Not in any circle I traveled.
IMO Windows Server had just become the new Netware; fine to run an office with, but not really much more scalable than that. I recall painfully how one associate tried to install a local version of BES (Blackberry Server) on a Windows box before giving up and going to the RIM-hosted service. It just wasn't up to much challenging tasks.
But MS had marketing money, and Ballmer was into full-on Linux-bashing at the time. The FUD campaigns were effective at slowing but not stopping the shift. But NOBODY I knew was taking Windows server seriously as a server of Internet-protocol-based stuff. If you were into, say, Sendmail or MySQL or Apache you already knew that open source worked, so overcoming the FUD and considering Linux for the plumbing was a no-brainer.
Aside: I recall being at a product launch from NEC for a line of Intel-based Windows server boxes. Some salescritter boasted that they were so confident of the superiority of Windows that the hardware was jigged so that it COULDN'T run Linux (they were evasive explaining how that was done, and I never pressed for an answer). Within a year NEC was out of the PC hardware business completely; I was really hoping that some product manager(s) lost their job over that bonehead move.