Home > Windows > Microsoft’s plans cloudy for server OSMicrosoft’s plans cloudy for server OS Eugenia Loli 2003-08-06 Windows 22 CommentsMicrosoft has laid plans for a server version of Longhorn, the next release of Windows. But it remains unclear what the software will include and when it will debut.About The Author Eugenia LoliEx-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli 22 Comments 2003-08-06 2:07 pm What about Blackcomb ? 2003-08-06 2:13 pm A server with the eye candy of longhorn?What a waste of resourses. 2003-08-06 2:22 pm A server with the eye candy of longhorn?What a waste of resourses. You’ve never heard of Mac OS X server, have you?…LOL 2003-08-06 2:33 pm Well, somebody has to go against the grain…I mean… all you *nix fanboys brag about your superior command line skillz…They’ll be bragging about their superior wavy translucent configuration window that doesn’t eat up too much of the CPU’s resources…Hah! Take that! 2003-08-06 2:47 pm So? It doesn’t eat much CPU but it still eats memory. Memory that could have used for more useful things.Besides, fast translucency rendering requires a good video card. Why should somebody buy an expensive 3D card for his’s server when most of the time he won’t even look at the monitor?You anti-Unix zealots can brag all you want but that translucent windows and animations are a waste of resources on servers is a fact, not an opnion. 2003-08-06 2:50 pm if you don’t like it, turn the shit off. end of story. 2003-08-06 3:12 pm Microsoft has laid plans for a server version of Blackcomb, the release after the next release of Windows. But it remains unclear what the software will include and when it will debut. 2003-08-06 3:24 pm Can’t believe you even took the stuff seriously… 2003-08-06 3:43 pm Maybe with this server release MS might be able to play with the big boys in the SQL server land. It’s probable that something will happen with MSSQL at the same time and also with .net so that DB2 and Oracle might loose some marketshares in the big league.Good luck MS! 2003-08-06 3:45 pm Lets hope they lose the bet 2003-08-06 3:47 pm Have you ever gone through and disabled all of the useless services in Windows XP. Guess what you get some CPU resources back and some memory resources back. Alot less context switches, less page faults, better IO, better overall performance.Now imagine if you could run all of your applications without the explorer. Now even more resources would be freed. Now imagine that all of the server applications (applications that have little need for direct interaction) are written to use only command line. Now all of those resources are used for the network applications.Simple, yet the idea of a server OS vs. a client OS seems to escape many people. I wouldn’t want to work on a system all day long when it only uses a command line interface, but I wouldn’t want a server system with any gui … a major waste of resources just so that you can have pretty icons and a mouse on your server… just my thoughts… 2003-08-06 4:58 pm I think that GUI could have it’s benefits. For me at least, I think it would make it easier to find what it is that you need to configure. True, you don’t really need the fancy looking stuff, but maybe some people just prefer it that way.You anti-Unix zealots can brag all you want but that translucent windows and animations are a waste of resources on servers is a fact, not an opnion.Well, no, that’s not a fact. To say that the GUI can use extra resources which could be used for server processes and applications is a fact. But to say the GUI is wasting recources goes back to whether or not the administrator wants to use a GUI. Therefore whether or not it is a “waste” is in the eye of the beholder. 2003-08-06 5:20 pm Not everyone can afford to hire a *nix admin.For small departments who call in the secretary’s computer geek son whenever something needs to be done with their computers, GUIs are just the ticket.I’ll admit, if you’re running a midsize to large business, GUI is NOT a major selling point. In many cases it actually decreases efficiency (much harder to automate things such as mass user administration tasks and software updates). I really think there’s room for both. Also, in most cases the GUI doesn’t use *THAT* many resources when it’s just sitting there idle. It’s not like an admin is going to sit there and play Quake on your server, or create a PowerPoint.There’s a place for both styles of server administration. 2003-08-06 6:19 pm actually in linux the gui if its not in use the process is put to sleep so its not using any of the actual cpu’s resources. I know the windows gui doesn’t do this right now but maybe by the time they bring out another server version it could. Therefore it would be negligable on the cpu just like in linux. 