Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 25th Apr 2007 22:09 UTC, submitted by stare
Windows Paul Thurrott reviews the latest CTP of Windows Home Server. "I remain excited about WHS and while one might easily come up with a number of features they'd like to see added to the product - a server-based version of Media Center comes to mind - know this: This is the initial version of WHS, Microsoft plans to keep improving it over time, and they're listening to your suggestions and ideas. As with the first version of Media Center, the technology is in a nascent stage but is already quite compelling. If this first version of WHS is so good, I can only imagine what the future holds."
Order by: Score:
Who would guess?
by Ford Prefect on Wed 25th Apr 2007 23:17 UTC
Ford Prefect
Member since:
2006-01-16

"I remain excited"
Sure you do, Paul!


But really shocking is this paragraph:
"My router--a D-Link gaming router--apparently isn't compatible with the automated Remote Access configuration capability. I'm actually sort of shocked by this, so I'll be looking for a new router. Microsoft tells me that when WHS ships, they will provide a router compatibility list and will actually certify routers for WHS via a logo program in order to help consumers ensure they have the right hardware."

Sure, every little router out there now needs a "WHS ready" logo sticked onto it. Why not also add a Windows Key? This is really so damn silly...

Edited 2007-04-25 23:22

Reply Score: 5

RE: Who would guess?
by flanque on Thu 26th Apr 2007 02:29 UTC in reply to "Who would guess?"
flanque Member since:
2005-12-15

Seems a bit odd doesn't it. You'd think given the volume of routers out there, it'd be Microsoft trying to make ends meet, not the consumer.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Who would guess?
by Bending Unit on Thu 26th Apr 2007 04:38 UTC in reply to "RE: Who would guess?"
Bending Unit Member since:
2005-07-06

Well, using my Netgear router with Linux somehow introduces delays in name lookups, sometimes seconds.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Who would guess?
by CPUGuy on Fri 27th Apr 2007 02:01 UTC in reply to "Who would guess?"
CPUGuy Member since:
2005-07-06

Yes, it's so silly to put a sticker on a product so that the person who's buying knows that it works with their software.... SILLY SILLY SILLY!

Reply Score: 0

Bad!
by Supreme Dragon on Wed 25th Apr 2007 23:42 UTC
Supreme Dragon
Member since:
2007-03-04

If it is based on Vista, it will have scary system requirements, DRM/activation/WGA, and cost much money.

Reply Score: 0

RE: Bad!
by stare on Thu 26th Apr 2007 00:36 UTC in reply to "Bad!"
stare Member since:
2005-07-06

First line of the article:
At the 2007 Consumer Electronics Show (CES) in Las Vegas this week (see my special report), Microsoft previewed its long-awaited Windows Home Server (WHS) product, a Windows Server 2003 with Service Pack 2 (SP2)-based server for consumers.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Bad!
by flanque on Thu 26th Apr 2007 02:30 UTC in reply to "Bad!"
flanque Member since:
2005-12-15

You obviously haven't read the article or done even very basic research on the product.

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: Bad!
by StephenBeDoper on Thu 26th Apr 2007 03:11 UTC in reply to "RE: Bad!"
StephenBeDoper Member since:
2005-07-06

Heh, welcome to OSNews ;)

Reply Score: 5

RE[3]: Bad!
by flanque on Thu 26th Apr 2007 03:20 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Bad!"
flanque Member since:
2005-12-15

Touche. God, it feels like an Apple TV ad. ;-)

Reply Score: 2

RE: Bad!
by Laurence on Thu 26th Apr 2007 12:51 UTC in reply to "Bad!"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

I know it's cool to slate Microsoft/Windows, but I do wish people would bother to read even just a little bit of information about the product they're so quick criticize.

Reply Score: 5

Why so excited
by vtolkov on Thu 26th Apr 2007 00:08 UTC
vtolkov
Member since:
2006-07-26

In fact, I do not understand, what is so exciting. This is just plain regular windows server with some software on top of it.

Most of scenarios do not work for me, and I guess, they will not work well for others. Linux and Mac computers are not supported, scheduled backup will not work with notebooks, because we used to shutdown them for a night. Don't you? Parental control - useless: I do not spy on my kids and kids are smart enough to be able to boot from linux CD. Central web administration is a kind of IT department at home - it is ridiculous. Windows Media streaming - I do not have any devices for it, all devices I have use other protocols. Remote access - I'm afraid to expose windows server. This is such a popular platform for attacks!

In fact, I have a small nice server on NSLU2 and it work just fine for me, including media streaming to networking DVD player. Entire thing costs less then $70, produces no sounds, and causes no troubles with licenses.

Reply Score: 5

RE: Why so excited
by flanque on Thu 26th Apr 2007 02:31 UTC in reply to "Why so excited"
flanque Member since:
2005-12-15

In fact, I have a small nice server on NSLU2 and it work just fine for me, including media streaming to networking DVD player. Entire thing costs less then $70, produces no sounds, and causes no troubles with licenses.


Really? Can you how you set this up? Surely all the hardware isn't included in this cost?

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Why so excited
by vtolkov on Thu 26th Apr 2007 04:04 UTC in reply to "RE: Why so excited"
vtolkov Member since:
2006-07-26

Really? Can you how you set this up? Surely all the hardware isn't included in this cost?

Yes, definitely you need networking hardware, like routers (as well as for WHS) and one or two external USB hard drives. You can install alternative firmware, and configure some additional packages. This takes some time and requires a bit of Linux experience. I did that as a small weekend project mostly for the purpose of refreshing my well forgotten Unix skills.

