At 06:35 AM 2/22/2004, Clive Chater wrote:
>Pat Farrell wrote:
> >>So I'd suggest either a lighter OS or a motherboard-ecktomy.
> >>Even W2K professional would probably work better as a slimserver
> >>platform.
> >>
> >>Email me off-list if you are interested in my specific setup, Samba, etc.

>Thanks for the good advice. Under normal circumstances I would agree that
>Windows 2003 is too heavy an OS to run just SlimServer on the said
>PC. However, I am a database programmer by trade and occasionally need to
>use the latest versions of SQL and Exchange for testing, hence the need
>for 2003.

Just realized that the slim list strips out email addresses. So I'll explictly
leave in a .sig in case folks want to talk about this off list. Since it
is quickly off topic.

Just because you need a Windows 2003 server doesn't mean you need
to put the slimserver on it. I do a lot of database programming professionally,
but try to use Linux and MySql over SqlServer or Oracle when I have a chance.
Try them, they are cool.

Linux systems are generally a lot happier than Windows systems on the
same hardware. And you can rip out stuff you don't need, if you
are hard code (I know, you can do that in Windows if you are really hardcore).

A discussion of which distribution is way off topic for Slim lists,
and nearly off topic for any list. I recommend finding a old,
cheap or free PC and putting a Linux distribution on it.
Since Clive is a pro, I recommend he and others who don't speak
Linux find a friend to help. Use whatever distribution they have
laying around, get started, install Perl and SlimServer, etc.
My slimserver is a P3-500 or so, with only 384 MB of ram,
and it happily supports 500+ albums, streams FLAC thru
decompression on the fly, etc.

Anyway, feel free to email me with questions, we can always
post a summary back to the list.


Pat Farrell pfarrell (AT) pfarrell (DOT) com