BetaArchive Logo
Navigation Home Database Screenshots Gallery Image Uploader Server Info FTP Servers Wiki Forum RSS Feed Rules Please Donate
UP: 8d, 13h, 38m | CPU: 51% | MEM: 5871MB of 12287MB used
{The community for beta collectors}

Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 18 posts ] 
Author Message
 PostPost subject: Windows Server 2008 R2?        Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 1:46 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Sat Oct 04, 2008 5:43 pm

Posts
1237

Location
Milky Way Galaxy

Favourite OS
Windows Server 2012 Dtc
2 questions:

1. Does anyone know when Windows Server 2008 R2 will RTM? same as 7?
2. Why have few Windows Server 2008 R2 builds leaked? Server 2008 R2 is significantly more reliable than its client counterpart.

_________________
See my profile for my website link.


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject: Re: Windows Server 2008 R2?        Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 1:51 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Wed Aug 27, 2008 12:52 am

Posts
890

Location
United States

Favourite OS
Windows Server 2008 Standard
1. I don't know. Maybe it will.
2. Because server leaks are rare (excluding the Win2k8 leaks, there has been lots of those) ...
3. Speaking of how it's more reliable, look at this page: http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/deta ... laylang=en

It will say Windows Server 2003 R2 SP3, and that error has existed for months.

_________________
Image


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: Windows Server 2008 R2?        Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 2:22 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Sat Oct 04, 2008 5:43 pm

Posts
1237

Location
Milky Way Galaxy

Favourite OS
Windows Server 2012 Dtc
Thlump wrote:
1. I don't know. Maybe it will.
2. Because server leaks are rare (excluding the Win2k8 leaks, there has been lots of those) ...
3. Speaking of how it's more reliable, look at this page: http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/deta ... laylang=en

It will say Windows Server 2003 R2 SP3, and that error has existed for months.

2. Why? :P The people that have access to 7 also have access to 2008 R2.
3. How does that have to do with reliability? :S

_________________
See my profile for my website link.


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject: Re: Windows Server 2008 R2?        Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 2:40 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Wed Aug 27, 2008 12:52 am

Posts
890

Location
United States

Favourite OS
Windows Server 2008 Standard
2. I'm guessing it's because they isn't much incentive or interest to leak Server 2008 R2 builds.

3. It doesn't but I find it strange that Microsoft would mention about SP3 for Win2k3.

_________________
Image


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: Windows Server 2008 R2?        Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 3:06 am 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
Offline

Joined
Mon Nov 03, 2008 11:10 pm

Posts
78

Location
Tacoma, WA
Well, there have definitely been more Server leaks than I expected...I've run each of the last two, 7260 and 7268, and after converting them to workstations, loved the stability of them. I've been thinking about running it instead of Windows 7.

_________________
Image


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject: Re: Windows Server 2008 R2?        Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 3:14 am 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
Offline

Joined
Mon Jan 28, 2008 4:53 am

Posts
428
I ran Windows Server 2008 for a while. I didn't find it anymore stable than Vista SP1. And how do you exactly compare the stability of Windows 7 to WS2008R2? They were developed together. I could understand saying that WS2003 is more stable than XP, since WS2003 is newer.

I haven't had Windows 7 crash or cause me any problems yet, and I haven't had Vista crash on me for about a year, or more. So how do are people able to confirm that WS2008R2 being more stable than W7, especially with neither of them being finished.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: Windows Server 2008 R2?        Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 3:36 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Sat Oct 04, 2008 5:43 pm

Posts
1237

Location
Milky Way Galaxy

Favourite OS
Windows Server 2012 Dtc
Ambig wrote:
I ran Windows Server 2008 for a while. I didn't find it anymore stable than Vista SP1. And how do you exactly compare the stability of Windows 7 to WS2008R2? They were developed together. I could understand saying that WS2003 is more stable than XP, since WS2003 is newer.

I haven't had Windows 7 crash or cause me any problems yet, and I haven't had Vista crash on me for about a year, or more. So how do are people able to confirm that WS2008R2 being more stable than W7, especially with neither of them being finished.


Server OSes are more stable by concept. Client/ Workstations OSes have all this visual stuff, un-needed processes that a server OS doesnt have.