Edited 2007-04-26 04:06

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Why so excited
by flanque on Thu 26th Apr 2007 04:08 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Why so excited"
flanque Member since:
2005-12-15

Are you saying you've overwritten the firmware in a router then attached external HDD?

Can you please specify the hardware you've used?

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: Why so excited
by vtolkov on Thu 26th Apr 2007 22:01 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Why so excited"
vtolkov Member since:
2006-07-26

Google NSLU2, you will find all the answers. It is not a router. http://www.nslu2-linux.org/

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Why so excited
by flanque on Thu 26th Apr 2007 22:07 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Why so excited"
flanque Member since:
2005-12-15

Yep, thank you. I've already done this and it's a very interesting idea.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Why so excited
by Kancept on Thu 26th Apr 2007 17:17 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Why so excited"
Kancept Member since:
2006-01-09

I always seem to read posts like these and regret selling my NLSU2. Found out after I sold it that the issue was bad boards in my external HDs. ;) I had mine before the linux firmwares starting showing up, though.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Why so excited
by Vendor on Thu 26th Apr 2007 05:14 UTC in reply to "RE: Why so excited"
Vendor Member since:
2006-11-14

The NSLU2 is available in many countries across the world, and once you add a usb external HD, you have a crazy-cheap home server running (in my case) Debian. Fileserving, webserving, mail server, bittorrent. Silent, and I swear the damn thing uses so little power that you could run it on a lemon battery!

Microsoft cannot compete with this kind of solution as most users that want a "home server" are geeks, who value "cheap" and "cool" in a way that MS hasn't understand for MANY years.

Reply Score: 2

NAS?
by bullethead on Thu 26th Apr 2007 00:36 UTC
bullethead
Member since:
2005-07-10

How is this different from a NAS?

Reply Score: 1

It's good
by Luminair on Thu 26th Apr 2007 00:53 UTC
Luminair
Member since:
2007-03-30

WHS is basically just a Windows computer with a bunch of hard drives to offload data storage from the family computers in the house. Most homes don't have such a central repository. So a cheap Windows Server 2003 server to do that for people who want it is great.

The other good thing about WHS is the built-in, easy, seamless backup system. It will tap into your home computers and automatically back them up. When they break, you can boot from a CD and automatically restore them over the network from WHS.

So that's basically all it is. The same role could be filled by a Linux distro at LEAST as well. Linux roughly supports RAID5 arrays with device expansion -- Even the Great Windows Server 2003 doesn't have that.

But nobody has created such a beast. I've tried them all, and nothing gets as much right as WHS does.

Reply Score: 1

v RE: It's good
by Supreme Dragon on Thu 26th Apr 2007 01:01 UTC in reply to "It's good"
RE[2]: It's good
by flanque on Thu 26th Apr 2007 02:39 UTC in reply to "RE: It's good"
flanque Member since:
2005-12-15

Why pay MS absurd prices for insecure software, infected with DRM/activation/WGA, and terrible EULA, if you can just use Linux?


Maybe Microsoft realise all this and will do something about it? This soft of OS isn't really needed by the majority of people, at least not for the next few years, so to my mind it will need some pretty delicious carrots dangled above it to get the majority of interest any time soon.

At a minimum, it'd need to be < $100 AUD, allow me to rip content without limitation (I don't mind duplication prevention of copyright protected content to other devices though) and interface to other devices such as the Xbox/Xbox 360 for streaming before I'll be interested.

I'm on the beta testing list so I'll download it soon and try it out. From talking to other testers, this is a very slick OS but in the end it's something I simply don't need for quite some time and it'll be treated as such.

I'd much rather spend my money on a HDV camcorder.

Edited 2007-04-26 02:48

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: It's good
by BluenoseJake on Thu 26th Apr 2007 11:58 UTC in reply to "RE: It's good"
BluenoseJake Member since:
2005-08-11

Are you a bot? You can't seem to comment without saying the same things over and over....

Reply Score: 2

PlatformAgnostic
Member since:
2006-01-02

I just don't see who's going to buy it. It will be a bigger flop than HTPC, it seems because it's going for a tiny niche of a tiny niche. I'll be impressed if they sell more than 20,000 copies of this (and I mean sell and not give away to various people).

Reply Score: 2

flanque Member since:
2005-12-15

I agree with you, at least for the next few years. After that, when broadband hopefully picks up in bandwidth it'll be a bit different. Having said that, if this can be a very slick PVR for an appropriate price point then I'll be more interested.

A definite must have is TV recording with time shift I think.

Edited 2007-04-26 02:50

Reply Score: 2

Luminair Member since:
2007-03-30

You can run Mediaportal or BeyondTV on it just like any Windows machine. So it can be your media center player and/or TV server. I use a Windows Server 2003 box with a TV tuner to spit Mediaportal out to a TV and stream TV to another PC over the network.

Reply Score: 0

Keep it simple
by islander on Thu 26th Apr 2007 03:53 UTC
islander
Member since:
2007-04-11

This extra Os , with a pc,is a waste of time and money.Most home networks don't grow out of the scope of a simple peer to peer network,unless you need NAS.

Plus, the average home pc user can burn a cd/dvd for personal backups and "ghost" their operating system image for reinstalls.

The cost with this server solution offers no real advantage of what can currently be done.

Reply Score: 1

microsoft's history of server security
by dwave on Thu 26th Apr 2007 07:03 UTC
dwave
Member since:
2006-09-19

heh. Another worm infested zombie. In every home.

Reply Score: 1

tomcat Member since:
2006-01-06

heh. Another worm infested zombie. In every home.

Oh, really. I wasn't aware that Win2003 Server is "another worm infested zombie"; in fact, the security is damned good.

Reply Score: 4