NT WORKSTATION CHANGE TO NT SERVER FREE!!!

You can get information about it here

but remember it's for informational purposes only
http://quest.apana.org.au/~djmer/winnt.htm

It's possible, and you can find many info about it over the Internet, but you have to understand that it's illegal...
Best regards,
Eizens

You _can't_ change workstation into server; what you can do is to make workstation (more or less) behave as if it were a server.
Of course, I believe that's illegal, so it's up to you to try.
You can find a good article on that at http://www.sysinternals.com/tips.htm

Regards,
César.

Sorry THere CesarGon But only Microsofties think that way , If you have read the text over at sysinternals or the link provided by loop, YOu will find out that WOrkstation is basically The same As Server, Microsoft Claims that Server has 700 different Feautures well People that have actually checked this out know it's fake,
I just want to know if anyone has Nttune?

When I say that you can't change workstation into server, but just to make it behave as if it were it, I mean that you will just be able to tune its kernel the server's way. But it will still be a workstation. I'm not a microsoftie at all, believe me. Of course I've read through SysInternals' text and infiniteloop's link, and I agree with you about that those 700 diferences are just marketing and nothing real in fact.
Regards,
César.

Hi eizens. I understand your viewpoint, and I totally agree with you about the differences between workstation and server. But you can't generalize and say that "nobody likes Microsoft style of programming or marketing". That is a nonsense, as anybody can see: at least, people strongly involved in Microsoft do certainly like Microsoft's style of programming and marketing. And I do, as well, even without any involvement of any kind with them.

Let's be a little less religious, dogmatic, and fundamentalist, please.

Regards,
CesarGon.

I didn't want to say something not acceptable for public, as an independent  person working with different software products, I hope that I can say what I think about them. So not "everybody": most my colleages.
Sorry, what I wanted to say was that it seems obvious for me (and everybody can has his own opinion) that the strongest part of Microsoft products is marketing, and when it became majore product on a market you have no more choise really, nevertheless this product is not the best (sometimes it isn't good too). And it's not a normal way of software progress that new version, containing no principal benefits for user, needs at least two times more powerfull PC. As a businessmen, I am happy that it's so, but of cause, it's not a fair play... We can only hope that receiving as much cash as it's now Microsoft will do something in strategical planning (not about how to make more money, it's so strong Microsoft side, that it doesn't need any omprovements, but how to make something which is more economical with resources and is really working).
      In Microsoft products we see many interesant improvements, but sometimes it's effort to do wellknown things in "Microsoft style". For example, domain structure in NT, which is proposed as "one point full network management system" and is really not suitable (if not say unusable) in a real, big and complicated network. So thay have good programmers, but the strategy is profit oriented more that it was echieved in other companies, and products are the result of it. I use them, I support them, I make business on them, but I don't feel that I have to love them.
      It's what I wanted to say to clear my position. I don't have time to go back to this discussion, so I'll not return to this question.

Best regards to all, including Microsoft funs,

Eizens

Ok then, eizens.

Regards,
César.

This Question has been up for quite some time, I thank everyone Who Gave a comment