Any Problems With Server 2008?

[FN-GM]

Hi

 

Has anybody had any major problems with Server 2008? I am thinking about trailing it as we have an old server coming offline soon I would like so have a good play when i have finished give small job as a Intranet server or something.

 

Thanks

[Geoff]

My main problem with 2k8 is that I don't have a server running it yet.

[localzuk]

The only issue I've had during testing so far is that Hyper-V is no where near stable yet.

[Geoff]

I wouldn't use HyperV anyway. If I was going to virtualise anything I'd stick with VMWare.

[Sylv3r]

I have the beta version on my MacBook with fusion - from what ive seen of it so far it does look good and very responsive. From reviews i've read and clips on itidiots - it does look worthy of running it in school in the not so distant future - probably for terminal services for SIMS.

[john]

Very pleased with it and its performance, nice speed to it good tool and worthy of using before SP1.

[kingswood]

I love Server 2008!

 

I am running the final Enterprise 64-bit version using VMWare on my MBP and it is *very* nice. I also did a full migration of two Server 2003 VMs with around a dozen users, home areas, System Center, WSUS etc over to a single Server 2003 VM. Absolutely no problems at all! Everything (in an Apple sense) "just worked".

 

I don't think you will have many problems with this edition of Server at all. In fact I am looking at it in comparison with Apple's Leopard Server and it leaves OS X Server behind in another galaxy! But that's for another discussion...

 

Paul

[FN-GM]

Thanks for the feedback, nice to hear something positive about a new Microsoft product.

[Michael]

A question that hasn't really been asked yet (I'm a Windows Server 2003 R2 user), is how do they compare? Where does 2008 noticeably improve upon 2003 R2? And are there any 2008 must haves? Meaning, should I adopt it sooner than later?

[zag]

After migrating to exchange 2007 before sp1 and paying the price, I wouldn't touch another piece of Microsoft software that early in its development again.

 

I will wait for SP1 this time but good to hear some positive reviews.

[kingswood]

A question that hasn't really been asked yet (I'm a Windows Server 2003 R2 user), is how do they compare? Where does 2008 noticeably improve upon 2003 R2? And are there any 2008 must haves? Meaning, should I adopt it sooner than later?

 

That's a great question. And a loaded one too.

 

You will probably get different answers depending on the roles that servers have played in particular organisations. For example- one strength of the new Server 2008 product is found in its improved Terminal Services. If you run TS in Application Mode then you will know that it isn't always good at what it's supposed to do (it isn't bad either- but has needed improvements across the board). It is my opinion that in 2008 MS have really spent time on this aspect of the product- from licensing all the way up to accessing applications and distributing those applications to client connections.

 

Another area of Server management that I think they have really looked at is management tools. The new MMC version included (they started this in 2003 R2 I think) is a lot richer, and the performance and monitoring tools are very very good.

 

Then there are kernel level improvements (file I/O, memory management, virtualisation, security) and NAP (Network Access Protection) as well as upgrades to things like DFS.

 

Meh. I could go on- but those are the ones that I have noticed or caught up with whilst looking at the two. At the end of the day Server 2008 is the future for MS Server Products and the general direction they are taking this in is nice look at Server Core and you can tell they are actually getting serious about Server Roles and how organisations can use servers rather than just have servers).

 

Just my thoughts on this...

 

Paul

[localzuk]

I wouldn't use HyperV anyway. If I was going to virtualise anything I'd stick with VMWare.

 

VMWare Server doesn't seem to work either actually. It just doesn't load. Maybe the new version will solve this.

[originofsymmetry]

Setting up a new domain in anew forest (so new builds only) is an increbibly long winded process now, I had no idea for about a week with it.

[Michael]

Thanks for the feedback Kingswood. Overall it sounds positive and it does seem Microsoft have just built more tools in Server 2008 (which isn't a bad thing at all). Server 2003 is/was probably my favourite Windows OS.

 

I do feel however that unless I'm using Windows Vista or XP SP3, then 2008 Server probably won't offer me that much as an administrator. That's not to say I couldn't run 2000 Pro or XP SP2, but I wouldn't be able to play with new policies with these.

 

I also read that just after one month (April 2008), 2008 Server has already received a security hotfix which I am surprised about. I hope this trend doesn't continue and that it's a one off!

[cookie_monster]

We moved from 2K to 2K3 very early as we needed to overhaull the network at that time and it work perfectly MS server products seem to be more trouble free than the desktops. I've been using 2008 a bit and it seems swift and stable (technically it is at SP1 already as Vista and 2008 share the same code base only 2008 has most of the 'trouble' packages removed e.g. aero.

 

Word on the street seems to be that it's good to go as a base OS, of course problems with third party software can't be ruled out but if you're sticking mainly MS you should be fine. Alot of the new 2008 features have been tested anyway in 2003 R2 they were finished ages before 2008 was ready which is really why MS released R2.

[srochford]

I also read that just after one month (April 2008), 2008 Server has already received a security hotfix which I am surprised about. I hope this trend doesn't continue and that it's a one off!

 

Would you rather that they didn't bother to fix problems?

 

I don't think that any program (beyond "Hello World" type apps) has ever been released without some kind of problem - the key thing is always whether the manufacturer fixes problems when they are alerted to them. Historically, Microsoft were bad at dealing with this but for a good few years now they've responded quickly to problems (hence "patch Tuesday") and have a much better security record.

[st00175]

I just finished building 2 new Quad Core Xeon servers with Server 2008 Std x64. I must say I found it much simpler to setup and get going over 2003. There's a few good improvements which you dont realize until you go back to a 2003 box.

 

About the only issue I've found so far is copying files between mapped drives, where sometimes it copies REALLY slowly, then bombs out - it's a known issue according to a few posts around the net. Apart from that, and the unstable Hyper-V (both the included beta and the RC0 update), it's fantastic.

 

A few things to be aware of if you are thinking of updating, especially if you have XP clients, is to disable AutoTuning and RSS using NETSH. Google "slow vista RDP" for the actual fix - it applies to 2008 too.

[amcevoy]

We are having a few .net based problems..

[zag]

I'm thinking of rebuilding my network over the Summer and have just put 2008 Enterprise x64 on one of my new servers.

 

The interface is very different from 2003 and I'm wondering if there is a problem whether it's going to be easy to find and diagnose, or cause longer downtime, especially as I don't have a service agreement or any help whatsoever.

 

Yes that's exactly the problem, it may be Microsoft's most stable server OS yet, but I wouldn't want to be in a disaster recovery situation with limited help on Google and a problem I simply couldn't fix because no one else has had that problem yet.

 

Servers to me should be stable and simply work, when there is a problem it should be easy to diagnose and fix.

 

I don't see the point in upgrading for the sake of upgrading, even if you want to future proof your network.

[ZeroHour]

I have been playing with 2008 and hyper v and just having a go of it all and its brilliant. I love the new interfaces for the most part and find it fairly easy to use.

[Michael]

Would you rather that they didn't bother to fix problems?

 

I don't think that any program (beyond "Hello World" type apps) has ever been released without some kind of problem - the key thing is always whether the manufacturer fixes problems when they are alerted to them. Historically, Microsoft were bad at dealing with this but for a good few years now they've responded quickly to problems (hence "patch Tuesday") and have a much better security record.

 

I agree problems should be fixed, but I was just so surprised a patch was released so soon after its release. I think also (as other people have pointed out), 2008 Server is still very new and it doesn't matter whether "SP1" is mentioned in its build name. It needs to be tried and tested. I think realistically 2008 SP2 should be the time I take it more seriously, but also I'll be running XP SP3 by then too.