_________________
See my profile for my website link.


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject: Re: Windows Server 2008 R2?        Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 3:40 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sun Jan 27, 2008 8:09 pm

Posts
3935

Favourite OS
OS X 10.8
motherboardlove wrote:
Ambig wrote:
I ran Windows Server 2008 for a while. I didn't find it anymore stable than Vista SP1. And how do you exactly compare the stability of Windows 7 to WS2008R2? They were developed together. I could understand saying that WS2003 is more stable than XP, since WS2003 is newer.

I haven't had Windows 7 crash or cause me any problems yet, and I haven't had Vista crash on me for about a year, or more. So how do are people able to confirm that WS2008R2 being more stable than W7, especially with neither of them being finished.


Server OSes are more stable by concept. Client/ Workstations OSes have all this visual stuff, un-needed processes that a server OS doesnt have.
That's not entirely true, the client OSes have the same exact stuff as the workstation OSes, just disabled by default plus a couple of server programs added into the mix. You can easily turn on all of the workstation functionality in a server OS to make it nigh the same.


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject: Re: Windows Server 2008 R2?        Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 5:19 am 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
Offline

Joined
Mon Jan 28, 2008 4:53 am

Posts
428
motherboardlove wrote:
Server OSes are more stable by concept.


Maybe by concept, but that doesn't mean that in practical use that they are more stable.

Quote:
Client/ Workstations OSes have all this visual stuff, un-needed processes that a server OS doesnt have.


Ever install Windows Server 2008 and make it into Vista? Certain services may be disabled or not installed by default, but they're pretty easy to enable and install. You can enable Aero with relative ease, install the Sidebar (which I found to be more buggy under WS2008 than under Vista to be honest), enable Superfetch and hibernation as well. You can shift the OS's process priority from background tasks to foreground tasks with ease as well. In essence, you can make WS2008 to be exactly like Vista. When I did this, I didn't see any speed improvement in programs. If anything, I saw more of an improvement from moving from 32-bit to 64-bit in a few games (they were based off of the Source engine). The only thing missing is Readyboost (but there is a dirty work around to enable it, but who uses Readyboost?)

Conversely, you can make Vista to be just as "lean" as WS2008 by disabling and uninstalling the theming service. Disabling Readyboost, Search Indexing service, Superfetch, UAC and the sidebar. You can set the system priority to be on background tasks instead of foreground tasks. The only thing you'll miss is the features. But if you're using Vista SP1, the speed and stability will all be there as WS2008 and Vista SP1+ have the same exact underpinnings.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: Windows Server 2008 R2?        Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 9:37 am 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Fri Dec 29, 2006 6:40 am

Posts
1513
Thlump wrote:
2. Because server leaks are rare (excluding the Win2k8 leaks, there has been lots of those) ...


There were no Windows 2k8 leaks at all, all leaks were MS releases that came from connect. Even the 16648 build that wasn't suppose to leaked was mistakenly leaked by MS and placed on connect. ("leaks" define as MS did not intend to release them)

There were a lot more leaks in Windows 7, including 7137, 7201, 7260 and 7268 that MS never intended to release them.

Leaks are usually a recent build since most of the public intended to get a hold of a build and play with it. Mostly the younger audience that wants them. Old builds and servers have nothing interesting (except longhorn) that no one (except beta collectors like us) wants. There is NOTHING to SEE in these builds. A blue desktop dressed in the classical windows theme isn't what I would describe as "exciting." A working DHCP server doesn't really excite me either, my router could do the same job (but worst).

Leaking a server build does not make people happy at all, leaking a x64 client does satisfied people and a x86 client leak makes people complaint. The demand for server builds is only about 1% of all people who wants leaks. Chances are that you wouldn't be able to find a beta server build anywhere besides at BA. Still, most members who have access to the FTP won't try the server builds. We should have a poll!

Server builds are not to be tested in a home environment, since I don't have enough spare computers to create a private network. I couldn't setup a domain for testing without influencing other computers in my house. Also, there's no database that I would need to manage or messages to be sent around the house. In other words, we install server betas in our home just for fun. :)

Windows Server 2008 R2 wouldn't offer much improvement over Windows 7 in terms of stability. They share the same code as well Windows Vista SP1 and Server 2008 did. Windows Server 2003, being developed at a later date did have a more refined set of code than XP. Windows XP x64 however shared the same code as Server 2003 x64. Windows XP x64 was a much solid OS compare to XP x86.
Windows Server 2003 R2 was an addon unlike Windows Server 2008 R2 which was completely rebuilt. This approach should make customers more satisfied than just some second disc option in 2003 R2.

