PiqueABoo Posted January 11, 2009 Posted January 11, 2009 Definitely not in a hurry to play with the 2K8 R2 beta, but I've skimmed the rev. guide and amongst other things it shows the new Active Directory Administrative Center (another standard 3-pane layout thingummy). Not sure I can cope without ADUC, but maybe it's still there... anyone want to play and find out? AD Recycle Bin might be handy, but OTOH I don't delete things accidently (and deleting OUs purposefully can be hard enough already coz of the standard 2K8 accidental deletion thing).
DrPerceptron Posted January 11, 2009 Posted January 11, 2009 most of the core roles (AD, IIS etc) now have PowerShell functions... PowerShell has a graphic interface and I thik you can create your own...? Windows 7 is a big thing for R2... HyperV2.0 has VMWare VMotion style functionality - transfer VM without loss of connection and DHCP failovers...
Gatt Posted January 11, 2009 Posted January 11, 2009 Just to go slightly OT - found out the other day that in Win2k8 - you can also protect objects (eg Computers, users, etc) in the same way as OU's - handy for objects that you REALLY dont want to delete!! 1
PiqueABoo Posted January 11, 2009 Author Posted January 11, 2009 Oh I didn't realise that. I guess it's just another object attribute.. I'll go look later.. have just made some plans to set protection via script/whatever on some set-in-stone AD objects. If nothing else, it will mean no one can claim it was an accident..
Zimmer Posted January 13, 2009 Posted January 13, 2009 AD Recycle Bin... I didn't know about that! Could be handy for when 1st Line make a mistake EEK!
Zimmer Posted January 13, 2009 Posted January 13, 2009 Think I'm going to have to get R2 installed this afternoon and have a play with it
somabc Posted January 13, 2009 Posted January 13, 2009 (edited) You don't need technet its open to anyone. This software is for evaluation and testing purposes. Evaluating any version of Windows Server 2008 R2 Beta software does not require product activation or entering a product key. Any edition of Windows Server 2008 R2 Beta may be installed without activation and evaluated for an initial 30 days. If you need more time to evaluate Windows Server 2008 R2 Beta, the initial 30 day evaluation can be extended to August 1st (at which time the OS will become inoperable) by entering the product key below for your selected edition. Windows Server 2008 R2 Beta Product Keys for Evaluation # Windows Server 2008 R2 Beta Enterprise (7000.0.081212-1400_server_en-us-GB1SXFRE_EN_DVD.iso) TFGPQ-J9267-T3R9G-99P7B-HXG47 # Windows Server 2008 R2 Beta Standard (7000.0.081212-1400_server_en-us-GB1SXFRE_EN_DVD.iso) 2T88R-MBH2C-M7V97-9HVDW-VXTGF # Windows Server 2008 R2 Beta Datacenter (7000.0.081212-1400_server_en-us-GB1SXFRE_EN_DVD.iso) GQJJW-4RPC9-VGW22-6VTKV-7MCC6 # Windows Server 2008 R2 Beta for Itanium Based Systems (7000.0.081212-1400_serverenterprise64_en-us-GB1SIAIFRE_EN_DVD.iso) CQ936-9K2T8-6GPRX-3JR9T-JF4CJ # Windows Web Server 2008 R2 Beta (7000.0.081212-1400_serverweb_en-us-GB1WXFRE_EN_DVD.iso) GT8BY-FRKHB-7PB8W-GQ7YF-3DXJ6 http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=85CFE4C9-34DE-477C-B5CA-75EDAE3D57C5&displaylang=en Edited January 13, 2009 by somabc 3
boomam Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 R2 sounds good - and 64bit only at last 64bit only!? So there will be no 32bit version, at all?
DrCheese Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 AD Recycle Bin... I didn't know about that! Could be handy for when 1st Line make a mistake EEK! Annoyingly tho, there is no GUI for it. Whist I like that we can use the powershell for things if we want, they should always have a GUI version as well. They did this with exchange 2007 which was stupid and we had to wait until SP1 to get important bits of the GUI back.
gshaw Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 64bit only!? So there will be no 32bit version, at all? From what I heard nope, about time too http://blogs.technet.com/windowsserver/archive/2008/10/28/announcing-windows-server-2008-r2.aspx
somabc Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 I still don't understand, is the codebase for Windows 7 the same as Windows Server 2008 R2? Then why is Windows 7 not Windows Vista R2 or the new server version not called Server 2009 ...
