Play with Server 2008

[ranj]

Any ideas folks where I could find some good guides on setting up Server 2008. I am keen on playing with the BETA version before the April deadline.

 

If there are any step by step guides out there. Please let me know. #

 

Thanks

[FN-GM]

It will probably be something similar to Windows Server 2003

[Guest Guest]

^ from what ive heard its not

[FN-GM]

Blast will that mean i will have to learn alot of new stuff?

[Guest Guest]

Welcome to IT.

[Gatt]

Been having a quick look round - got it in VMWare with an XP Client - looks like some good additions to Group Policy!

In AD, OU's are automatically "Proctected" against accidental deletion too!!

[FN-GM]

"OU's are automatically "Proctected" against accidental deletion too"

 

That might come in handy

[comedydave]

"OU's are automatically "Proctected" against accidental deletion too"

 

That might come in handy

 

Indeed, In my 4th month in the job, and just being allowed to play a bit, I deleted the entire Year 9 during Sats week!

3 hours later I had recreated the accounts from roll, and associated then with permissions!

We live and learn!

[cookie_monster]

I found that it offered to protect OU's and you could select yes or no it wasn't automatic. 2008 really isn't all that different, you turn features on or off like in Vista and the roles wizards that started in 2003 are used allot also there are hundreds of new GP's. The main difference is server core which is all command line but very few people will use this unless you are running infrastructure stuff in the DNZ e.g DNS or DHCP servers. Also the firewall is on by default but most of the roles wizards open the correct ports so it doesn't seem to present any problems.

[Gatt]

I found that it offered to protect OU's and you could select yes or no it wasn't automatic. 2008 really isn't all that different, you turn features on or off like in Vista and the roles wizards that started in 2003 are used allot also there are hundreds of new GP's. The main difference is server core which is all command line but very few people will use this unless you are running infrastructure stuff in the DNZ e.g DNS or DHCP servers. Also the firewall is on by default but most of the roles wizards open the correct ports so it doesn't seem to present any problems.

 

When you create the OU now in RC1 there is a checkbox underneath with a checkmark in it as in the attached thumbnail

[CyberNerd]

^^ 5yrs of development is paying off. Seriously, what new features are there.

[cookie_monster]

Oh yeh that's changed, cool it's about time. The only problem is that it's not immediately obvious how you reverse the process to delete it you have to go into advanced permissions.

[cookie_monster]

Allot of the changes are to the architecture. Hyper V is an obvious one, read only donaim controllers, Powershell, user profile service (nice touch), network access protection and terminal services is improved to a point where you can compare it to citrix.

[saundersmatt]

I've been playing too, we're at the point where we're going to setup a 2008 domain and run it alongside our existing for a while.

One feature that i really do like, and was surprised was so easy to setup is Terminal Services RemoteApp. I've got SIMS.net running on a 2008 server and shared as a remoteapp, and just to prove it:

 

http://tt-s.co.uk/images/sims.jpg

 

Matt

[Kyle]

Where can you get a copy of 2008 from?

[Oops_my_bad]

Will it be easy to migrate across to 2008? I'm just thinking it's gonna be an arse recreating GP's and all the rest..

[cookie_monster]

If you have a tidy AD then you should be able to add a 2008 DC and upgrade your schema. I haven't tried this yet but it will be the likely course of action.

[Gatt]

I'll be doing a clean install on some new servers..

[mrforgetful]

Where can you get a copy of 2008 from?

 

The Microsoft website has a downloadable RC. Do a search on there it should turn up.

[projector1]

have you tried this

 

http://www.microsoft.com/events/series/windowsserver2008.aspx?tab=overview

 

http://www.microsoft.com/events/series/windowsserver2008.aspx?tab=virtuallabs

[saundersmatt]

^^ 5yrs of development is paying off. Seriously, what new features are there.

 

You've obviously not had a look at the MASSIVE improvements to group policy.

That's just one of the things that we noticed this week.

 

Matt

[localzuk]

As matt says, the improvements are amazing. The development time has been well worth it I would say. Should make our lives a hell of a lot easier in so many ways.

[CyberNerd]

What are these improvements to gpo ? My question is genuine because I've stopped believing anything that comes from MS propaganda department, so I'm asking you guys to sift the Bulls*it.

 

I've previously found with group policy it's possible to write adm templates to change pretty much any resistry settings. we were told we needed win2003 for XP, when adm templates can be loaded onto 2000 server. Is there a fundamental difference to 2008 to prevent it being backwards compatible?

 

I was expecting new virtualisation features, as MS rush to keep up with Vmware, Citrix and the linux offerings. It seems this will be delayed until after 2008 release. Any sign of winfs?. Powershell looks an improvement (15yrs late).

[torledo]

What are these improvements to gpo ? My question is genuine because I've stopped believing anything that comes from MS propaganda department, so I'm asking you guys to sift the Bulls*it.

 

I've previously found with group policy it's possible to write adm templates to change pretty much any resistry settings. we were told we needed win2003 for XP, when adm templates can be loaded onto 2000 server. Is there a fundamental difference to 2008 to prevent it being backwards compatible?

 

I was expecting new virtualisation features, as MS rush to keep up with Vmware, Citrix and the linux offerings. It seems this will be delayed until after 2008 release. Any sign of winfs?. Powershell looks an improvement (15yrs late).

 

you make a good point about adm files, i bought the whole idea that you must have 2003 for xp-specific gpo's ....if i had known i would never had upgraded beyond win2000. win2k server does everything you need and the things that were supposed to improve things in 2003 such as the printer deployment gpo just plain don't work as advertised or are ugly solutions to a problem (check both boxes for the awful printer deployment feature)....as for the file and print mgmt gui's to me they're just purely cosmetic fluff

 

As for win2008, if it's better than the con that was windows server 2003 then i'm all for it - winfs was always an empty promise, they've killed it dead in the water before they dug that hole too big for them to get out of. MS realised it's just too difficult to create a truly modern fs without community support, i'm guessing winfs would have looked crap next to what sun and the open-source community have achieved with zfs anyway.

 

As for virtualization my understanding was that hyper-v IS the virtualization offering, and is based on xen. if as a result of microsoft efforts vmware reduce the cost of vi3 even further to retain competitive advantage then i don't care if Hyper-V is any good.

[torledo]

 

Powershell looks an improvement (15yrs late).

 

 

it's funny 'cos the team behind powershell actually looked back 15 years when developing powershell - that's how wrong microsoft were with thy're cmd / wsh approach . ....the team were heavily influenced by vms and os/400 - bonafide legacy technology from way bacj wen .

 

and i don't think it is wrong to say that powershell itself is very heavily influenced by vms.

 

So yes, powershell is late, but just shows how advanced legacy technology such as vms actually was and how microsoft got it so wrong before they came to their senses.

 

 

when microsoft or the other tech companies tells you they've developed something brand spanking new, in all likelihood it's been done before in more mature technology.

 

after all vm's aren't new ibm were doing virtualization and thin clients decades ago, what goes around comes around if it's of real substance.