Installing the Desktop Experience Package in the Server setup makes server builds look like clients. I don't think a lot of people (from the general public) knew this.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: Windows Server 2008 R2?        Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 1:54 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Sat Oct 04, 2008 5:43 pm

Posts
1237

Location
Milky Way Galaxy

Favourite OS
Windows Server 2012 Dtc
XDude wrote:
Thlump wrote:
2. Because server leaks are rare (excluding the Win2k8 leaks, there has been lots of those) ...


There were no Windows 2k8 leaks at all, all leaks were MS releases that came from connect. Even the 16648 build that wasn't suppose to leaked was mistakenly leaked by MS and placed on connect. ("leaks" define as MS did not intend to release them)

There were a lot more leaks in Windows 7, including 7137, 7201, 7260 and 7268 that MS never intended to release them.

Leaks are usually a recent build since most of the public intended to get a hold of a build and play with it. Mostly the younger audience that wants them. Old builds and servers have nothing interesting (except longhorn) that no one (except beta collectors like us) wants. There is NOTHING to SEE in these builds. A blue desktop dressed in the classical windows theme isn't what I would describe as "exciting." A working DHCP server doesn't really excite me either, my router could do the same job (but worst).

Leaking a server build does not make people happy at all, leaking a x64 client does satisfied people and a x86 client leak makes people complaint. The demand for server builds is only about 1% of all people who wants leaks. Chances are that you wouldn't be able to find a beta server build anywhere besides at BA. Still, most members who have access to the FTP won't try the server builds. We should have a poll!

Server builds are not to be tested in a home environment, since I don't have enough spare computers to create a private network. I couldn't setup a domain for testing without influencing other computers in my house. Also, there's no database that I would need to manage or messages to be sent around the house. In other words, we install server betas in our home just for fun. :)

Windows Server 2008 R2 wouldn't offer much improvement over Windows 7 in terms of stability. They share the same code as well Windows Vista SP1 and Server 2008 did. Windows Server 2003, being developed at a later date did have a more refined set of code than XP. Windows XP x64 however shared the same code as Server 2003 x64. Windows XP x64 was a much solid OS compare to XP x86.
Windows Server 2003 R2 was an addon unlike Windows Server 2008 R2 which was completely rebuilt. This approach should make customers more satisfied than just some second disc option in 2003 R2.

Installing the Desktop Experience Package in the Server setup makes server builds look like clients. I don't think a lot of people (from the general public) knew this.


Just because there isnt anything graphical doesnt mean theres nothing to see. Some people have fun testing both server and client builds, like for example *points to self* me.

Ambig wrote:
motherboardlove wrote:
Server OSes are more stable by concept.


Maybe by concept, but that doesn't mean that in practical use that they are more stable.

Quote:
Client/ Workstations OSes have all this visual stuff, un-needed processes that a server OS doesnt have.


Ever install Windows Server 2008 and make it into Vista? Certain services may be disabled or not installed by default, but they're pretty easy to enable and install. You can enable Aero with relative ease, install the Sidebar (which I found to be more buggy under WS2008 than under Vista to be honest), enable Superfetch and hibernation as well. You can shift the OS's process priority from background tasks to foreground tasks with ease as well. In essence, you can make WS2008 to be exactly like Vista. When I did this, I didn't see any speed improvement in programs. If anything, I saw more of an improvement from moving from 32-bit to 64-bit in a few games (they were based off of the Source engine). The only thing missing is Readyboost (but there is a dirty work around to enable it, but who uses Readyboost?)

Conversely, you can make Vista to be just as "lean" as WS2008 by disabling and uninstalling the theming service. Disabling Readyboost, Search Indexing service, Superfetch, UAC and the sidebar. You can set the system priority to be on background tasks instead of foreground tasks. The only thing you'll miss is the features. But if you're using Vista SP1, the speed and stability will all be there as WS2008 and Vista SP1+ have the same exact underpinnings.


Vist into Server 2008? Vista cant start domains, become a domain controller, host a KMS Server, lots of things. Anyways, if someone figured out how to do it, have fun spending a few hours of your life actually doing it.

_________________
See my profile for my website link.


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject: Re: Windows Server 2008 R2?        Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 1:56 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
Offline

Joined
Tue Aug 28, 2007 11:18 pm

Posts
419
1. According to WZor yes, it will RTM simultaneously with Windows 7.

