Feeds

back to article Microsoft to lob out Windows Server 2012 by September

Microsoft is releasing Windows Server 2012 a month ahead of Windows 8 and will be aggressively promoting it against virtualisation rival VMware. Satya Nadella, president of Redmond's server and tools business, said that Server 2012 will be handed out to manufacturers in August and go on general availability in September – a …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
Linux

"Talk the talk"

That's the problem with all Microsoft products: the harsh reality never matches the outlandish claims. Maybe some Vole bod can achieve said results in the lab, for a couple of microseconds, under pristine conditions, but how long before it trips over due to Real World® conditions like viruses, the dreaded "updates", or (let's face it) the mere fact of it being Windows.

Anyone who's serious about any sort of mission-critical application needs to be using a *nix solution, or frankly anything but Windows.

No, really.

10
8
Bronze badge
Trollface

Re: "Talk the talk"

Ahem... leap second... cough.... mission critical.... cough cough cough....

8
1
Anonymous Coward

Re: "Talk the talk"

No, anyone who needs a mission critical system needs to understand how their systems work and design an appropriate solution.

A Windows only guy will never be able to setup a Linux/UNIX server. A UNIX/Linux only guy can't setup a Windows server (although, I've met many who think they can by some sort of technical knowledge osmosis.)

Windows servers are way more stable than even the NT4 days, and NT4 was pretty good - when you knew what you were doing. It's just that there are a lot of people who think they know a lot more than they actually do, when these people setup systems, they're unstable. Who'd 'o' thunk it?

3
1
Bronze badge
Devil

Re: "Talk the talk"

"A Windows only guy will never be able to setup a Linux/UNIX server. A UNIX/Linux only guy can't setup a Windows server (although, I've met many who think they can by some sort of technical knowledge osmosis.)"

This is probably the stupidest comment in a long time here - and that's not a small feat considering any anonymous idiot can post here...

But hey, let's take your words literally! I like it a lot - because then you must be considering a lot of us to be superheros, people like me who can set up *both* server including clustering w/ enterprise storage backend, redundant networking setup (w/ switches, VLANs etc), offloading etc...

2
5
Anonymous Coward

Re: "Talk the talk"

Did you actually read my comment, or just not understand what I was getting at?

3
0

Re: "Talk the talk"

the leap second affected some Linux systems, *nux not *nIx.

0
0
Devil

Re: "leap second"

Microsoft is not exactly a stranger to leap time problems either.

Linux, like any software, has bugs, but Windows is endemically and fundamentally flawed in so many ways, from its grossly over-engineered design, random and inexplicably dysfunctional behaviour, to its afterthought "security" - with little concept of proper privilege separation / law of least required privileges, that the idea of using it for anything even remotely critical is just silly, and actually potentially dangerous.

Then there's the fact that any given *nix is not homogeneous, even within a single distro, so a "problem" that affects one version of one component on one release of one distro won't necessarily bring World + Dog to its knees, whereas a single fubar on e.g. Windows XP (still the most common OS - in that tiny segment of the computing market called "the desktop", anyway) can shut down a significant portion of entire countries (e.g. the recent Internet Blackout).

There's a lot to be said for a heterogeneous infrastructure, doubly so if one completely eliminates Windows from the equation. There's even more to be said for having access to the source, so you don't have to wait for some poorly-motivated vendor to "fix" some crippling issue on some Tuesday in the distant future.

Server == *nix. Period. It wrote the book. Anything else is just a toy, and Windows is the sort of toy you'd expect to win at a carnival ... if you were really unlucky. It might work as a game system (FSVO: "work"), but even there I think you'd probably be better off with a console ... no DRM, virus or driver issues to contend with.

Really, the only reason anyone uses Windows at all is because consumers are force-fed it by OEMs, mainly thanks to some historically dodgy deals (and some not so historical, I'm sure). Business customers don't have that excuse, they just have clueless pointy-hairs making uninformed decisions based on buzzword-bingo propaganda. Or at least 40% of them do, according to Ballmer, anyway. The rest avoid Windows like the plague.

2
10
Anonymous Coward

Re: "Talk the talk"

Almost all Linux servers were completely unaffected by the leap-second problem. Sorry if this fact causes you pain

1
0
Silver badge

FTFY: "Talk the talk"

>Ahem... leap year... cough.... mission critical.... cough cough cough....

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: "leap second"

And Homer 1 goes all out to demonstrate that a UNIX/Linux only guy just doesn't understand Windows. You can regurgitate incorrect tired old rubbish all you want (security as an after thought) but it doesn't change the fact that you obviously have no idea about serving in a Windows environment. As for Unix being the only option for serving - I know a lot of mainframe, Tandem and VMS guys who'd be laughing at your lack of knowledge right now.

