synaesthesia Posted June 1, 2012 Posted June 1, 2012 Giddy good god - I was hoping it wouldn't be entirely Windows 8'ised. I was wrong. My NM described it as "Windows Server CBeebies Edition". Closed it before Justin Fletcher popped out on screen, not that I could find the start menu... 1
sonofsanta Posted June 1, 2012 Posted June 1, 2012 I read yesterday that it defaults to Metro on boot. Because what every sysadmin wants is a fscking touch screen interface when they connect to their server. Of course.
synaesthesia Posted June 1, 2012 Author Posted June 1, 2012 Still doesn't help when you punch the screen in desperation.
teejay Posted June 1, 2012 Posted June 1, 2012 Linux and Samba 4 are beginning to look like something worth investigating...
Michael Posted June 1, 2012 Posted June 1, 2012 I think for a server, Metro really is pointless. And anyway, I thought by default Windows Server 2012 was GUIless and you have to switch that on too? I think Microsoft are trying to engineer it in such a way that you control the server functions from a workstation (a bit like RSAT), so you don't actually have to touch the server itself. If Microsoft want to make Windows Server more secure, they should strip out IE completely and make that optional too. Rock on Windows Server 2008 R2
Frut02 Posted June 1, 2012 Posted June 1, 2012 Hmmm i cant see me using this when its released...... starting to investigate linux anyway
sted Posted June 1, 2012 Posted June 1, 2012 it has no start menu but defaults to desktop metro is basically the start menu it has some good stuff hyperv has had some good upgrades, storage pools like home server look good and data deduplication. Its less annoying than win8 but i could live without metro yes
cpjitservices Posted June 1, 2012 Posted June 1, 2012 Oh my word.... Metro... on a server... really ? no way am I going down that road!!!! Think Ill stick with 2008 R2!
Dave84 Posted June 1, 2012 Posted June 1, 2012 I read yesterday that it defaults to Metro on boot. Because what every sysadmin wants is a fscking touch screen interface when they connect to their server. Of course. There was originally a GPO to allow it to boot to desktop but ever since the beta Microsoft changed it to only work if you had Desktop experience installed which is pointless. The server manager UI is shockingly bad as well.
gshaw Posted June 1, 2012 Posted June 1, 2012 Maybe the UI is meant to be deliberately bad so you install the Core-equivalent GUI-less version and remote manage it
DrCheese Posted June 1, 2012 Posted June 1, 2012 The server manager UI is shockingly bad as well. oh god yes, it took me about 10/15 minutes to work out how to dcpromo it. What a mess!
synaesthesia Posted June 1, 2012 Author Posted June 1, 2012 I quickly looked at the Core install of 2008 for hyper-v and nearly decided to learn it. Perhaps I should have. But nm, I intend to be using 2008R2 for a long while yet.
Michael Posted June 2, 2012 Posted June 2, 2012 This made me laugh - Microsoft 'feeling really good' about Windows 8... The point is, no one else feels good about it The strange thing is, there's so much talk of Windows 8/Windows Server 2012, but nothing on Windows 7 SP2/Windows Server 2008 R2 SP2
SYNACK Posted June 2, 2012 Posted June 2, 2012 This made me laugh - Microsoft 'feeling really good' about Windows 8... The point is, no one else feels good about it The strange thing is, there's so much talk of Windows 8/Windows Server 2012, but nothing on Windows 7 SP2/Windows Server 2008 R2 SP2 This will probably be specificly because of W8, the SP2 release usually includes a bunch of features to make it work nicely and take advantage of some of the features in the new system. SP2 will probably arrive some time after the RTM of the next server OS.
Michael Posted June 2, 2012 Posted June 2, 2012 This will probably be specificly because of W8, the SP2 release usually includes a bunch of features to make it work nicely and take advantage of some of the features in the new system. SP2 will probably arrive some time after the RTM of the next server OS. Yeah you're probably right, but Windows 7 SP2 would be a welcomed addition. Just as long as Microsoft DON'T remove the Start Menu orb!
SYNACK Posted June 2, 2012 Posted June 2, 2012 Yeah you're probably right, but Windows 7 SP2 would be a welcomed addition. Just as long as Microsoft DON'T remove the Start Menu orb! Yea, luckily that is not something they are likely to do as SPs are generally just a patch release with very few new features, they could pull an XP SP3 and gimp stuff like the address bars again but removing the start menu from the existing OS would be unprescedented and suicidal.
Arthur Posted June 2, 2012 Posted June 2, 2012 The Start Menu isn't going to disappear in SP2. Steve Ballmer would have to be out of his mind to do this (even more so than usual). What Microsoft should also do is create a Feature Pack for SP2 (like they did with Vista) to add native support for USB 3.0, 4Kn HDDs, SMB 3.0 and VHDX/ISO files.
SYNACK Posted June 2, 2012 Posted June 2, 2012 The Start Menu isn't going to disappear in SP2. Steve Ballmer would have to be out of his mind to do this (even more so than usual). What Microsoft should also do is create a Feature Pack for SP2 (like they did with Vista) to add native support for USB 3.0, 4Kn HDDs, SMB 3.0 and VHDX/ISO files. Agreed, they may well add some of this in, SMB3 etc. for better integration with W8 server. I am somewhat amused by the Windows 8 name in general, shorten it to W8 and then say that as it would sound 'wait' Windows Wait just sounds funny especially since they have made all sorts of changes to make it faster.
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