_________________
Quod licet Jovi, non licet bovi


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject: Re: Windows Server 2008 R2?        Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 2:14 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Sat Oct 04, 2008 5:43 pm

Posts
1237

Location
Milky Way Galaxy

Favourite OS
Windows Server 2012 Dtc
Raiker wrote:
1. According to WZor yes, it will RTM simultaneously with Windows 7.


Aww :cry: I was hoping that it'd RTM before 7, like 2008R2 had the RC before 7 :)

_________________
See my profile for my website link.


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject: Re: Windows Server 2008 R2?        Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 5:05 pm 
Reply with quote
Staff
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Wed Apr 11, 2007 2:11 pm

Posts
2607

Location
Germany, Earth

Favourite OS
Windows 10
Ummm what? The Win 7 and the 2008 R2 RC have been released at the same time, or am I mixing something up now?

_________________
MS vNext: Windows 10 ESD Database - Windows 10 Build Labs - Windows 10 Update Archive - Office 2016 Version Tracker - Office Downloader


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject: Re: Windows Server 2008 R2?        Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 5:40 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sat May 12, 2007 1:05 pm

Posts
5271

Location
The Collection Book

Favourite OS
Windows & Phone
Not only they were released at the same time, they have also the same buildtag.

Code:
6.1.7100.0.winmain_win7rc.090421-1700

_________________
Image
http://www.thecollectionbook.info
Subscribe to our Image for updates and like us on Image.

Reading Mode only, PM's possible.


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject: Re: Windows Server 2008 R2?        Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:01 pm 
Reply with quote
FTP Access
Offline

Joined
Mon Jan 28, 2008 4:53 am

Posts
428
motherboardlove wrote:
Vist into Server 2008? Vista cant start domains, become a domain controller, host a KMS Server, lots of things. Anyways, if someone figured out how to do it, have fun spending a few hours of your life actually doing it.


To Re-Quote myself on the point of turning Vista into WS2008:

Quote:
The only thing you'll miss is the features.


I'm well aware that you'll miss all the features that differentiate Vista from WS2008. My point was that you can "slim" Vista to WS2008 territory, just as you can fatten WS2008 into Vista territory.


Top  Profile
 PostPost subject: Re: Windows Server 2008 R2?        Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 11:12 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
Offline

Joined
Sat Oct 04, 2008 5:43 pm

Posts
1237

Location
Milky Way Galaxy

Favourite OS
Windows Server 2012 Dtc
Daniel wrote:
Ummm what? The Win 7 and the 2008 R2 RC have been released at the same time, or am I mixing something up now?

DjRob wrote:
Not only they were released at the same time, they have also the same buildtag.

Code:
6.1.7100.0.winmain_win7rc.090421-1700

Oh oops :oops: I confused it with the beta.

Ambig wrote:
motherboardlove wrote:
Vist into Server 2008? Vista cant start domains, become a domain controller, host a KMS Server, lots of things. Anyways, if someone figured out how to do it, have fun spending a few hours of your life actually doing it.


To Re-Quote myself on the point of turning Vista into WS2008:

Quote:
The only thing you'll miss is the features.


I'm well aware that you'll miss all the features that differentiate Vista from WS2008. My point was that you can "slim" Vista to WS2008 territory, just as you can fatten WS2008 into Vista territory.


It just is a waste of time. :P :(

_________________
See my profile for my website link.


Top  Profile  WWW
 PostPost subject: Re: Windows Server 2008 R2?        Posted: Fri Jul 10, 2009 1:16 pm 
Reply with quote
Donator
User avatar
Offline

Joined
Sat May 12, 2007 1:05 pm

Posts
5271

Location
The Collection Book

Favourite OS
Windows & Phone
motherboardlove wrote:
Daniel wrote:
Ummm what? The Win 7 and the 2008 R2 RC have been released at the same time, or am I mixing something up now?

DjRob wrote:
Not only they were released at the same time, they have also the same buildtag.

Code:
6.1.7100.0.winmain_win7rc.090421-1700
Oh oops :oops: I confused it with the beta.




Code:
6.1.7000.0.winmain_win7beta.081212-1400


Also the Beta has been released at the same time with same buildnumber.

I think you are confused with Vista and Server 2008.

_________________
Image
http://www.thecollectionbook.info
Subscribe to our Image for updates and like us on Image.

Reading Mode only, PM's possible.


Top  Profile  WWW
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 18 posts ] 




Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

All views expressed in these forums are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the BetaArchive site owner.

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group

Copyright © 2006-2019

 

Sitemap | XML | RSS