Neowin.net

Really? I wonder how bad the older one looked. Actually, its not all that bad, I hope they change the visual style to fit in with the UI though. Other than that it looks great.

Why would you want a "visual style" on a server? Stick with classic if you ask me.

Why not updated Windows 2007 Server?

They decided to use Windows 2003 because "Longhorn" is still under development and because their market goal is for computers running Pentium 3 class processors. It's designed to be a box sitting in your closet; a networking device like your router...

i think he means part of it looks more vista-ish and the rest looks like a default classic 2003. i suspect he wants it to be more classic just like you.

Then you need WDS Windows dorm server.

I thought we already had Windows Server 2003 Enterprise (Warez) Edition for that

When I was on campus, we had one of those nice Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Warez edition things too. The best part is when we were helping the campus IT staff diagnose a network issue that left our sever inaccessible to half the campus, he asked us what windows version we were running... we immediately said "Windows Server 2003 Enterprise". He just looked at us for a second, and didn't say anything. Then we all started laughing.

You had to be there.

i think we would. lol is lacking in this post

The final plans are supposed to allow you to install on a home made kit, so no worries there.

I hope it's flexible with that.

I could see wanting to use different storage devices for different things... non-time-sensitive stuff on some cheap large discs, other stuff on Raptor RAID

It uses a plug-and-play design; you just plug a device in and then from the server console activate, format, and boom you instantly have more space. It doesn't utilize a raid technology either, instead it uses something else to keep integrity of your data.

if you read the article its based on windows 2003 code which is currently at sp2 release candidate stage, a newer standalone build 2845 is available, but 2825 was the last offered to testers on an integrated cd.

Its concurrent connections, and its only a security measure which was implemented on XP SP2 & Vista. It can be turned off with a registy key. I expect home server would allow many more concurrent connections by default.

XP MCE did that already.

Autoexec, you are confusing the concurrent open connection (server shared) issue with tcpip connections (re: levellord patch). I'm talking about the MAXIMUM of 5 simultaneous open file shares on XP Home/Vista Basic (10 for XP Pro and Vista Premiums, I believe). And, Joel, everything I've found online says that MCE has the same limit.

These are HARD CODED limits into the OS and cannot be disabled with a registry key. The artificial limits were put in place to force people to buy MS Server OS builds if you wanted to share a drive with more than 5/10 users.

So my point is simply that some of us have more than 10 PCs (or PC-like devices) that we'd like to share data with in our homes. NAS devices don't have these limits, obviously, but they don't work with NTFS formatted drives, etc.

Currently the only way around this is to run a copy of Windows Server, which is ridiculously overpriced when all you want to do is share your music/media drive with your family.

Sooooo, back to my question, does this Home Server finally do away with this arbitrary restriction or is it really just XP Pro level file sharing in a box?

Well, being based on Windows Server 2003, these limits should not be present! Try watching the Channel 9 and 10 videos on MSDN.

"Well, being based on Windows Server 2003, these limits should not be present! Try watching the Channel 9 and 10 videos on MSDN."

Well, those limits exist in Windows Server 2003, in that you have to pay for client licenses, etc. for any connections over 10/25/50, depending on the version of OS you buy, etc.

So, what I EXPECT is that MS has hard coded this to 10. What I hope for is that they haven't hard-coded it. Anyone have an answer to this?

I believe it is a hard code. It's desgined for small inhouse environments. If you need more connections, I'd go for SBS...

Not rearlly an option! SBS *base* cost is cheap but it only come with 5CALs meaning you can only have 5 authenticated connections at once. If you want to connect MORE than 10 *just for file sharing* you need to purchase another 5-10 CALs and because the SBS licence includes SQL Server and Exchange licences so your be looking at lots of money.

The other option is to spend a fortune on Server 2003 and buy the cheaper licences either way it works out to the same cost. Its either that or purchasing a copy of Windows Server Warez Edition and setting the number of CALs to 50 if thats possible.

I always found it ironic how microsoft get away with charging you a server licence, a workstation licence for every indivdual PC and then feel the justification of charging you AGAIN for a licence to allow the two to talk to each other.

Precisely, I'm just talking about file sharing here. Not Exchange, etc. etc. If there was ANYTHING that supported unlimited shares on a LAN and NTFS read/write, it would be a winner.

Home users do not need all the rest of it, just file sharing without artificial restrictions, and they DON'T need a MS server class product with CALs etc.

SHEESH!

Let me guess. Apple doesn't have this restriction. Ahem.

If all you want is file & print sharing, set up a Linux server. If you want an application server, you could set up a Linux server and run VMWare on it.

What MS is doing here with the artificial 5/10 connection limit belongs in the 1990s. It is a ripoff.

Check your mail!
There should be a mail that starts with

"Greetings from the Windows Home Server Team

You have been approved to be in the Windows Home Server Beta program."

by now.

Thanks for the reminder!! I just checked my mail today and I got in!!

It's a Beta. What do you expect? Final set of icons? The whole idea of a beta is to get feedback on everything, not just how it works.

Most users are going to access the whs console remotely anyway and use the server as a headless nas device.

