BetaArchive
https://www.betaarchive.com/forum/

Microsoft "Longhorn" Server Beta 3 is here!
https://www.betaarchive.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1611
Page 2 of 2

Author:  psiren [ Sun May 06, 2007 5:31 pm ]
Post subject: 

How predictable. Y'know, I don't see why they can't stick with the codenames. They're so much cooler than 95, 98, 2000, 2003, 2008, etc, etc. NT, XP and Vista are exceptions, but you've also got the Office releases that follow the 'boring' naming convention too (Office 95, 97, 2000, 2003 (XP)).

Longhorn, Neptune (yea I know it wasn't released - but the name is still cool), Memphis, Hydra, Whistler, etc. So much better imho.

Author:  ___ [ Mon May 07, 2007 8:38 am ]
Post subject: 

i prefer longhorn than vista

Author:  Vista Ultimate R2 [ Fri May 11, 2007 10:22 am ]
Post subject: 

There's now a logo out for Server 2008 - pretty much the one you'd expect, it's in the same form as all the other current MS logos:

Image


From MS TechNet France

Is it just me or is it slightly strange how the new name is popping up all over the place before they officially announce it?

Author:  empireum [ Fri May 11, 2007 7:10 pm ]
Post subject: 

The logo doesn't look bad :D

Author:  DJ 2501 [ Tue May 22, 2007 10:59 am ]
Post subject: 

im going to download the beta. what version is the most powerfull? is it datacenter or enterprise?

Author:  Vista Ultimate R2 [ Tue May 22, 2007 11:11 am ]
Post subject: 

Datacentre is the flagship edition of Windows :) Though it's not actually that different to Enterprise. Standard, Enterprise and Datacentre are actually all on the same DVD image, like all the editions of Vista are on one disc, so by downloading one you will have them all - just request the key(s) for the version(s) you want to install from that image.

Author:  Luckie [ Tue May 22, 2007 3:59 pm ]
Post subject: 

I like the Webedition most, becuse this Edition includes all I need.

Author:  empireum [ Wed May 23, 2007 5:37 am ]
Post subject: 

Vista Ultimate R2 wrote:
Datacentre is the flagship edition of Windows :) Though it's not actually that different to Enterprise. Standard, Enterprise and Datacentre are actually all on the same DVD image, like all the editions of Vista are on one disc, so by downloading one you will have them all - just request the key(s) for the version(s) you want to install from that image.

After all, Datacenter x64 of Server 2008 might be the only edition to include Windows Virtualization, which might be a substantial difference for some... You don't have to use a key to install any of the editions, just don't enter one and select the desired :)

Author:  XDude [ Wed May 23, 2007 6:04 am ]
Post subject: 

Standard edition is fine for me. Enterprise is nice, but I hardly even use 10% of the features. Datacenter is abit different from Enterpsie, but is a cool edition.

Author:  Vista Ultimate R2 [ Wed May 23, 2007 6:40 am ]
Post subject: 

empireum wrote:
After all, Datacenter x64 of Server 2008 might be the only edition to include Windows Virtualization, which might be a substantial difference for some... You don't have to use a key to install any of the editions, just don't enter one and select the desired :)

Is that any better than Virtual Server or VMware ESX then? But it's only in the 64-bit version? :( MS seem so keen to push everyone to 64-bit you'd think they owned stock in Intel or something :evil:

Author:  empireum [ Wed May 23, 2007 6:44 am ]
Post subject: 

Vista Ultimate R2 wrote:
empireum wrote:
After all, Datacenter x64 of Server 2008 might be the only edition to include Windows Virtualization, which might be a substantial difference for some... You don't have to use a key to install any of the editions, just don't enter one and select the desired :)

Is that any better than Virtual Server or VMware ESX then? But it's only in the 64-bit version? :( MS seem so keen to push everyone to 64-bit you'd think they owned stock in Intel or something :evil:

It's something Xen-based, so quite different when talking abut paravirtualization but similar when it comes to full virtualization to ESX or VS. As for it being present in x64 only, (almost) all processors supporting VT are x64.

Author:  Vista Ultimate R2 [ Wed May 23, 2007 6:53 am ]
Post subject: 

So it's like Xen but for Windows hosts? Is the performance of this much better than hardware-assisted regular virtualisation then?

Author:  empireum [ Wed May 23, 2007 7:02 am ]
Post subject: 

Haven't really "used" Xen, so can't say much, but paravirtualization which is only possible with Linux, OpenSolaris (?) and *BSD guests so far (because it requires a special kernel and kernel modules) was pretty quick on my machine. Full virtualization (which uses Qemu's technology) was slower than VMware Server but I couldn't do much testing because Xen in full virtualization mode causes intermittent reboots on Apple hardware. This was all done on Linux as host OS, of course.

Author:  Vista Ultimate R2 [ Wed May 23, 2007 7:23 am ]
Post subject: 

So Xen runs *nix and Windows guests, but Windows ones perform poorly? So "Windows Virtualisation" will presumably be a very fast way of virtualising Windows as it'll be like Xen but with proper support for Windows guests? Although I doubt that virtualisation is going to be slow exactly, whatever you're using, if you're running it on a 64-bit DataCentre server... :P

Author:  ToastyCheesy [ Wed May 23, 2007 8:47 am ]
Post subject: 

psiren wrote:
How predictable. Y'know, I don't see why they can't stick with the codenames. They're so much cooler than 95, 98, 2000, 2003, 2008, etc, etc. NT, XP and Vista are exceptions, but you've also got the Office releases that follow the 'boring' naming convention too (Office 95, 97, 2000, 2003 (XP)).

Longhorn, Neptune (yea I know it wasn't released - but the name is still cool), Memphis, Hydra, Whistler, etc. So much better imho.


Actually, Office XP and 2003 are 2 different products.

Author:  paddynator [ Mon May 28, 2007 1:12 am ]
Post subject: 

My oppinion's to give Longhorn a chance. Some agree to Vista, some to Longhorn Server, why not? Who cares? But I for myself prefer Home Server. ;-)

Author:  ___ [ Sat Jun 02, 2007 8:46 am ]
Post subject: 

my beta 3 kit arrived (finaly)
Image
Image

Author:  psiren [ Sat Jun 02, 2007 6:19 pm ]
Post subject: 

ToastyCheesy wrote:
Actually, Office XP and 2003 are 2 different products.


Spot the deliberate mistake! Yup, you're right. Should be 'Office 95, 97, 2000, 2002 (XP), 2003 and 2007'. But naming the office product the same as the OS is still unimaginative!

Author:  EagleX [ Sun Jun 03, 2007 1:41 am ]
Post subject: 

Does it realy worth the download?
how much is it different from the previous betas?

Author:  Chriso [ Sun Jun 10, 2007 7:59 pm ]
Post subject: 

i downloaded this 1st time useing server 2008 what do u think so far worth a look?

Author:  Luckie [ Sun Jun 10, 2007 9:58 pm ]
Post subject: 

i like it. Its very fast and stable.

Page 2 of 2 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/