Windows .NET Server 2003 Release Candidate 2 is released to beta testers. Upgrade or join the Customer Preview Program today and see what’s new. Update: An anonymous sent us a link on Microsoft’s site which describes at a high level how they migrated the entire site to .NET Server RC1. According to the article they are experiencing high levels of uptime and significant performance increase that they may even reduce the size of their cluster.
Windows .NET Server 2003 Release Candidate 2 Released
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
This solution is *maybe* acceptable for web-server only box, but not for general purpose machine. From now on DoS attack on will starve all kernel resources.
Does anyone know if IIS 6.0 could at least be configured not to run in kernel mode? Any asynchronous operations *must* be measurable and cancellable. I heard that Linux people were thinking about mimicing this MS “optimization”. I am really looking forward to this happening. It will probably help stopping integration of Linux by enterprise. (Should shift more focus towards *BSD efforts)
THis si my experience anyway.
I have to agree with who every modded you down. It did sound trollish as you gave no reason WHY you found it buggy. Is it the stability? interface? drivers?
As for Windows.NET, personally, I don’t find any use for it. When you weigh up SCO Linux 4.0 Server with is awsome support structure vs. what Microsoft has to offer, SCO wins without breaking a sweat.
Linux too has an intergrated http module. The question is whether there is enough safe guards in place to ensure that the senario you describe doesn’t happen.
Knowing what Microsoft is like, they’ve most likely put speed ahead of stability and security.
Ok, I can belive better administration,better dev tools on .net server. But uptime. lol! Come on people rc1 just came out a few weeks ago, how can they even begin talking about higher levels of uptime?
By plural levels they imply more than 1 reboot
probly more than 2
Just something to think about.
/me waits for mono to code up asp.net support for apache. Stuff’s cool but I don’t belive in runing a weird gui os for a server
The only thing that I can add is that the RC1 version feels fast, even on a slow platform, which should tell you something. The same twicking that could be done for the regular desktop and standard server is saved for the high-end stuff. As we all know, it is the same OS re-marketed with a few more tools at a higher price. Another reason to use another OS, like Linux. Why would I want to put myself on the situation where I’m conciously letting them rip me off? Especially when dealing with their licensing agreements. What a rip off! Not only are you going to pay more to get the same thing that could cost you next to nothing when using Linux, but will be charged again and again depending on the client license agreements. Win .NET in overall seems like an technical improvement, but I mean what do you expect when you have such a huge R&D budget. Still, I find that it is not worth the price, and would not recommend it to my clients, which reminds me how unrealistic marketing people are. I, like I guess many other folks that visit this site, are paid to provide clients with technical advice on products and the like, but we are most often than not personally nailed by these companies in many ways and forms. Well, guess which products will I recommend? For me, magazine or web site ads are completely irrelevant when I make a decision. You can post how many ads you want and it won’t make any difference at all. I will still test things and use my personal experiences when deciding. And I’ll tell you, with the way that these folks are behaving, they are not going anywhere unless they all change their act. Yes, marketing people can give great presentations and say whatever they want. But when everything done, consultants are really the ones that influence or in some cases make the decision on what to get.
>They rarely reboot Windows .NET Server 2003 with IIS 6.0—
>perhaps a tenth as often as Windows 2000 Server with IIS
>5.0, they estimate. “We’re seeing crazy uptime numbers
>now, like three months, six months. I fully expect we’ll
>see a year of uptime when Windows .NET Server 2003 is
>finished,” Stucky says.
God I hate this. So windows is finally going to get uptimes measured in months instead of days. Good for them.
Of course our unix boxes have done this for years.
Interesting numbers though. If 3months uptime is 10 times better than previous then their windows 2000 boxs had a uptime of about 9 days. OUCH.
I was reading another article a few days ago that also talked about what they thought were crazy up times. Basiclly they were amazed at getting on average 3-6 months of up time but like someone else said before me in *NIX in general a few months is not that great. Sure it might be better then what they are getting now with W2K boxes but not much of an improvement if you compare it with other *NIX OS’s and their server uptimes.
It’s Microsoft writing about .NET, take everything with a grain of salt. It has probably passed the marketing staff a couple of time so that everything is more, better, longer, faster and so on.
The summary is a perfect example of everything being better while nothing was worse than before.
have you l00ked at the latest liesense? don’t forget all the DOWn time you MuSt pay for, so bill&stevIE can remain FraUDuleNT billyunheir softwar gangsters. they caN’T doo IT without YOU J., so vote with your wallet.
soon, the ONLY accurate comments on eugIE’s blog, will be in the moddead DOWn secshun. kewl. fud on.
I’m sure that you must have a valid opinion or thought in that post somewhere. Unfortunately, typing worse than my 7 year old Autistic son doesn’t add much to your credibility.
Honestly? It hurt my eyes to read more than the first sentence.
>> The summary is a perfect example of everything being better while nothing was worse than before.
Washing powder companies have been doing this for years. How comes the new product always gets your whites even whiter and gets rid of the same impossable stubborn staines? I’ve seen newspaper adds from decades ago and they said the same thing then!
Come on people rc1 just came out a few weeks ago
Well, I’ve been running RC1 since this summer, and the only time I ever had a problem with it was when I installed the alpha release of DirectX and jacked up my video hardware performance. It is faster than Win2K, definitely. It also *feels* more stable and (believe it or not) lighter weight. In fact, we’re just installing RC2 in my team now.
RE: Uptime
Remember folks, we’re talking about a very intense environment. This is not your desktop, or even your departmental server. We’re talking about the metal driving the largest corporate .com in the world. That is where these numbers come from. I would like to see some firm data about UNIX (and UNIX Like) performance under similar conditions.
<“We’re seeing crazy uptime numbers now, like three months, six months. I fully expect we’ll see a year of uptime when Windows .NET Server 2003 is finished,” Stucky says.>
Intense invironment or not, these uptimes are only ‘crazy’ for windows servers.