4
1
Silver badge

Re: "Talk the talk"

"But hey, let's take your words literally! I like it a lot - because then you must be considering a lot of us to be superheros, people like me who can set up *both* server including clustering w/ enterprise storage backend, redundant networking setup (w/ switches, VLANs etc), offloading etc..."

They wrote "a windows only person" and "a UNIX/Linux only person". They didn't say there can never be people who are gurus on both. But it is true that most people lean toward one or the other - it takes a lot of time to become and to stay an expert sysadmin on either system and you mostly end up working with just one or the other so it makes sense to prioritize. And regardless of the merits of Linux vs. Windows (I think they're both good these days), I would rather have a Windows system maintained by a Windows expert, or a Linux system maintained by a Linux expert, than either system without respect to who maintains it. That's what the poster is getting at - in contrast to the OP who just made some blanket (and faintly ridiculous) comment that it just had to be *NIX and that people would be an idiot if they used Windows.

3
2
Bronze badge
Devil

Re: "leap second"

'nix is secure, and Windows is just a toy, etc. etc.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/08/31/linux_kernel_security_breach/

Even the people who write Linux cannot keep their own systems secure. It can happen to any OS. The point is that your choice of OS does not keep you secure.

Condemning X% of the market as being idiots and fools because they choose a different product to your preferred one really makes you sound rather sanctimonious and more than a little childish, especially when there are huge major corporations running business-critical systems on Windows with apparent success in addition to notable hacks and security issues relating to Unix-based systems.

It seems far too many Unix proponents seem to have the debating skills of the average Jehovah's Witness. You're all going to hell unless you subscribe to my views, everything else is nonsense, etc. I tend to shut the door in the face of such people, and I suspect others do too. Such a sanctimonious attitude really doesn't help the cause, but they don't seem to be able to appreciate this.

4
2
Anonymous Coward

Re: "leap second"

Did you make all that crap up by yourself, or did your mom help you with that?

You're so wrong on so many levels it's embarassing. I won't address every point of the nonsense you wrote as it very likely will exceed the posting limit of this forum, but as a general observation it seems the latest Windows you've ever seen was Windows 95, and it shows. Getting a clue first would have prevented you to look like an idiot.

Even more, the fact that you believe that 'server == *nix' (a mediocre operating system born as a botched solution for insufficient hardware which has been patched to keep up with the times) is testament to your lack of understanding of missing critical computing and even the IT world as a whole (and true mission critical operating systems like VMS or MVS), and outs you as the Linux zealot you probably are.

Disappointing.

3
2
Paris Hilton

Re: "mediocre operating system"

So your contention is that "*nix" is a "mediocre operating system"?

Which one of those ~300 operating systems are you referring to, exactly (and BTW that's counting all GNU/Linux distros as just one)?

Maybe if you tried one of those, instead of wasting your time with Windows, you might find your "missing critical computing".

Windows kiddies are funny.

0
1
Windows

Re: "apparent success"

The "apparent success" of businesses running Windows, belies the fact that they've become so accustomed to dealing with its inadequacies that they assume things like viruses, dysfunctional software, pathetic uptimes, Client Access Licenses, planned obsolescence and the upgrade treadmill are simply the inescapable, normal, acceptable, daily consequence of computing, rather than rare and/or unacceptable failures that shouldn't be tolerated.

IOW they've lowered their standards to accommodate Windows (or more likely these days, never knew any better), and they pay heavily for the "privilege", in terms of multi-faceted licensing, propping up Windows with diagnostic/repair/antivirus software, and footing the vast bill for (what might otherwise be) extraneous hardware.

Then to cap it all, the dilberts tasked with operating all this junk tend to have the collective IQ of a cabbage, which isn't really surprising considering the glorified secretarial course that qualified them for this lofty position.

Businesses lumbered with Windows have my pity and sincere condolences.

0
0
Bronze badge
FAIL

Re: "Talk the talk"

I absolutely did, on both count - and I found it extremely stupid, yes.

Windows-only guy? Linux-only guy?

Are you from 1997 or you just stuck in some godforsaken gov or academic research place?

0
0
Bronze badge
Stop

Re: "Talk the talk"

Well, *my* point was that, in fact, that I don't think there are "$single_platform_name$-ONLY" people anymore (sans skunk-labs in gov or academia.)

0
0

Having had the real-world exposure...

that I had to go through with Hyper-V, they can push it all they want, I'm not going to go back to a solution that destroyed several VMs due to a security update that was shoved at my co-administrator as being highly important. Back then, he still trusted MS, so he installed it. I spent the next two nights trying to restore a minimum level of service from a backup that, thanks to also having been made by a MS solution, was only partially usable. Needless to say I went without any sleep whatsoever during the emergency.

