Server Fault is a question and answer site for system and network administrators. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Thinking about getting a new dedicated server, having played with a shared solution and not very happy with it I am going to go back to dedicated

For the same amount of money I can get either a windows 2003 32bit server that comes with the helm control panel, versus windows 2008R2 64bit without the helm control panel (not supported)...

Question 1: Which OS is better for running web applications and some using small SQL Server database (yes, on the same machine). I assume the 64Bit will perform better...will I notice any problems with 64Bit, R2?

Question 2: How much will I miss having helm? I assume I can do manually everything helm does for me, correct? Any big drawbacks of this way? Last time I used helm, I vaguely remember not really using or needing many of the features anyway...

share|improve this question
up vote 1 down vote accepted

Go with the 2008 box.

  • It's newer tech
  • 64bit = good
  • While Helm is one of the more stable packages I've used, nothing beats being able to control it yourself! (IMHO)
  • 2008/IIS7 supports much of your app environment out of the box, or with minor tweaks
share|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.