Windows Server 2012 RTM coming in August, general availability in September

Yesterday at Microsoft's Worldwide Partner Conference, the company announced officially that Windows 8 is on-track to reach the Release to Manufacturing (RTM) stage in the first week of August, with general availability to come later in October - essentially confirming many thoughts of the industry on when Windows 8 would be released.

There was no word at the event on when Windows Server 2012 would be released, but a post today on the Windows Server Blog reveals that the operating system will also RTM in the first week of August alongside Windows 8. General availability will be in September (earlier than Windows 8) through "multiple channels".

The Release Preview of Windows Server 2012 has been downloaded over 500,000 times, according to the blog. Come September, it will definitely be interesting to see what differences there are between the shipping version of Server 2012 and the RP.

Via: The Verge
Source: Windows Server Blog

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Google releases Android Jelly Bean source code to AOSP

Next Story

Firefox dev claims "everybody hates Firefox updates" [Update]

30 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Maybe I'm just different, but I find it easier to administer a server with a gui. I can get so much stuff done faster, such as moving files (drag and drop), configuring apps, etc. Yes, Server Core reduces the attack surface exposed to the outside world, but even with something like ubuntu desktop vs ubuntu server, I can get things done much quicker with the GUI than the command line.

SirEvan said,
Maybe I'm just different, but I find it easier to administer a server with a gui. I can get so much stuff done faster, such as moving files (drag and drop), configuring apps, etc. Yes, Server Core reduces the attack surface exposed to the outside world, but even with something like ubuntu desktop vs ubuntu server, I can get things done much quicker with the GUI than the command line.

Once you figure out PS scripts and use them, you might not ever touch GUI again (at least for common administrative tasks)

Doubt it, I use a combination of the two and see no reason to change. PS is fine for some MS stuff but across the board it is easier to manage through GUI by and large. Reasons we focused on Windows and not Linux.

Dashel said,
Doubt it, I use a combination of the two and see no reason to change. PS is fine for some MS stuff but across the board it is easier to manage through GUI by and large. Reasons we focused on Windows and not Linux.

Nah, after seeing how our Linux admins scripted everything, I've been doing the same in our environment. Don't get me wrong, I love the GUI and used it for years but when you can save time, it makes you that much more productive; whether I'm working on SharePoint, Exchange, or even configuring a server build.

And for those poster childs its great. Its everything else thats problematic. I don't want a management client for everything I need on my PC. That and many things are certainly easier from the GUI, reasons Exchange 2010 is preferable to 2007 - a fleshed out GUI. Its about choice.

Ya i'm curious too whether this will have the Metro garbage start screen crap
It would be funny if it did, because I'm sure thats exactly what admins want lol

If it don't this may be the version everyone is gonna pirate like crazy

I am Not PCyr said,
Ya i'm curious too whether this will have the Metro garbage start screen crap
It would be funny if it did, because I'm sure thats exactly what admins want lol

If it don't this may be the version everyone is gonna pirate like crazy

Yeah, it does have the start screen, but server's not known for that, esp. when you have other ways to launch apps or not even having to RDP into the server.

A server doesn't need a UI, you set it and then you manage it remotely or through powershell. If people have issues with a UI on a server install then they're doing it wrong.

GP007 said,
A server doesn't need a UI, you set it and then you manage it remotely or through powershell. If people have issues with a UI on a server install then they're doing it wrong.

Better tell that to all the Terminal Services, Remote Desktop, VDI and Citrix customers then.

Tell them about full-screen transitions will make it better whilst you're at it.

GP007 said,
A server doesn't need a UI, you set it and then you manage it remotely or through powershell. If people have issues with a UI on a server install then they're doing it wrong.

And remote administration (especially via tablets, such as iPads or Android tablets) is, in fact the preferred method to admin Server 2008 today (with or without R2).

PGHammer said,

And remote administration (especially via tablets, such as iPads or Android tablets) is, in fact the preferred method to admin Server 2008 today (with or without R2).

RDP via Tablets preferred? No.

shockz said,

RDP via Tablets preferred? No.

He said remote administration and you think RDP? The two things aren't the same. It could be as simple as using the server manager app and connecting to the server that way or sending off a powershell script, all of which can be done via a tablet and have nothing to do with starting up a remote desktop session.