The security update as such had no direct connection with Hyper-V. The Microsoft hotline said ours was the only business suffering from the problem. The open support forums had entries complaining about the problem by over 1000 different people.

No thanks, I'll stick with Xen for the time being.

5
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Having had the real-world exposure...

So the upshot was: You installed an untested update, which took down a server. This was compounded by not knowing how your backup system worked and not testing it regularly.

While I'm sympathetic, you can hardly blame this on MS.

8
3
Facepalm

Re: Having had the real-world exposure...

Sounds like your backups were never tested. That's not Microsoft fault. Management and Operational failure or incompetance.

2
1
Pint

Re: Having had the real-world exposure...

Well, when we (my co-admin and myself) tested the backup system we had inherited from Those That Went Before, it had worked... when we needed it, it was borked. Go figure. As to the security update, if the maker of the software I'm using says the update is mission critical, I check on the forums to see whether there are known problems; if there are none, I go for it, knowing that I have a full backup... My co-, who was on duty at the time the update was posted, didn't check, which was unfortunate.

I'm glad I'm out of that particular madhouse, anyway. Cheers!

0
0

Re: Having had the real-world exposure...

(I would like to add, before the inevitable messages come in: my co-admin at the time was young and inexperienced. When I was his age, I would most likely have acted similarly. So don't damn him; I certainly don't.)

0
0

Actually, MS are talking the talk, at least as far as our stuff is concerned. We have begun ditching VMWare en masse for Hyper-V, have had several long standing areas of pain resolved by switching and can't wait to say bye bye to VMware.

This is despite me using it for years happily enough. Hyper V is really starting to mature, especially if you have a predominantly MS workload.

It

6
6
Anonymous Coward

Do you actually trust CSVs to store your mission critical data? Hacked together POS that you can't touch with anything as it might 'upset' Hyper-V and one you can't easily monitor for disk space usage from expanding thin images via SNMP as they haven't got the counters sorted.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Microsoft "birthing the client server era"?

WTF is *that* supposed to mean? That's a ridiculous statement even for a marketing droid, given that Xerox coined the term back in the early 70s, and by any measure, the "client server era" was well underway by the time Microsoft released Windows 3, and years before they ever released their own server OS.

5
0
Silver badge
Pint

Re: Microsoft "birthing the client server era"?

It means everything old is new again, the world turns, old wine in new bottles, the big lie and tech skills and background knowledge shall never meet with marketing pushes.

4
0
Silver badge
Facepalm

Re: Microsoft "birthing the client server era"?

The Softie fans will claim anything. Who invented multitasking? Microsoft did! Client-server? A Redmond product. There is no limit to it.

3
2

So much to learn!

I have to say MS finally have have product that can stand up to VMware but they really are absolutely hopeless at encouraging Hyper-V adoption amongst existing VMware customers. Numerous attempts to reach out to MS the product and sales teams to become and early adopter and reference case for migrating to Hyper-V, have been met with the usual sheer-incompetence and inability to engage.

I guess its back to renewing VMware support for another 3 years. Good luck MS!

1
0
Trollface

Network Engineer

"when we were birthing the client server era" LOL!

You mean when Novell was running rings around you with performance, reliability, ease of use, and security?

4
0
Silver badge
Windows

Experience first, then we'll talk

The stuff one can do with VMWare are quite extreme, but HyperV has yet to proof itself. The fact that Server 2012 will be Metro flavoured doesn't exactly bode very well for them either IMO.

I'll believe this "huge success" when I see it, but until then pardon me for not being a believer.

2
1
Silver badge

Re: Experience first, then we'll talk

The devil is in the licensing. If you want to be sure you're in violation of some licensing agreement somewhere, choose Hyper-V. The licensing is completely incoherent. I believe there's a provision that if you have two fully-paid-up Windows Server Datacenter Edition hosts and you fail over a Windows Server VM incidence from one to the other, you can't fail back in under 30 days without violating the terms.

And then there's backup. Shudder.

4
0
Facepalm

Re: Experience first, then we'll talk

I'll have to disagree with you - that's kind of the point of Datacenter Edition. Purchasing the licenses for the host entitles you to run any number of VMs on that host without paying for other Windows OS licenses. So if you license the cluster with DC edition, you have as many VMs as you want and you can move your VMs around any time you please, because the license isn't on the VM it's on the host.

Now applications might be different, but you generally license the VM for the application not the hosts; in which case you may or may not be fine. But Windows is a no-brainer.

0
0
Bronze badge

2012 is actually not bad (at least in release candidate form). Perhaps equal to ESX 3.5 or early 4.

