Start packing your bags for a Windows Server 2003 migration Windows Server 2003 is due to reach the end of its life in July next year. Microsoft will no longer support the software, which means no further patches or security updates and a security risk and compliance headache for businesses. A surprising number of companies will be affected unless they get their act together and …
That is the big problem, kit gets bought and forgotten until it breaks. Then you aren't just talking about upgrading the OS, you need a whole lot of extra Cap-Ex for hardware. That is a major cost for companies, even if the hardware was written down over a decade ago.
I know of servers still running SUSE installs from the turn of the century and even a couple of DEC Alpha minis from the mid-90s, because they are still running, the owners of the servers don't see a need to migrate to something newer. Even thought they are mission critical, because they haven't failed in the last decade, they seem to think they won't fail in the next decade either!
I managed to get a small business to migrate from SBS2000 to SBS2010 at the end of last year!
No updates? No worries, it is a server, users can't infect it! :-(
The job of an admin is never easy.
"You would think that as single server hardware gets older and no longer supported (looking at you HP) that would be a big push to upgrade. After all, that's what is most likely to fail."
Does HP really offer worse HW support than the competition? The initial warranty for HP Proliants is 1-5 years and can be extended with a support agreement or annual care pack registration. A single failing HDD may be enough to offset the care pack costs for a year or two.
When it comes to servers I very rarely decommission one because it fails. Likely causes are lack of software support for the old OS (eg. 3rd party support for Win2000), expensive HW upgrades (check the availability and price of SCSI drives or ECC DDR1 for example), memory limits of 32-bit Windows, and obsolescence of the 3rd party software for which the server was dedicated.
Whether it is cost-effective to continue using say, 10-year-old server instead of replacing it with a faster and/or more energy-efficient model, or at least virtualising it is another thing.
Thanks to the Reg for pushing articles regarding the EOL for W2k3 servers! I have finally driven the point home that our last W2k3 server will need upgrading. At this time we will have to be happy with 2008r2. I'm not sure this mission critical App will run internally when 2008r2 is put out to pasture. Who knows, M$ may be shown the door by then as well as we have AD just to support this App.
"when Microsoft worked with another customer on a WS2003 migration recently, it found that of the business's 27,000 servers it had 9,000 that could be retired."
Ye gods! A third of 'em!
A company of that size has probably been paying for hardware and software maintenance on that little lot.
Where I'm working now they have a few Win2k boxes (one a central file server!) plus plenty of 2003, though also lots of 2008-12. Quite a mix!
There is a BIG project to virtualise and migrate the majority of the servers to a pair of datacentres, but it's being run by HP and the speed they're going it may be 2003 has gone EoL before that completes!
Anon obviously ;-)
I recently spent 6 months migrating legacy applications off WS2003. The main reason it took so long was the lamentable state of the deployment documentation. But I have to wonder what the company was supposed to gain from the upgrade. Retirement of unreliable old boxes? Maybe, but you don't have to install a new OS for that. As it is, the company is 26 * my weekly rate poorer with no measurable benefit to show for it.
The migration away from XP was made almost impossible by the vast number of (cr)apps that only just ran on XP (or, in practice, IE6) and therefore had to be re-written or replaced before the OS could switch. Since we're talking about end-user apps, there is almost no limit to the numbers of these.
What's the position for your average server? Any box that is simply filling one of the standard roles (like DC, file server, web server, database, ...) just requires the cash to replace. The only problems would be servers running some sort of bespoke crapware.
So if you can forgive the (apparent, but un-meant) trolling -- how big a problem is this?
The problem with abandoning Windows Server 2003 is that it won't be long before they also abandon support for Windows Server 2008 ... leaving Windows Phone Server 2012 as the only option. I hope all of you sysadmins have your touchscreen servers ready. Or better yet ... start moving your applications to Linux where they belong. :)
"...it won't be long before they also abandon support for Windows Server 2008"
2008 Server loses support in 2020 after 12 years. So it's only half-way into oblivion.
Now, which Linux would you suggest with the same or superior support lifecycle?
"I hope all of you sysadmins have your touchscreen servers ready."
Nah. In 2020, Server 2012 is probably superseded by 1 or 2 newer Windows releases with everything done with the Xbox controller and Kinect. :-)
I recently migrated several physical hosts away from Server 2008 R2 to Server 2012 R2. It was a very painless experience and the extra features in Hyper-V in relation to replication and disaster recovery made it well worth it.
My colleague and I had three physical servers and all the contained VMs migrated in a couple of hours on the weekend. No in-place upgrade, reformat and reinstall, apply OS updates, install SAN tools, setup iSCSI and reload the VMs. Too easy.
The Touch interface didn't really get in the road the updated server management tools keep you away from that abomination, and with a liberal sprinkling of Start8 it's as if Metro never existed.
Next victim on the chopping block is the SBS2003 domain controller.
"The problem with abandoning Windows Server 2003 is that it won't be long before they also abandon support for Windows Server 2008 ... leaving Windows Phone Server 2012 as the only option."
Errm... I set up a machine with WinServer2012R2 yesterday. It was a quick, easy, set up, and I have yet to see even one tile.
I have a pile of WinServer2012R2 books and that server to serve (see what I did there?) as a testbed for the future. I expect that all of our WS2003 and 2008 units will either be scrapped or will be WS2012R2 by the end of the year. The 2008R2 units will probably still be in service for a while yet.
I've used two tutorials in our 2003 migration that I would highly recommend.
This is the official MS one. Yes, I know :) But it is surprisingly good: http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/server-cloud/products/windows-server-2003/
and this one is a more dedicated to migration process itself:
http://www.zinstall.com/how-to/how-to-migrate-application-server-from-windows-server-2003-to-server-2008-or-2012
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
