Discussion in 'Windows Server' started by T-S, Nov 20, 2015.
You need to login to view this posts content.
What makes it a good alternative to LTSB if it still has Edge, and the XAML calc, and the Store?
I thought the whole point of running LTSB was to have as little XAML / App crap as possible?
Frankly I couldn't care less about edge. It's a browser. I just don't open it. But I care a lot about the time spent to cleanup the system, I care a lot about some features like the improved snap (that no one has noticed) present on b10586 but not on the 10240.
So, yes i prefer to have 2/3 things more to uninstall and use the spared time to do something else.
I prefer 10240 with as much Win32 over XAML as possible, TH2 just ports more quick and functional Win32, to useless and slow XAML
Upgrade my sever 2012R2 to this version ! Settings are now working nice. But why would somebody install an server version on an main system there are a lot of features in there you wil never use just my 2 cents
as long as they don't pay, they won't care
2 broken cents.
Looks like you didn't read a word of what I wrote on my first message.
What you don't get is that both on server and on client there is a bunch of features you will never use.
On clients are all enabled by default, on server they are disabled. That's the difference.
If people had to pay for windows, no matter of the version, Linux was dominating the Client market since the AD 2000 or so.
The so called "Piracy" was the vector that made a small and crap SW house in a giant multinational. That was true for dos 3, is still the same for server 2016 and W10.
MS intentionally let the piracy go unchecked for a long time. and this made the ms dominate the entire world. but linux developers didn't give up on stubbornness and continued on command line tools and the hard way for all the thins while MS chosed the gui, made everything as easy as possible. so this is not MS's fault alone.
People still spread the "XAML is slow/crap" nonsense? I agree to the point that I don't like how MS implemented/restricted things, I don't like the "app crap", the fact that you cannot use the native XAML stack in Win32, but denunciating XAML as a technology goes just a little bit too far, because if you look at it from the tech perspective, there's no other presentation concept out there that can really compare to it. And I think that almost everybody who worked with and understood WPF knows what I mean, and what benefits it can give you. It's just a shame that MS didn't invest more in one of its better inventions, there is a lot of stuff left in the cold that could be improved, and what for? They dropped it for a dumbed down application model that might be okay for mobile consumer crap but is a joke for anything productive. Therefore, I just felt I had to stand up in defense for XAML as a technology, because "app crap != XAML crap".
Now, back to topic, this reminds me of the good old Server 2003 days, when people were "abusing" it as a client because of the newer kernel compared to the then-current XP. And how annoying it was that you couldn't run client-side anti-virus out of the box because it was always asking for the expensive server version. Personally, I don't think it's worth the effort this time. I think even Enterprise (N) (non LTSB) is a good compromise, you have to put a little more effort into removing all the provisioned apps, but you get the TH2 update right now, and blocking all the telemetry stuff works better at the router level anyways so for me, it makes more sense to put my energy in maintaining the router than tweaking Windows over and over again with every other update.
Yeah I have read your post don't get the attitude realy ! Using server software for years now on a server based computer just pointing out why should u use it on a main comp as you can use the LTSB for having a more focust system for normal system's
I think you missed that Linux has good UIs since the '99 or so, and you missed also that lately MS, is all about Powershell, core/nano servers and command line tools.
The truth is that MS didn't have a decent command line to compete with linux ones, not the opposite.
The linux problem was (and is) just one. For the average Joe Windows costs the same, no matter if because the so called piracy or because the cost is embedded on the HW price.
I already give the answers.
Lighter/cleaner OS than standard W10 th2, more updated UI experience than LTSB.
Then each one will evaluate pros and cons.
We've been having this argument with people who don't understand the benefits since before 2003 was even out. It's been established they never can learn or understand and feel their personal client of choice is somehow always better "because".
Meanwhile the rest of us get on with using the Windows Server line which is usually the most efficient, fastest, most secure and in this case now least likely to be sending out info on you.
when you use a server as client you may have to install special softwares for backup, antivirus, disk management etc. some programs may refuse to run.
Anti-virus is the only one I ever noticed when using Windows Server. You cannot install many of the free home alternatives that are out there for obvious reasons. Beyond that I even have Steam Games playing on the OS and notice zero difference. DirectX may not be included by default, but most modern games will install that automatically for you.
I have heard that some system tools will require the corporate or enterprise editions to counterpart with running Windows Server, but I haven't yet come over any (though I do believe you). Only the Anti-Virus was ever a problem. Kaspersky or BitDefender work nice though.
Still using Windows Server 2003 SP2 x86 on my 2 PCs and work as expected.
The only "issue" that I had was that I had to use Symantec Corporate AV, but that's the AV I use an all my Windows-powered machines, anyway.
I was hoping MS won't include metro/modernUI crap in Windows Server. I'm curious how Windows Server 2016 RTM will look.
Yes. But at the time there was the great NTswitch tool, all you had to do was to switch to client, install the affected SW (antivirus, partitioning SW, and so on), then switch back to server.
The limit was almost always limited to the installation phase.
Nowadays you can act on the opposite side, with orca or superorca.
Interesting option and I have been exploring servers in vm's lately, may be a force feed to help me learn more . After removing indexes 1,3,4 from the iso that I obtained I played with it and it appears the only app package to remove is store, why store in a server , and the calculator if you feel the need. The packages and removal of them are on par with windows 10. The only difference I see for doing this is my lstb n version is RTM and working well to switch to 2016 I would be jump on a TP trail which I did not do for 10 for obvious reasons. Not too sure, for me, if it is a good idea to be the 10586 TP4 ginnie pig and we assume it is time bombed? Possibly second half 2016 it will become a good option to try. After kms v7 is figured out .
Yeah. We have a GUI for that stuff. Welcome to 2015.
On a less joking note has anyone had issues with actual network shares on 2016 (and Enterprise)? I cannot get either the Server machine or any other to show up in the network browser, yet those machines list the Server one and can copy to folders on it just fine.