While I have no doubt MS will fix it all up to look neat and tidy for release, what does it really matter? This is a SERVER!

Exactly! The only design you should REALLY be concerned with is the client console... WHS is designed to be a network device, not an everyday OS.

You can get the product key through the connect site. Just click the request product key link

Repeat after me: beta. B-E-T-A. Go ahead, you try it now. Give Microsoft a break, it's a *drumroll please* beta.

Its a server. You use your web browser to manage it.

As RevitXman said, it's a SERVER!. There is no need for themes are styles. Windows Classic is just fine, however I'm sure they will tidy up the icons for release.

No, they thought about but decided it wasn't something the average home user will ever use.

Didnt stop you downloading it illegally from Winbeta though did it.

And I take it the whole world could give a ****?

No, of course not.

Yes, you have to format all the drives that are in the server.

This isn't meant to be installed on a dual boot or anything like that. This is meant to be on a box that is dedicated to nothing but WHS.

For testing purposes, just unplug any drive you don't want to format...that idea is pretty obvious.

Simplicity.

It's much easier to set up and use. It's meant for home users, as you can tell by the name.

Probably nothing you'll be interested in, if you already have Server 2003 x64.

So basicly I can run clarkconnect and get the same functinality + more... all for free or shell out a few hundred for this? nah.... heh =)

Advertising again are you?
And when had $100s become "free"?

Eh? no one said nothing about free money. I'm just stating the fact that you can get clarkconnect FOR FREE from their web site, COST NOTHING to use and run AND has alot more function than the M$ server which they WILL CHARGE MONEY for. I have nothing against M$, in fact i love xp64 to death, I just dont understand why they keep unloading stuff like this on the public. Now if it was say a free download from their site or if it came already installed on a NAS device then yeah more power to M$ but just for building your own server and running this? nah....

It probably will run with less, but the installation (according to the installation notes posted on the Connect site) is based on Vista PE, and requires "well north of 256MB" (their words). They claim that the installation can fail with all kinds of obscure errors with less than 512MB of RAM.

well lets just find out and see what happens i guess

To be honest, I stopped listening when I read M$. When will people grow up?

I think there is plenty of interest in the market for a product like this. How many households have more than 1 computer and currently do not have any kind of backup plan in place? I'd guess a pretty high number of homes. If a family is not lucky enough to have a geek in the house then they very likely don't have a good backup plan neither.

In theory, these Windows Home Servers (the prebuilt ones) are going to be priced relatively low enough that it shouldn't be tough to justify the cost of a device like this when you weigh the safety you get from it. This device is like a NAS on crack. The remote desktop access, remote file sharing, and media streaming add enough features to this to make it a lot more interesting than a simple NAS. Personally, I was hoping for some form of Exchange with Outlook Web Access to be included, but that is just me. I still think this is a good deal considering how easy and powerful it can be.

Damn dude, you stopped reading after M$? You missed a LOT ha ha. Sorry, I forgot this is newWIN not Slashdot. Okay it was a bit immature but nobody would understand if I used M% or M#.

Last edited by linuxamp on 17 Feb 2007 - 23:23

No, you probably didn't. It's very hard to confuse the two.

Then why not skip the immaturity and just use "MS"?
But of course, it's your choice to use ancient jokes or not.

I am going to have to disagree with you on this. True Image is a wonderful program, but I have many clients run it using a simple USB2 hard disk (for most jobs you do not need an external SATA solution). Still, you do have a point. While WHS is likely going to be connected to the network by a ethernet cable (100MBps should be fine...54 is probably not), the same can not be said for the clients. If you want to be more serious about backups you are likely going to have to use a 802.11n setup. Still, one should be able to backup up most solutions just fine (just a little slower).

My backup solution, smart sync pro. Don't get me wrong, acronis is great but I don't like filling up my network storage with large images which contain lots of system files. I take an image after installing the OS, apps and upgrades, burn it to DVDR then just use smart sync to backup my data to a network share. Only problem is that apps installed after the image have to be reinstalled after restoring from an image.

Last edited by linuxamp on 17 Feb 2007 - 23:21

That's why having partitions is still a GREAT idea:

C: Windows XP
D: Windows Vista
E: Windows Vista x64

M: Media Files (MP3, Simpsons, Futurama, Daily Show, etc)
L: Downloads
O: Documents


S: Acronis Backups

Doing Incremental backups with Acronis keeps the image sizes small and updated, having separate partitions makes it a breeze to reinstall windows.

The purpose of WHS is not just for backups, but a central location for data in a home with multiple computers. Also, you can access the data anywhere the computer has a connection (including the internet). Last, the OS is designed to be self managed; you shouldn't have to manage the server anymore than supplying quotas, users, schedules, etc. It's designed to be put in that corner of your house you never need access too and forgotten. Think of WHS has a NAS with many more features

Huh?

Don't mind him. In the end Neowin is just Slashdot + horde of dummies.

Where can i get Windows Home Server beta2?

you had to be invited into the beta by microsoft.

Looks like someone's selling an invite on ebay

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewI...em=250085453008