Making the Switch To Windows "Workstation" 2008 552
snydeq writes "Disenchanted with Vista? Why not convert Windows Server 2008 into the lean, efficient, reliable 'power user' OS that Windows should be? InfoWorld's Randall Kennedy, who has been using a converted 'Workstation' 2008 as his primary OS since hitting a wall using Vista as a Visual Studio development platform four months ago, says the guerrilla OS has turned his Dell notebook into a well-oiled machine that never gets sluggish and rarely needs to reboot. Those interested in making the switch should check out win2008workstation.com, a clearinghouse for 'Workstation' 2008 tips and techniques. Kennedy also offers a link to a Windows 2008 Workstation Converter utility for those looking to quickly convert a fresh Server 2008 install without hacking the registry or manually installing/enabling lots of services and features."
windows server is pimp (Score:5, Informative)
one thing to note, its kind of a bitch to get drivers working. vista drivers work fine but you'll have to open those driver installers with an archive utility, pull out the
Incorrect use of the term 'Workstation' (Score:5, Informative)
OEM Vista Home Basic $105
OEM Vista Home Premium $136
OEM Vista Business $166
OEM Vista Ultimate $229
OEM Vista Workstation (AKA 2008 server) $1090
Wow, that's quite a markup for a workstation OS!
(All prices in AU$)
Why not run a decent 'Workstation' OS like Solaris or Linux? If you want a 'home PC', Vista is fine, but Windows is not a 'Workstation' OS, and it never was.
Meh.
You can try it for free (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Vista... Microsoft's "New Coke" (Score:4, Informative)
It's nice, but why are these necessary to use it as a "workstation"?
2. New User, Auto Logon and Strong Passwords Enforcement: How to create a new user, how to configure a user to logon automatically and how to disable enforcement of a minimum complexity for passwords.
8. Internet Explorer Enhanced Security: Disable Enhanced Security in Internet Explorer.
2. Not sure about the auto logon. New user makes sense, right? Microsoft has gone crazy with some of the password requirements-- I'm fine with complexity, but IIRC the default domain settings on 2003 are something like, "Force users to change their password every 30 days, and don't let them re-use any of their last 14 passwords." And that's stupid.
8. Again, some of the security enhancements on Microsoft's servers are absurd. I can't remember all the details, but recent versions of their servers won't allow you to download anything from the Internet, won't let you install plugins or ActiveX controls (it won't even ask you, it just won't allow it), and even if you manage to download something, Windows won't run it.
Some of my details may be off, but the general idea is there. You can either jump through insane hoops to get things working, or you can disable their security.
Pft (Score:5, Informative)
You can add Powershell to vista pretty easily, and strip off most of the junk. But what you really want is to move to 64 bit and Vista 64 is pretty dicey even in SP1. They tend to test the server products more completely before release. So they might have something there. But really, people should be complaining about why Vista isn't good, not moving to the next OS already..
The bottom line is they are basically the same, with different modules. So if you configure 08 with the exact same configuration as Vista, it will run just as crappy.
Personally, I have been forced into using Leopard (Mac OSX) at work for the past two months and I have been very pleased. UNIX is just great. Powershell is a step in the right direction but I'm not too impressed with it. You have to be very very knowledgable about all of the classes to use it effectively. For most tasks I am only needing text anyway, so why add the extra bloat of object piping? The only problem with Mac OSX is the GUI but I can run X and do most of what I want. I mean, I like the Mac GUI, but some of the stuff is frustrating to a power user. And all the addons cost money! It works pretty well for a dev box, with linux test and production servers to back it up. The best part is the huge, beautiful monitor and really really great fonts and typesetting. Nothing on windows comes close.
I have a beta of 2008 rolling around here somewhere that I picked up at the launch event. I also have VS 2008 which I believe is the finest IDE available. Although Eclipse could trump that if they could just move faster. So maybe I'll try this. Most places want you to use windows and I'm getting rusty already.
Windows Server 2008 has a better kernel..but (Score:3, Informative)
Vista is the Windows Server 2003 kernel with some junk thrown in on it, and Windows Server 2008 is just the next generation of Windows Server 2003. So, right off the wheel, you are getting a better kernel in Windows Server 2008.
The thing is, though, if you are doing client development on Windows, you are probably going to want to be developing on Vista and on XP just so you can be using an OS that is tested.
drivers may be a problem (Score:5, Informative)
A few years back, the company I worked for tried pushing Windows 2003 terminal servers (using Linux as thin clients) for its clients. It actually worked rather well, but there was one major drawback: since Windows 2003 was a "server" OS, a lot of desktop applications and workstation hardware flat out refused to support it.
Our biggest challenge was printer drivers. Practically no printer manufacturers released Win2k3 drivers, because it was the only major MS operating system at the time that didn't have some sort of workstation edition. Even though there was no technical hurdles to providing the drivers, the installation packages would refuse to run, saying that they didn't support the OS. I was usually the one stuck having to hack in the manufacturer's Windows 2000 drivers just so our customers could print their stuff. In one case, we ended up deploying a Linux CUPS server just to forward the print jobs through because the Windows drivers were so terrible.
