locked
What's the big deal with WHS RRS feed

  • Question

  • At first I was kinda suprised with the looks of it al, but if i look now to what WHS is offering for me, it's a bit disappointing.... It's a headless server with a neat backup solution.... The shares and stuf can be done from any OS....

    Ok, the user-administration is easy, and the interface looks nice, also the option to remotely control all your machines from 1 point is nice.

    But does all this justify the need to have a box serving this? All the options can be served from a XP client, and you can use that XP client as a full workstation.

    So, am I missing the point somewhere?

    Wednesday, February 28, 2007 10:41 AM

Answers

  • If they put the MCE functionality into WHS, they would make a great hit... Together with some real user-management and functions .

    Then they can count me in

    Wednesday, February 28, 2007 1:14 PM

All replies

  • you are right to some degree.  However there are several reasons why this can be good.  Yes, you could probably do it all on an XP machine with 3rd party software, but no one has done the whole solution that will be OEM'd to ordinary users.

    It gives them a single place to store files - Without having to know how to set up shares.
    It gives them a backup solution - which most end users do not do at the moment.
    Allows them to add storage without much hassle - again easy for end users.
    Allows the streaming to Media Extenders and other hardware devices that can take advantage of Windows Media Connect, or install their own media connect software.
    It's a locked down version of Server 2003, so the chances of it messing up are slim, especially if you are not browsing the web, downloading files, and installing apps on it.


    Now, this being a beta, not all of this is working for a lot of people, but I think most of us will agree that we would like to have the server hidden in a closet, and not have to hear our desktop that would be closer to us.  Allows you to turn off your computer, and still be able to use Media Extenders.  Again, you could do this on an XP client, but do you really want to?
    Wednesday, February 28, 2007 11:30 AM
  • The answer is in your last sentence....

    Do you really want to do this on a "real workstation"?

    I think so, yes. The "easyness" doesn't jutisfy the price for an extra license and hardware. It would be nice if the home server was the little brother of W2K3...So with roaming profiles, a small email environment, a proxy-server with "family-filters"... This all based on the created users with a real "login to the server", then it would be a "server" ....

    For now it looks to me as something like a "sharing your drives for noobs"-box.

    I think that if WHS stay's like it is, it's gonna go the same way as MCE, a nice wanne-have, but not really a serious OS.

    Just my 2 cents.

     

    ps. the backup-solution is a big plus, but needs some extra functions as well. (detailed scheduling, more control over versions)

    Wednesday, February 28, 2007 11:53 AM
  • I'm not going to say your wrong, because I do agree with you on a bunch of levels, I'm just hoping that with all of the suggestions that are being thrown around, that the final product may be a bit better. 
    Most people believe that v1 of this product will leave much to be desired, but v2 it could be a great product.  Especially if they put a lot of the Media Center into it. 
    My hope is that it will replace Media Center and become Home Center.
    Wednesday, February 28, 2007 12:48 PM
  • If they put the MCE functionality into WHS, they would make a great hit... Together with some real user-management and functions .

    Then they can count me in

    Wednesday, February 28, 2007 1:14 PM