PeterW Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 I still don't understand, is the codebase for Windows 7 the same as Windows Server 2008 R2? Yes Then why is Windows 7 not Windows Vista R2 The Vista brand is damaged goods, best to market it as a new product and call it Windows 7
boomam Posted February 4, 2009 Posted February 4, 2009 From what I heard nope, about time too Why is it about time? Not that i want to cause an arguement, but that statement has no logic. If 2k8 R2 is anything like 2k3 R2, then it'll just be a few MMCs basically. To which x64 holds no advantage over. Even if its more than that, short of systems that require more than 3.25Gb of memory to function properly, having R2 limited to x64 still has no advantage.
k-strider Posted February 5, 2009 Posted February 5, 2009 I think the Logic is that it moves the development on out of the 32 bit environment to the 64 bit. they will need to stop supporting and building 32 bit systems some time like they did with win16. and WoW for 16 has just been dropped with the advent of x64 platforms, so i guess despite the OS moving to pure x64 WoW32 will be around for a long time and will support older software much like WoW16 did with old win 3.1 Apps right up to XP.. The Logic kind of breaks in that Win7 looks to be offered in both and that means that they will still be developing the code tree and support for both!! i think now XP and Vista have got x64 incarnations surely they could have put Win7 on just a X64 platform... maybe the driver development for Vista/Win7 x64 is still to low a base...
localzuk Posted February 5, 2009 Posted February 5, 2009 (edited) 64bit only!? So there will be no 32bit version, at all? It is a good thing. 32bit is old hat, especially for servers!! 3.5GB ram is quite often far too low for many server functions now, so why keep 32bit going? Edited February 5, 2009 by localzuk
DrCheese Posted February 5, 2009 Posted February 5, 2009 I don't even know why they are calling this 2008 R2, for starters it's built on the Windows 7 codebase and not the 2008 codebase which means it will have separate service packs from standard 2008. It has all the new wizzy features of 7 (The taskbar) so really it's essentially a whole new release and not just a bunch of MMC's like 2003 R2 was.
torledo Posted February 5, 2009 Posted February 5, 2009 I still don't understand, is the codebase for Windows 7 the same as Windows Server 2008 R2? Then why is Windows 7 not Windows Vista R2 or the new server version not called Server 2009 ... Microsoft don't want to hinder sales of the current release product which is w2k8. If they were to pitch or give the impression that R2 is a non-disruptive upgrade it's less likely that customers will hold off from moving to w2k8 in order to wait for R2. IF a totally new product with a windows server 2010 branding was around the corner in a early 2010 delivery timeframe that could be enough to convince a lot of windows server customers to hold off upgrading from w2k3 in 2008/2009 to w2k8. Now that's a lot of lost revenue in 2009 if there's enough of a mindset to hold off. Obviously i can't prove that that would be the case, i guess those folks that do surveys of IT decision makers would know better. And IT decision makers would no doubt be affronted that they're not considered sophisticated enough to make migration decisions based on the facts about future releases rather than merely judging based on product naming. But marketing and product positoning is of huge importance.
boomam Posted February 5, 2009 Posted February 5, 2009 I think the Logic is that it moves the development on out of the 32 bit environment to the 64 bit. Ive got no problem with them dropping 32bit support. But to do it to an OS thats already out there is stupid as far as im concerned. It is a good thing. 32bit is old hat, especially for servers!! 3.5GB ram is quite often far too low for many server functions now, so why keep 32bit going? Old hat, yes. But 32bit 2k8 & 3.5Gb of ram is still more than enough for most server roles, and brings with it greater hardware compatibility. Not as bad as it is on the desktop, but officially, unless its changed, the last time i spoke to HP, 64bit 2k8 isnt offically supported by their Insight software.
boomam Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 Just a thought, is anyone here planning on migrating to R2? Asuming there is no upgrade path from normal 2k8. Im just weighing up the idea of what to do with a spare server of ours, tempted to go down the WSUS route as i keep meaning to set one up, but im tempted to leave it be until R2 is out....?
localzuk Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 Ive got no problem with them dropping 32bit support. But to do it to an OS thats already out there is stupid as far as im concerned. What do you mean for an OS that's already out? 2k8 R2 isn't out... It's a new OS.
jamesb Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 Annoyingly tho, there is no GUI for it. Whist I like that we can use the powershell for things if we want, they should always have a GUI version as well. They did this with exchange 2007 which was stupid and we had to wait until SP1 to get important bits of the GUI back. There's always been an AD recycle bin, in a way, with tombstoning when you delete an object. From what I gather the decision to make it difficult to restore objects (unless you just go and get ADrestore of course) was quite deliberate, and was done so that people wouldn't treat AD overly casually.
DMcCoy Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 It is a good thing. 32bit is old hat, especially for servers!! 3.5GB ram is quite often far too low for many server functions now, so why keep 32bit going? I can't virtualise 64 bit servers with my current hardware. So I'm allowed to pay for server 2008, including software assurance, but despite it being called 2008 R2, I am unable to run it. If it was called server 2009, then fine, but 2008 R2 it's not.
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