Knowing Microsoft, this semi-annual preview will produce the most efficient running software they've ever produced.
Microsoft's released something odd: a new tech preview of Windows Server's semi-annual release channel with no new features but a few known issues with the potential to mess things up. The first-listed known issue warns that “Dynamic disks fail I/O with STATUS_INVALID_DEVICE_REQUEST, resulting in failures to mount or format a …
"Do you have any verified stats to back up your prodigious claim?"
Yes, but not ones I can publish. However, Zone-H.org do. They are from ~ 2010 but the gap has only got larger since then - as Windows Server security has been significantly improved.
For pretty much anything on that is internet facing - especially when used as a "default" configuration, and especially as a web server - Window Server is (at least over the last decade or so) at way lower risk of being successfully attacked than Linux.
If Microsoft did a new version with no new features, a choice of GUI's and a LOT of bug fixes then i'd be perfectly happy buying it.
After about 6 months when you've discovered the bugs with the latest OS and the applications it's running it's not like you really need much in the way of features because you sort out any deficiencies with third party software. NT, 2k & 2003 hung around recently (and are still deployed in some places) because they do the job adequately; beyond a certain point you don't need additional features as long as programs still run.
"They bring out new stuff and break old stuff. "
Or just remove useful old stuff. I still miss the flashing green on the network con in the system tray which showed actual data transfer (they later changed it so that it would still flash but not in relation to the actual data transfer).
Also the ability to right click the icon and go straight to IP address details.
Given the speed of actual networks, it could be just wasted CPU cycles to update the icon.
Still, there are too many indirection levels to get to useful data when you click the icon. OK, lusers should be kept away from meddling with the system, but it' not a good reason to make users life more miserable...
"Given the speed of actual networks, it could be just wasted CPU cycles to update the icon."
I think there's some spare cycles that could be used instead. Also there seems to be plenty of other CPU cycles I'd be prepared to give up - the 'Metro' interface for one, the constantly updating tiles etc.
The 0.0000000001% hit on my processor to update an icon I can deal with. The relatively small silicon inn the network card seems to update its own LED without too much trouble.
Server or Win 10 Fall Creators update ? The horror stories one hears around town about it. After multiple partial downloads blow your ISP data allowances out of water, followed by remediation of problems from partial installs,you may have a working computer with another 25GB space used up. , All one gains is some irrelevant guff about VR or MR instead of something useful. So the server version may be benign in comparison.
The problem here is that people like to complain when things go wrong, they dont pipe up as much when things work, Yes some people have had issues, but whats that % wise of the install base of windows 10?
I have installed windows hundreds probably thousands of times in the past, i don't regale people with the tales of the times that windows installed issue free, I do however tell them about the one time that an in place upgrade screwed my data ONCE 15 years ago.
Its the same with linux, billions of installs across the world.. ticking away just fine. But if you google linux right now the news is full of stories about it not being fit for purpose in Munich and it being replaced with windows... To the layman the perception would be that linux isn't that good.
"After multiple partial downloads blow your ISP data allowances out of water"
Setting up your connection as metered might be a good idea?
"you may have a working computer with another 25GB space used up"
You have x days to roll back from the update, during that time a backup of your old installation is kept on disk. If you don't rollback this will be removed automatically freeing the space back up.
"Setting up your connection as metered might be a good idea?"
You mean the option where MS says they won't download anything unless MS thinks its really important, in which case they will do it anyway? As always, it's Microsoft's call, right?
Why should MS have the final say on what circumstances the user would be allowed to not download updates? Why the silliness with metered connections and active hours and deferrals? Why does the owner of the PC have to make their case to Microsoft, according to Microsoft's rules, and hope that the request for control of their own computer is approved?
The quality of MS updates and patches has taken a nosedive right at the moment that they've taken away the user's ability to control these things for himself. This is by no means a surprise; if you fire all of your quality assurance testers, quality isn't assured. Add that to an insane rapid release schedule (which necessitates MORE testing, not less), and you have... well, what we have now.
"You mean the option where MS says they won't download anything unless MS thinks its really important, in which case they will do it anyway? As always, it's Microsoft's call, right?"
Ahh, I wasn't aware of that, certainly not experienced that myself, work tethered quite often and Iv not noticed any massive downloads... Maybe Ive just been lucky.
I seem to recall something something about Storage Spaces Direct, the only damn thing that looked at all interesting which they ripped out for possible bugs. So. Nothing worth bothering about. Wake me when we have old features back or something new worth investigating. And no, a further increase in the licensing cost is not a feature.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019