Re: Wow
>If they can do it properly so that you can cut it back quite dramatically (e.g. run a few undemanding services in 128MB memory and a 1GB disk image) then that would be qute welcome.
<jokeAlert>Does nano have a footprint of only 9 Gb ? That would already be pretty impressive for Windows.</jokeAlert>
>I suspect what we will actually end up with is a dependency graph that goes "You need feature X. That needs features A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, and L installing as prerequisites." If it goes too far along those lines it loses its usefulness and becomes more marketing fluff, so it'll be interesting to see how it actually works in practice.
Indeed, the whole point ... especially when you consider that a lot of enterprise apps do not run on server core, will it be worse on Windows nano ? I guess so ... Compare that to truly modular OS' (cf icon) where the database server's OS takes up mere megabytes, where you can install "X, along with A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, and L" with a one-liner ... sweet dreams.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
