Gaz Posted January 26, 2015 Posted January 26, 2015 Will Windows 10 be followed up with a new Server OS? For example Windows XP - Server 2003 Windows 7 - Server 2008 Windows 8 - Server 2012 Will server 2012 be fully functional with Windows 10 or are they likely to release a new OS? Or has it been announced but I just live under a rock!
cscc Posted January 26, 2015 Posted January 26, 2015 There is a Server 10 consumer preview available along side Windows 10. I'm guessing they are aiming for a summer 2015 release. 1
andydis Posted January 26, 2015 Posted January 26, 2015 (edited) (Microsoft officials haven't yet said what the final name of the next server release will be. It could be Windows Server 2015, if Microsoft sticks with past naming conventions. Or they could do Windows Server 10, I guess... source First preview build of Windows Server Next available to testers on October 1 | ZDNet at a guess im sure 10 will fully function with 2012 but you may need a few updates / ADM updates Edited January 26, 2015 by andydis 1
Gaz Posted January 26, 2015 Author Posted January 26, 2015 Thanks for the responses guys, I'm hoping to get a new server to replace an old 2003 server but It would be nice to use the latest OS with it. I'll have to take a peak at server 10 then.
andydis Posted January 26, 2015 Posted January 26, 2015 Gaz , if you have 2003 still , are you not thinking of upgrading anyway?? (as its support is being dropped)
Gaz Posted January 26, 2015 Author Posted January 26, 2015 Gaz , if you have 2003 still , are you not thinking of upgrading anyway?? (as its support is being dropped) Yeah thats what I mean, I will be completely removing the server and installing a new one with the latest OS as the network runs Windows 7. This will be done this summer so it may be a little out of its expiry date.
Michael Posted January 26, 2015 Posted January 26, 2015 I suspect 2008 R2, 2012 and 2012 R2 will be functional with Windows 10. The reason I don't include 2008, is because if you install the latest Windows 8.1 GPOs, it works, but it displays parsing errors every time which is annoying!
sted Posted January 26, 2015 Posted January 26, 2015 I suspect 2008 R2, 2012 and 2012 R2 will be functional with Windows 10. The reason I don't include 2008, is because if you install the latest Windows 8.1 GPOs, it works, but it displays parsing errors every time which is annoying! you also cant edit certain policies on 2008 (for that matter there are some you need 2012r2 for and id assume there are windows 10 settings that you need server 10 for)
Gaz Posted January 26, 2015 Author Posted January 26, 2015 Well it would be server 2012 R2 as a minimum. I don't think anything would be virtualised because I'm not sure what we could virtualise we dont run many systems as we a small company.
Michael Posted January 26, 2015 Posted January 26, 2015 Virtualising only makes sense when the number of physical servers becomes a problem. I have seen some setups where there's only one physical server on site which also has virtualised instances and is a big no no.
sparkeh Posted January 26, 2015 Posted January 26, 2015 Virtualising only makes sense when the number of physical servers becomes a problem. I have seen some setups where there's only one physical server on site which also has virtualised instances and is a big no no. I have one physical server with VMs on it. Its great for DR and server migrations. What's your issue with it?
Gaz Posted January 26, 2015 Author Posted January 26, 2015 I have one physical server with VMs on it. Its great for DR and server migrations. What's your issue with it? Seems like its an all your eggs in one basket approach, although I've never done virtualised systems so I can't say for certain as I've only used Oracles Virtual Box. We have one physical server that does everything, but I'll be looking to move to a mirrored setup when the server gets replaced.
sparkeh Posted January 26, 2015 Posted January 26, 2015 Seems like its an all your eggs in one basket approach, although I've never done virtualised systems so I can't say for certain as I've only used Oracles Virtual Box. We have one physical server that does everything, but I'll be looking to move to a mirrored setup when the server gets replaced. Sorry to derail the thread a bit, its just I never understand why people are so against single server virtualisation, the DR benefits are worth it alone. Anyway back to topic
Michael Posted January 26, 2015 Posted January 26, 2015 I have one physical server with VMs on it. Its great for DR and server migrations. What's your issue with it? Exactly that - all your eggs in one basket. You'll only have one real DC, and one virtual DC but they're still on the same physical box. You do have to think worse case scenario that it could create a lot of work if something serious went wrong.
sparkeh Posted January 26, 2015 Posted January 26, 2015 (edited) Exactly that - all your eggs in one basket. You'll only have one real DC, and one virtual DC but they're still on the same physical box. You do have to think worse case scenario that it could create a lot of work if something serious went wrong. Good Lord I would never make the physical box a DC, that's madness. The VMs are DCs. Worst case scenario involves getting a new server, installing Hyper-V, recovering the backups (either through Veeam or the raw vhd (I have both) from either the onsite or offsite backup) and starting them up. Though actually I have a couple of workstations that are capable of running each vm and have run very successful tests on this during a DR scenario. No problems. Not vitualising a single server is old thinking. Edited January 26, 2015 by sparkeh
Gaz Posted January 26, 2015 Author Posted January 26, 2015 Derail away I was only asking from an academic standpoint whether MS were releasing a new server OS in line with their new desktop OS. So the thread has served its purpose. 1
DMcCoy Posted January 26, 2015 Posted January 26, 2015 Derail away I was only asking from an academic standpoint whether MS were releasing a new server OS in line with their new desktop OS. So the thread has served its purpose. Which is unfortunate, 2003 was much better than XP, and then we get 2008, *Vista* server, and again the horror of 2012 with Metro, eugh. I do not need My Recorded videos and such on a server thanks. 1
sted Posted January 27, 2015 Posted January 27, 2015 Which is unfortunate, 2003 was much better than XP, and then we get 2008, *Vista* server, and again the horror of 2012 with Metro, eugh. I do not need My Recorded videos and such on a server thanks. but it makes sense to keep the interface standard across them all esp if you have rdp servers
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now