I've done this. I switched back to Vista. (Score:5, Informative)
I got Windows Server 2008 free at the LA launch, so I figured I'd give it a go. I installed it and quickly changed everything to function as a desktop. Then I switched back. Here's why:
The experience is definitely not a simple "setup windows, modify windows, use as normal" one. Most of the random things that screw up are fixable, but just too much of a pain in the ass and ultimately a waste of time.
Server *can* run faster than Vista, but only because various artificial limits are raised or removed. Most developers work around these limits and most are very good at it, so I doubt any non-developers would ever notice any performance difference. If you're looking to speed up Vista, find one of the various sites that list descriptions of services and which are safe to turn off. Most of the "bloat" of Vista can be turned off through that.
I tried this...Antivirus Issues (Score:5, Informative)
Re:The new Windows 2000? (Score:5, Informative)
Windows 2000 wasn't the "server" OS.
Windows 2000 was the business OS. It came in Professional desktop versions and various Server versions.
How to download freely in Server 2008 (Score:5, Informative)
1. Visit www.getfirefox.com
2. Download FF3
3. Install FF3
4. Click a dozen or so security warnings in the process.
5. Never look back.
db
Re:I've done this. I switched back to Vista. (Score:1, Informative)
Did you try removing the checks from the MSI file using the Orca MSI editor?
Re:Plust best of all (Score:5, Informative)
Comment removed (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Why not... (Score:5, Informative)
That's because, for all intents and purposes, it is server 2003.
Wikipedia [wikipedia.org]
Vista SP1 == Server 2008 (Score:5, Informative)
Of course, Win 98 and Win 2K were radically different kernels.
Vista SP1 and Windows Server 2008 are the *SAME* kernel
As was said upthread, if want you want is a workstation that doesn't use all the Vista services, it's easier and cheaper to just turn off the services you don't want :).
Re:I've done this. I switched back to Vista. (Score:5, Informative)
The sound system is screwy. Priorities are setup for different workloads, resulting in pops and hisses when you play music. This is fixable, but took me a while to figure out how and I still never seemed to get it perfect.
I'm running Server 2008 as my main box, and I haven't seen this problem.
I did see the first one though (the incompatibilities) with both AVG and Avast! anti-virus; both seem to assume that since I'm installing it on the server OS it's not being used on a home, non-commercial desktop and tell you to buy the full version.
Re:You can try it for free (Score:5, Informative)
I'll provide links since you didn't. =)
Download Windows Web Server 2008 trial [microsoft.com] (or if you prefer, you can get a trial of a different version [microsoft.com] of Windows Server)
Buy Windows Web Server 2008 [pcrush.com] - apparently U.S. $140.91 ($157.76 after shipping according to shopzilla.com) from pcRUSH.com (I'd never heard of this company, but here's their Shopzilla customer rating [shopzilla.com] page); this is the best price I could find, but it seems rather low so I'm somewhat skeptical.
Buy Windows Web Server 2008 [amazon.com] - U.S. $362.49 with free shipping on Amazon.com; this is the second best price I could find, and looks a bit less fishy considering the price is closer to retail and the seller (Amazon) is well-known.
Feel free to search for better prices. I tried shopzilla.com [shopzilla.com] and pricegrabber.com [pricegrabber.com] and the prices above were the best that came up.
In case you're wondering, the reason why I singled out Windows Web Server (as opposed to another edition of Windows Server) is that if you're not going to actually use the OS for the server features, it doesn't make sense to buy a more expensive edition. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Re:come on this is not remotely affordable for mos (Score:4, Informative)
Win2k8 is going to be cost prohibitive as a desktop os for the vast majority of people.
Is that so?
(Note: I posted this in another thread, but I'm reposting it here because it's relevant.)
You can apparently buy an HP OEM copy of Windows Web Server 2008 for U.S. $140.91 [pcrush.com], supposedly $157.76 after shipping (to California). I'd never heard of the seller, pcRUSH.com, but it looks pretty legit based on the Shopzilla customer rating [shopzilla.com] page); this is the best price I could find, but it seems rather low so I'm somewhat skeptical.
Or you can buy Buy Windows Web Server 2008 for U.S. $362.49 with free shipping [amazon.com] on Amazon.com; this is the second best price I could find, and looks a bit less fishy considering the price is closer to retail and the seller (Amazon) is well-known.
I searched shopzilla.com [shopzilla.com] and pricegrabber.com [pricegrabber.com] and the prices above were the best that came up.
Anyway, these prices are not really that much higher than what Vista costs. Amazon lists Vista Home Premium for $94.99 and Ultimate for $277.49 (note that the latter is just $85 more than Amazon's price for Windows Web Server 2008). Assuming pcRUSH's price for Windows Web Server 2008 is accurate, you can actually get it cheaper than Vista Ultimate!
One problem with "server" class "workstations" (Score:4, Informative)
For example, try getting a reasonable price for something like Acronis for personal "workstation" use if you are running a flavor of Windows "Server", whatever...