GP007 said,

He said remote administration and you think RDP? The two things aren't the same. It could be as simple as using the server manager app and connecting to the server that way or sending off a powershell script, all of which can be done via a tablet and have nothing to do with starting up a remote desktop session.

My mistake I thought I saw remote desktop, not administration. I still stand by my original comment.

shockz said,

My mistake I thought I saw remote desktop, not administration. I still stand by my original comment.

Right and I agree with you that RDP via a tablet, at least to a desktop UI makes no sense. But I've seen some remote management of servers via tablets, hell, even on something like an iPad. If the admin is using scripts to do tasks or a server manager app like WinServer uses then it's pretty doable in the end.

"The Release Preview of Windows Server 2012 has been downloaded over 500,000 times, according to the blog."

Thats because we wanted to see if its without Metro and perhaps its possible to tweak it and convert to Workstation like 2008 to Vista

Very curious to know how many people will be upgrading right away. While there are alot of new additions to 2012 I still wonder how many people will skip simply because of the UI. Microsoft making alot of big moves this year... Great to see

este said,
Very curious to know how many people will be upgrading right away. While there are alot of new additions to 2012 I still wonder how many people will skip simply because of the UI. Microsoft making alot of big moves this year... Great to see

We're talking about sysadmins here, not Metro crybabies.

este said,
Very curious to know how many people will be upgrading right away. While there are alot of new additions to 2012 I still wonder how many people will skip simply because of the UI. Microsoft making alot of big moves this year... Great to see

Considering you are using specific apps on a Server, its quite convenient. I am usually messing around in DHCP creating scopes and AD for managing users. Having those pinned directly on the Start Screen provides quick access.

deadonthefloor said,

Having a secure remote shell like powershell helps so you don't even need to remote into the server with RDP.

Or consoles like SharePoint's Central Admin and Exchange already on your workstation.

Mr. Dee said,

Considering you are using specific apps on a Server, its quite convenient. I am usually messing around in DHCP creating scopes and AD for managing users. Having those pinned directly on the Start Screen provides quick access.


This! Or see information in 1 view, new errors. what happened, CPU/RAM usage, Network usage, have a MMC like AD stuck to either side, able to do what needed AND see the whole server status in 1 window. cant wait.
For Windows 2012, Metro basically just replaces the Server Manager.

I don't see any reason not to wait for R2 unless you have SA. Stop with the silliness, its us sysadmins that are the biggest supposed 'crybabies'.

I can't really seem them releasing Windows Server 2012 with that goofy, designed-primarily-for-touchscreen-devices Start Screen instead of just the classic Start menu, or something similar. Has anyone installed the Server product to see whether there are differences?

devHead said,
I can't really seem them releasing Windows Server 2012 with that goofy, designed-primarily-for-touchscreen-devices Start Screen instead of just the classic Start menu, or something similar. Has anyone installed the Server product to see whether there are differences?

I installed one of the previews at one point and it had a lot of the stupid Metro crap in it but it was not quite as bad as it is in windows 8, I will probably install it on my hyper-v hosts in core mode but continue to run 2008 R2 on the virtual servers with the exception of possibly my file servers just to get the added benefit of de-duplication.

devHead said,
I can't really seem them releasing Windows Server 2012 with that goofy, designed-primarily-for-touchscreen-devices Start Screen instead of just the classic Start menu, or something similar. Has anyone installed the Server product to see whether there are differences?
I tried the original preview and yes, it WAS that metro crap unbelievably.
Installing core would be smart but (not tried is since 08 R2) there were quite a few things you couldn't do at all using core that needed a GUI...

deadonthefloor said,

The recommended install for the server is server core with no GUI.
Then you add your roles in powershell v3.

Which is fine for some things and terrible for the ones that do need a GUI (MS product or other). That said, SQL in Core is awesome.

GP007 said,
There's some really cool stuff in WS2012, specially around Hyper-V 3.0 etc.

Agreed. Hyper-V 3 bring Hyper-V more in line with what VMWare is offering in ESX 5, such as hot migration and other similar features...and it's free (relatively speaking of course). Should be interesting to see how it compares next to Hyper-V 2 and ESXi 5 once released.