Options
Microsoft announces Nano Server
Comments
-
Options
N2IT
Inactive Imported Users Posts: 7,483 ■■■■■■■■■■
Thanks for sharing! That sounds interesting! -
Options
dave330i
Member Posts: 2,091 ■■■■■■■■■■
Based on the link, it's a striped down version of Server Core. I remember reading something about most of MS patch is GUI related. If that's true, then getting rid of the GUI would make it more secure.2018 Certification Goals: Maybe VMware Sales Cert
"Simplify, then add lightness" -Colin Chapman -
Options
MrAgent
Member Posts: 1,310 ■■■■■■■■□□
Yeah less of a footprint.
Also this:Nano Server will allow customers to install just the components they require and nothing more. The initial results are promising. Based on the current builds, compared to Server, Nano Server has:- 93 percent lower VHD size
- 92 percent fewer critical bulletins
- 80 percent fewer reboots
-
Options
Verities
Member Posts: 1,162
Saw this yesterday. Thoughts?
Microsoft Announces Nano Server for Modern Apps and Cloud - Windows Server Blog - Site Home - TechNet Blogs
Microsoft is trying to turn its server OS into Linux. The most noticeable shift was server core, then storage spaces, and now this. They're going to have to prove that using his is a better alternative than Linux which is already established in the workflow automation/devops field. -
Options
bertieb
Member Posts: 1,031 ■■■■■■□□□□
Sounds great and I'm looking forward to playing about with it.
Note of caution though. Windows Server Core sounded great too but it was largely ignored by server admins. And, have you ever tried to troubleshoot a Win2008R2 server core production instance at 2am when the NIC drivers decided to go on holiday?
I've got my fingers crossed that the tools being developed to manage Nano are properly up to scratch and allows us to admin and troubleshoot in the depth we need though I will admit that there should be less to go wrong if most of it has been ripped out. Here's hopingThe trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never tell if they are genuine - Abraham Lincoln -
Options
Mutata
Member Posts: 176
I wouldn't say they really have to prove they are a better alternative than Linux - they both play at their strengths and weaknesses. I think this will just allow Windows to play in the DevOps space a bit more.
From what I've seen the issue is the approach to administration. -
Optionsally_uk
Member Posts: 1,145 ■■■■□□□□□□
Most windows Admins ignored it because they probably were to scared to get their hands dirty. All the Linux / Unix Admins knowledge wise in comparison to Windows Server guys are on a different level.
Started with Powrshell then you got Server Core now this Nano business it's Windows taking a leaf out of the Linux / Unix way of doing things although in reality using Linux or Unix is alot better / powerful.
Why pay for Windows Server when you can do the same thing better with Linux? ..................Microsoft's strategy to conquer the I.T industry
" Embrace, evolve, extinguish " -
Optionsnster
Member Posts: 231
Lets not make this a Linux vs Windows thread eh?
Both have their strengths and weaknesses like mentioned before -
Optionsgespenstern
Member Posts: 1,243 ■■■■■■■■□□
Windows Server Core sounded great too but it was largely ignored by server admins. And, have you ever tried to troubleshoot a Win2008R2 server core production instance at 2am when the NIC drivers decided to go on holiday?
I did, but I'm CMD/BAT windows shell, PoSh and windows registry guru. I wouldn't say it's much harder than what you do regularly on Linux or AIX.
And the main reason from what I've heard from our Hyper-V guy is licensing. Server Core costs the same and doesn't have any obvious benefits compared to full-blown server with the exception of attack surface which is not something many people are concerned about.
Plus, initially Server Core didn't support PoSh and its configuration was pretty painful because of that.
These days it's pretty robust though.