There are reasons to run a "server" OS, even if it is just for development and testing work, if not legitimate personal use.
Re:Mods on crack? (Score:4, Informative)
It is redundant because its parent explained already how was this accomplished.
Re:Vista... Microsoft's "New Coke" (Score:4, Informative)
I can't remember all the details, but recent versions of their servers won't allow you to download anything from the Internet, won't let you install plugins or ActiveX controls (it won't even ask you, it just won't allow it), and even if you manage to download something, Windows won't run it.
Not true. I'm currently running Windows Server 2008 on my desktop, and while by default IE makes downloading stuff a little trickier than say XP, it most certainly will let you do it. It just throws up a warning or two, forcing you to click to say that yes, you really do mean to download it (and thus no, you're not being hit by a drive-by download). It's a nuisance (but certainly not "insane"), but then so are most security measures and this is a *server* OS, in the vast majority of deployments once you've set it up and installed the app(s), you shouldn't be surfing on it at all...
Re:Why not more of this? (Score:3, Informative)
I run server 2003 64-bit as my destop OS. I ran all my games on it for years - only games that explicitly checked for the Windows version had any problems. Everything form Steam *64-bit Source engine) worked fine. Outside of drivers, 32-bit apps just worked.
Be warned though that there are some driver issues - my oddball HP printer, for example, never had a driver that worked on a 64-bit OS.
of course it is (Score:3, Informative)
(c) limits the licensee right to make copies (you can't except fair use or if the license says otherwise as in GPL). Does not oblige the author to make or sell any copies if he doesn't want to.
Yes (Score:3, Informative)
You'll find that there's an awful lot of shit about Vista that some random person just made up. Then the echo chamber effect takes over and people who don't like Vista will repeat it over and over since they don't like Vista and what to make it look bad, without any consideration to it's veracity. They are interested in information that supports their world view, not what is correct.
Re:XP? (Score:2, Informative)
Oh for goodness sake, stop being sensible will you - this is Slashdot!
Actually UAC becomes a lot more usable if you install the Elevation PowerToys:
Re:Vista... Microsoft's "New Coke" (Score:1, Informative)
The AD password security requirements are a joke.
Everyone I know uses the same password and just adds an incrementing number to the end until it rolls around and then starts from 1 again.
Don't go too fast (Score:3, Informative)
Re:I've done this. I switched back to Vista. (Score:3, Informative)
Enterprise? Like the ability to act as a domain controller? Or the ability to act as a head to a SAN?
How about the fact Linux can handle 32PB partitions on said SAN, and can easily generate them using LVM? Mirroring disks with LVM? Can do. Snapshots? Also easy.
Just because you don't know how to provide enterprise-level services on Linux doesn't mean it's not possible.
Oh, and the server box I have running at home is providing SSI using LDAP and Kerberos, and is also providing file storage to my hosts - for hardware costs only. The only thing I really need to do is SSH in once a day, and run 'apt-get update && apt-get upgrade'. Usually results in no updates, but better safe than sorry :)
Re:How to download freely in Server 2008 (Score:4, Informative)
If you're a PC Gamer, Valve's Steam uses MSHTML.
Re:Vista... Microsoft's "New Coke" (Score:2, Informative)
No, you mean slackware. My 386/33MHz still has just 4MiB of RAM and a Hercules card for video, not VGA, you insensitive clod! I hope I get the 387 chip for Christmas this year, though.
As entertaining as that is, I actually prefer Slackware over any other distribution. It was the first I ever tried over a decade ago (!), and in my occasionally humble opinion believe it beats the tar out of all the buntus and everything else.
Re:How to download freely in Server 2008 (Score:3, Informative)
Problem is that it doesn't let you download executables or installer packages. You need to either do it on another computer, or disable the enhanced security to enable you to do it on your win2k3/2k8 system.
Re:Windows Server 2008 has a better kernel..but (Score:4, Informative)
No, I just missed this article:
Vista SP1 gets kernel upgrade [slashdot.org]
So Vista pre-SP1 got the Win2003 kernel, and Vista SP1 got 2008.
You don't need to be an accusatory jackass. Dick.
Re:How to download freely in Server 2008 (Score:3, Informative)
So true! I used Windows 2k8 beta and Vista. (Score:2, Informative)
I had Windows Server 2008 betas installed on my PC alongside Linux and Windows Vista. One thing that always amazed me is that Server 2008, even though it was still a beta at the time, ran much better than Windows Vista, had no annoying popups, consistently was stable, etc.
Even with Active Directory Domain Services and all the Web services enabled, turning Windows 2008 into a domain controller, I STILL saw better performance.
I believe people did this for Windows Server 2003 as well, I remember seeing forum posts about Windows 2003 being the BEST gaming OS a few years back.
Re:How to download freely in Server 2008 (Score:4, Informative)
C:\>ftp ftp.mozilla.org
ftp>get "/pub/firefox/releases/3.0/win32/en-US/Firefox Setup 3.0.exe"
Then you don't have to be bothered to go to another computer.
Re:Vista... Microsoft's "New Coke" (Score:2, Informative)