Moving to Server 2008?

[localzuk]

So, how quickly are people planning to go up to Windows Server 2008 after it is released?

I'm just having a play and think that some of the new features will make a lot easier! Too many to list in fact!

So, your thoughts...

[Oops_my_bad]

If someone's willing to do a noobie guide to migration then I'd love to

[john]

I will have a test one or two on the go fairly quickly, they won't be DCs probably be more like Application, Print, WDS (to allow multi-casting) etc maybe add a third DC which is 2008 to allow more control over Vista for when we move onto it. From what I have seen of it, its more like Server 2003 V2 rather than Vista Server, it certainly doesn't have the speed issues of Vista

[Sylv3r]

We will probably setup a Virtual Machine with it on so we can have a play with it first before we start using it on our main servers.

[contink]

I doubt my primary schools will need or want to spend the money until at least a year down the line and then some so I'll be playing with it myself on my test network and getting to know its peculiarities for a good while before I let any schools jump into that quagmire.

In particular I'm waiting to see if 2008 is as "interesting" as Vista with it's GUI. If it's all pretty and no functionality it'll be a lot longer in coming.

[john]

The GUI is like Server 2003 just a bit Vista tarted up from when I last used it, got a build from the Private Beta to try out when I get 10 mins.

[Norphy]

We'll probably migrate some of our servers over to it but not all at once.

[localzuk]

In particular I'm waiting to see if 2008 is as "interesting" as Vista with it's GUI. If it's all pretty and no functionality it'll be a lot longer in coming.

The thing is, you can tell it to just install 'Core' and not have a GUI!! Or you can go with the normal install and have a GUI which is like 2003, but with everything in the same places as Vista. And no Aero.

[john]

You probably could turn Aero on using some reg edits and service adjustments like you can make Server 2003 look like XP by turning on services that are disabled.

[sidewinder]

I need to have a real play with it first, but put it this way - its an upgrade I will be wanting unlike Vista!
Unless of course its awful, but I havent heard anything to that effect.

Only worry is if SMT find out that it makes it easier to manage Vista and want it deployed...

[Gatt]

Need to rebuild our domain at summer anyway onto new hardware, so might as well move to Windows 2008

From what I've seen of it I quite like it...

[CyberNerd]

Straight away
As soon as I know how to use it
When SP1 comes out, or later
When penguins inhabit hell...

When there is a feature that I'm going to need, enough to warrant the cost of an upgrade

[Michael]

I haven't actually seen or tested 2008 Server as yet, but it'll be interesting to see just how much difference there is between this and 2003 R2.

I'm in no immediate rush and I voted to install Server 2008 once SP1 comes out. Unless you're using Windows Vista or XP SP3, there's no real need to upgrade in the short term.

[elsiegee40]

We're in no hurry. As a very small school with a 2K3 server that's only just 2 years old, I can see us staying put for the next couple of years.

[localzuk]

One thing I've just found is the windows firewall policy controls are a huge improvement in 2008.

Add in the relatively easy to us NAP system and I have another reason to upgrade.

Also, add in the fact that network shares can be mapped via GPO rather than having to use scripts...

And you can control local users and groups via group policies for computers, etc...

I am actually looking forward to moving to it, as it will solve so many issues.