Memory requirements for Windows Server SBS 2003 are dictated by Microsoft. Per MS systems requirements, 512MB of RAM is minimum, 1GB is recommended, and 4GB is maximum. You may want to consider running it with 4GB of RAM if you plan on using ISA, Exchange, and SQL components of SBS.
That depends on what operating systems you are trying to run. WIndows Server 2008, for instance, requires a minimum of 512 MB. It is best to never use more than half of the memory available on the computer, so you would need a minimum of 3 GB to run three instances safely.
At least 128MB of RAM available here,& 1.5GB of available hard disk space...........
At least 128MB of RAM available here,& 1.5GB of available hard disk space...........
Yes. Windows XP and Windows Server 2003 have similar codebases and identical hardware requirements. No. Windows Server 2003 is much more expensive than even a copy of Windows XP Professional. It provides no added features that a typical desktop user would want to make use of, and is not particularly user friendly by default. Certain applications that run on Windows XP may not run properly on Windows Server 2003.
All of it
As much as you can give it. Architecturally, Linux can support 64 GB on an x86 server, and a theoretical 16 exabytes on an x86-64 (no current server can come close to supporting that much RAM in hardware).
It depends on which edition, but in general any 32 bit Operating System is limited to physically 4 Gb of memory. Microsoft generally uses about 3.2 - 3.5 Gb of that memory (it cannot address it all).
In my personal opinion, No, a Linux server is the better answer for the web. I would recommend a windows server only when running asp/.net, and with the introduction of mono (an apache module), Linux machines can run .net (although I've never used this, myself, and it is in its infancy). Linux, in general, has much better thread and memory handling than Windows. In a multi-threaded web server, it should serve you better. Remember, that things like this are always a personal preference type of thing, and the debate between Windows and Linux is fierce. My advice would be to look up benchmarking information for Windows web servers and Linux web servers, and see which would suit your needs.
Microsoft revealed the Windows 8 will be delivering significant memory is much more considerate when acquiring available memory resources. 8 system occupying 281MB in 29 processes and a Windows 7 system.
With MS-Windows XP Professional & the Vista line I believe you can use the Remote Desktop feature just one person at a time. With MS-Windows 2000 Server/Advanced Server or MS-Windows Server 2003 Std/Enterprise Editions, it's pretty much unlimited -- it depends on how many CAL's you've purchased (Client Access Licenses). Your server's CPU (or CPU's) and memory must be able to handle the load as well. If you want extra performance with a LOT of users on at the same time, you can make it totally "enterprise-capable" and faster/leaner by using Citrix's add-on software www.citrix.com
Answer--The difference between the two is simple. Windows Server 2003 is built on Windows XP, but Server 2003 has some advanced networking and server facilities. You can notice this on the Server configuration wizard on Server 2003 Note: There is Lot of difference win XP & win server 2003. Xp is a client operating systems. but win 2003 is a server. we can not install active directory in Xp. but we install active directorey win server 2003. we can not manage centralize Win xp. but we manage centralize Win server 2003. Win Xp use small network Maximum 25 computer in a network. but we manage large network through win server 2003.Note: If you want more information so you can visit http://www.iyogibusiness.com/
The amount of memory Windows Movie Maker uses depends on the project 'specifics'. In other words, memory usage increases are dictated by demand. The more a project requires from the program, the higher the memory usage at that given time.