The problem is that the paint is still wet on many of the features (network teaming, SMB hosted VMs, VM migration) that Xen and, more importantly, VMware houses have been used to for up to five years.

Microsoft are definitely getting there. In combination with VMware's bizarre pricing model, they may make pretty good head way.

Perhaps the tradition of waiting for Service Pack 1 before being too dependent on it isn't a bad idea, at least for critical workloads. Until then, I'll stick to pushing vSphere 5.0.

2
0
Anonymous Coward

Is there a start button?

I don't want to have to explain to hundreds of people I meet who are under qualified stuff like ...

psh "sql -s t sdfaklsdflkhjas -boot -bollocks"

I want to say

"Start -< Program Files -> sql Server - Sql management studio"

"Connect to ."

"Click the start button."

5
1

Re: Is there a start button?

Fail at the first post! As you ought to know by now, there will be no start-button in Windows 8/2012. The user you just sent this manual to is now confused and gives up.

Think I'm joking? Anecdotally, how many people couldn't figure out where the any-key was (in that time, apparantly, where Novell and Xerox impregnated Microsoft).

1
1
Anonymous Coward

Re: Is there a start button?

@Buck Futter - So he could change it to "hit the Windows key, type "SQL Manag..." then hit enter".

0
0
Silver badge

Re: Is there a start button?

Actually, by default, you'd probably just see the SQL Management program on the Metro page. No need to go through a hierarchy at all. There's space for over twenty applications even on my laptop screen. On my Desktop monitor, it can easily be forty without feeling crowded or hard to find stuff.

1
1

Re: Is there a start button?

Exactly.....the only reason people don't like Metro is that they can't deal with change. We are all looking at at least one less button click to open an application, and all people seem to be doing is throwing toys out of their prams. Plus with the right-click power tools (and if you don't know about these then you cant talk about Windows 8/Server 2012 because you obviously haven't used them), all the main tools a sysadmin needs are literally 2 clicks away.

Oh and another point. The GUI is optional, true, and this can be changed post-install whenever you want. So now I can build a server with a GUI, get it exactly how I want it and then remove the GUI so that my server isn't wasting resources. Oh, and did I mention that I will be able to fully manage this server and my entire server estate from 1 management server, or even my Windows 7/8 client?

You'd think the IT community would be more accepting of change considering we work in the fastest changing industry there is. Get over yourselves and learn the new features, unless you are a complete muppet it will take you less than an hour.

2
1
Anonymous Coward

@Levente Szileszky

I think you are one of the idiots who thinks he can setup a windows server properly.

1
2
Windows

"setup a windows server properly"

I doubt that goal is really attainable by anyone, considering the source.

3
6
Bronze badge

Metro...

Metro on a server? No thanks.

2
2
Anonymous Coward

Re: Metro...

It's a good job it'll be command line only then, at least by default. You have to opt to install an GUI.

2
1

Re: Metro...

You make the optional GUI sound like a bad thing! Why would I want to waste valuable system resources on a GUI when I can fully manage my servers from one Windows 7/8 machine or one management server? Especially considering that I can just reinstate the GUI if I need to.

Oh, and just to clarify, you can choose from no GUI, limited GUI and full GUI. And you can change this at any time post-install. This is why there is no datacenter edition. Sounds bloody fantastic to me.

1
1
Windows

Re: Metro...

Bzzt, wrong.

The supposedly GUI-less "Core" is in fact ... a desktop running a Blackbox-style GUI and a terminal window, along with whatever other application windows you launch from there.

Just because it doesn't have a "Start" button, that doesn't mean it's not a GUI.

Four decades on, and Microsoft still can't do a headless server.

1
0

This post has been deleted by a moderator

Flame

Re: Metro...

"Four decades on, and Microsoft still can't do a headless server"

Why the fuck would they *need* to do a headless Server? Their entire product line has been about creating graphical interfaces that make working on computers easy and painless. If you want a headless erver there are plenty of alternatives out there - use one of them.

0
2

Re: Metro...

I don't remember calling it headless. And I wouldn't call a command prompt on a blue background a GUI. I'd call it a command prompt.

0
0
Facepalm

Re: "need to do a headless server"

Why would any server need to be anything but headless?

Perhaps I should amend my original statement to: "Four decades on, and Microsoft still can't do a server". Indeed they don't even seem to know what one is.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Paul Maritz is out at vmware

http://gigaom.com/cloud/vmware-shakeup-maritz-is-reportedly-out/

welcome to reality vmw. you ticked off your customers for multiple releases gouging them like Hannibal lecter. then you went and purchased all sorts of random companies and lost your focus on the only product that makes you any money. great strategy.

Novell on line 2.

0
0
This topic is closed for new posts.