 2003 if my current network was NT.

Oh yeah, it does comes with IIS 6.0 also. I also neglected to mention that the most cost-effective OS in my opinion is 2003 Web Server. It is a great use of an existing NT server that will replaced with a more robust server when an upgrade to Server 2000 or Server 2003 is done. The exhisting hardware could be used strictly as a webserver for 397.00 which is very cost effective and allows you to not lose your investment in existing hardware which may have cost 3000-4000 dollars a couple of years ago but which is not sufficient for a full-scale applications server running server 2003.


>>As of today, .NET server = Win2k + .NET application framework.
>>
>>>A .NET application has to be deployed on a Web server. Can it be deployed on a Windows 2000 Server or it has to be on a .NET server? If on both, then, what is the advantages of using a .NET server?
>
>I think it is IIS 6.0 also. Also, I think there are other kernal and services upgrades... If it was just Win2k + .Net it is very expensive:
>
>http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/evaluation/overview/family.mspx
>
>BOb