2003-08-06 8:54 pm Last I heard, and note that I have no special or reliable sources on this, is that there will be a server version or Longhorn in ~2005, followed a few years later by a server version called Blackcomb.http://www.computerworld.com/softwaretopics/os/windows/story/0,1080…There is mention that the Blackcomb release may have a new kernel (or a rewritten one), though I am not exactly sure if this is really needed, or even if thats the way it’s going to be.Pure speculation on my part; the Blackcomb kernel will be modified so as to include NGSCB integration making that version of Windows “Palladium” enabled software, as opposed to Longhorn for which “Palladium” will be an option. Additionally, or maybe instead of my first little idea (and still pure speculation on my part), the kernel may be rewritten so that it takes advantage of the .NET framework, becoming managed code. 2003-08-07 1:19 am IMHO, you’ve gotta have both. The speed and flexibility of the CLI for doing discrete tasks and scripting is indisputable. But for something like network topology analysis (using a tool like HP OpenView, for instance) a GUI can’t be beat. I would really hate to be stuck with either one without the other.Actually, it seems to me like *nix and Windows are each growing towards becoming more balanced in both areas. 2003-08-07 2:33 am Got this straight from the people at Interop Systems…SFU 3.5 (Beta) Features List (current version is 3.0)* New utilities (includes X11R6.6)– New versions of make, bind, sendmail, gcc [here here!], gdb, tar, ftp, plus the addition of X11R6.6* Pthread support– A complete POSIX thread implementation* Server for NIS Improvements– Analysis and upgrade of code base to address top customer NIS deployment issues* NFS Improvements– 50% performance improvement on Windows Server 2003 and tie into Windows Server 2003 “Protocol Transition” functionality* Interix Subsystem Stability– New and improved stress framework and stress test case development; more targeted security testing by development of penetration test tools and new thread modeling; code coverage analysis; removal of artificial resource limits like processes, threads, etc.* Interix throughput & disc IO performance improvements– Greatly increased throughput and disc IO performance 2003-08-07 4:20 am After finding that all windoze is just a OS with full of holesMS should drop out of OS business and be like apple and just make pretty gui shell. 2003-08-07 11:45 am actually in linux the gui if its not in use the process is put to sleep so its not using any of the actual cpu’s resources. I know the windows gui doesn’t do this right nowSo what is the Windows GUI doing when it’s not in use?My explorer.exe is using 0% CPU right now…you are probably looking at System Idle Process…OMG! IT’S STEALING ALL MY CPU RESOURCES AND IS SENDING THEM TO MICROSOFT SO THEY CAN USE THEM TO KILL LINUX! 2003-08-07 2:51 pm Processes: 37 total, 3 running, 34 sleeping… 144 threads 00:49:21Load Avg: 0.96, 0.46, 0.29 CPU usage: 38.8% user, 17.2% sys, 44.0% idlSharedLibs: num = 84, resident = 25.3M code, 2.46M data, 7.00M LinkEditMemRegions: num = 3737, resident = 67.4M + 5.50M private, 73.0M sharedPhysMem: 59.7M wired, 110M active, 165M inactive, 335M used, 177M freeVM: 1.82G + 57.7M 129077(0) pageins, 498500(0) pageouts PID COMMAND %CPU TIME #TH #PRTS #MREGS RPRVT RSHRD RSIZE VSIZE 1259 top 8.6% 0:01.41 1 14 17 200K 340K 496K 13.6M 1258 tcsh 0.0% 0:00.02 1 10 16 348K 604K 788K 5.73M 1257 login 0.0% 0:00.27 1 12 33 244K 392K 576K 13.7M 1256 Terminal 44.2% 0:02.91 3 58 132 1.91M+ 9.49M 6.70M+ 71.3M+ 1254 mozilla-bi 0.8% 4:24.97 12 182 662 40.9M 41.9M 64.0M 312M 1229 lookupd 0.0% 0:00.42 2 32 45 392K 532K 924K 14.9M 1205 AppleModem 0.0% 0:00.16 2 59 87 636K 6.45M 2.22M 64.8M 1203 modemd 0.0% 0:01.09 2 82 51 568K 1.76M 1.70M 18.4M 1202 pppd 0.0% 0:00.24 1 10 31 200K 856K 376K 14.1M 957 SecurityAg 0.0% 0:01.37 2 74 117 1.37M 7.30M 3.23M 67.2M 613 AppleSpell 0.0% 0:00.15 1 16 22 296K 840K 500K 15.0M 407 automount 0.0% 0:00.08 2 22 21 92K 408K 204K 14.7M 337 Finder 0.0% 1:43.49 2 142 262 5.61M 23.1M 15.5M 112M 336 SystemUISe 0.0% 5:52.32 2 142 144 1.50M 8.30M 2.57M 68.2M 335 Dock 0.0% 0:41.43 2 114 153 1.65M 11.8M 3.44M 72.6MThe thing consuming the most CPU time is top! I can see how people *may* want to shun GUI’s but it is a clear fact that there are *NOT* alot of people out there who know CLI. Most system admins grabbed their qualification off the back of a cocoa pop’s pack and thus, only know the old click, drool and talk to clippy routine. 2003-08-08 1:04 pm Is 63,000 bugs a good description of what will be included in the server version of Longhorn ? 2003-08-11 1:12 am “Now imagine if you could run all of your applications without the explorer.”No problem doing this. When I leave my Windows desktop machine for the weekend it’s usually doing something to make sure the T1 is not underutilized. I end-task explorer and bump priority of the applications that are running to high. A button on my keyboard opens a CLI window, I type “Explorer” and hit return and it’s running again.