| News | Features | Interviews |
| Blog | Contact | Editorials |
| Review: Windows Server 2012 RTM |
| By special contributor Bob Stein on 2012-10-26 22:59:57 |
| ActiveWin.com has just posted their 17-page, 90-screenshot review of Microsoft Windows Server 2012. The review covers many different aspects of the OS including start screen, server manager, VHDX, chkdsk improvements, Hyper-V, private cloud, IIS 8, and more. "On the desktop, Windows 8 remains the most talked about release, but within the datacenter, Windows 8’s counterpart on the server is also creating its own noise amongst Sys Admins and Integrators. One of the themes around Windows 8 is mobility and Touch, Windows Server 2012 itself follows a theme that is part of an industry trend, the Cloud. Windows Server 2012 promises to embrace the concept of private clouds fully while maintaining the traditional concept of on premises administration using its familiar tools." |
|
| Comment by Luminair |
| By Luminair on 2012-10-27 02:18:23 |
|
server 2012 is a gem, even despite the comedic shoehorning-in of the metro start screen bad review, good OS |
 - Score: 2 |
| RE: Comment by Luminair |
| By modmans2ndcoming on 2012-10-27 13:45:00 |
| you can make server 2012 boot to the desktop. |
| - Score: 4 |
| RE: Comment by Luminair |
| By Ford Prefect on 2012-10-27 13:50:14 |
| Does it matter? The desktop itself was already a joke for a server OS. |
| - Score: 2 |
| RE[2]: Comment by Luminair |
| By Drumhellar on 2012-10-27 18:17:54 |
| Then don't install the desktop. It is completely unnecessary. |
| - Score: 3 |
| RE[3]: Comment by Luminair |
| By shotsman on 2012-10-27 19:32:44 |
|
Then don't install the desktop. It is completely unnecessary in a some situations There fixed it for you. Oh, and not everything can be done via powershell. |
| - Score: 2 |
| RE[2]: Comment by Luminair |
| By ze_jerkface on 2012-10-27 20:07:52 |
|
> Does it matter? The desktop itself was already a joke for a server OS. Maybe in 1999 when the GUI resource argument was actually worth considering. I definitely wouldn't run X on a server because it is a POS that can't be trusted on production servers. The Win GUI is plenty stable but Microsoft has definitely ruined it with Metro. The way they integrated it looks like a practical joke. |
| - Score: 2 |
| RE[2]: Comment by Luminair |
| By Luminair on 2012-10-27 20:35:27 |
| server 2012 boots to the desktop automatically. but eventually you'll have to run something, and metro is still the new start menu. |
| - Score: 1 |
| RE[4]: Comment by Luminair |
| By Drumhellar on 2012-10-27 21:41:52 |
|
You'd be hard pressed to find something you need the GUI for. And, in the rare circumstance you need a graphical tool, you can install just that, and not the whole desktop. |
| - Score: 3 |
| RE[3]: Comment by Luminair |
| By WorknMan on 2012-10-28 00:20:07 |
|
> server 2012 boots to the desktop automatically. but eventually you'll have to run something, and metro is still the new start menu. If it's anything like Windows 8, there's plenty of Start menu replacements to be had. Or just use a launcher. In all honesty, it's a lot of bitching about nothing. |
| - Score: 3 |
| RE[3]: Comment by Luminair |
| By Drumhellar on 2012-10-28 02:20:09 |
|
> and metro is still the new start menu. Does it really matter? The Server 2012 Start Screen is nearly blank initially, with and only the snap-ins for the service you add populate it afterwards. It ends up being nicer than the start menu, with large text and icons making things easier to find. I have yet to see anybody give a plausible situation where you need the rest of the desktop available when the start menu is open The Start Screen displays more icons and is easier to read, compared to the old Start Menu. Apart from the Start Screen, Metro absent 2012 (Though, I do believe you have the option of going back and installing everything). Edited 2012-10-28 02:22 UTC |
| - Score: 3 |
| News | Features | Interviews |
| Blog | Contact | Editorials |