Submitted by 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.”
“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
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.
Well, using my Netgear router with Linux somehow introduces delays in name lookups, sometimes seconds.
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!
If it is based on Vista, it will have scary system requirements, DRM/activation/WGA, and cost much money.
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.
You obviously haven’t read the article or done even very basic research on the product.
Heh, welcome to OSNews
Touche. God, it feels like an Apple TV ad. 😉
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.
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.
Really? Can you how you set this up? Surely all the hardware isn’t included in this cost?
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
Are you saying you’ve overwritten the firmware in a router then attached external HDD?
Can you please specify the hardware you’ve used?
Google NSLU2, you will find all the answers. It is not a router. http://www.nslu2-linux.org/
Yep, thank you. I’ve already done this and it’s a very interesting idea.
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.
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.
How is this different from a NAS?
Is it true that Paul Thurrott gets an erection whenever a new version of Winblows is released? And especially whenever he gets a beta version of an upcoming version of Winblows?
It must be difficult not to remain excited when you have Bill Gates’ flaccid penis permanently stuck in your mouth.
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.
“The same role could be filled by a Linux distro at LEAST as well.”
That is correct! 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
Are you a bot? You can’t seem to comment without saying the same things over and over….
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).
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
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.
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.
heh. Another worm infested zombie. In every home.
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.