UK Community: DeveloperDeveloper Day

die-Sel wrote:this is going to be one handy piece of software, i just hope we can deloy our own applications
This is an amazing piece of software. It really turns the tables on GDrive or Live Drive. Why would I want to store my documents at Microsoft or Google, when I can have the privacy of storing them on my own server, and yet have the zero-maintenance anyway.
I love the Desktop Search right on the storage server (as opposed to on every PC in the house), the super-quick easy backup and the ability to restore a complete computer on a blank disk in just 1 hour (that is going to save me time! I'll sell one to my parents
too ), the ability to store documents centrally with infinite storage (no more manually mounting disks anymore), with resiliance to a crashing harddisk (can't do that with an ordinary mount). The central management of the security of all home PCs, without
the hassle of complex policies and settings. I'm sold. And throwing in the remote access to applications over the Internet is the ultimate selling point for Vista on my other PCs, in my case.
I have just two requests for Charlie Kindel:
1. You mentioned that Windows Media Center initially was too closed for geeks (and ISVs) to extend. Could your team please please provide an API that allows an external service to plug a page and top tab in the Home Server Console? I'm thinking of third parties
providing an easy interface to do home automation, for instance.
2. On the client PC with Home Server Connector, could you please provide a system tray icon which allows to take a backup immediately (like I know is already possible from the Homer Server itself for that PC).
Or alternatively the ability to create a backup every time the computer shuts down (with max of once a day).
This is just so that computer don't consume energy while waiting to be backed up over night. I'm sure my parents will NOT keep their PC on just to back it up.
PS. Can this Home Server also do ASP.NET web serving?
This IS very cool.
I wonder if there will be an email server for this? That would seem to be a logical extension of this...
daSmirnov wrote:As long as my FTP server runs on this I am buying one ASAP. So let's not forget about releasing it in Europe.
The on10 video only made me want one sometime after they come out... this one made me want/need now... now now now now now.
Granted I’ve got zero chance of getting into the private beta... so in the mean time I’ve got to ask... any chance of being directed towards some API documentation? I’ve got a pin handy and will sign over my soul in blood if you let me at it.
Arg... on the way out of my day job I had a couple of questions come to mind... which lead to others which lead to still more... Sorry to bother Charlie but I’ve got to ask...
1. The on10 video told us that WHS was able to keep up to date and inform you of the security status of the machines in your house with tidbits such as the status of the firewall, Windows Update and what not... does WHS get involved with anything more than
monitoring of those subsystems such as... being central repository for in-house WU downloads (ie so only a single copy of each patch is required)?
1a. If it is able to be more involved in the updating and management... how much control can it grant/restrict to the desktop? Can a WHS user/admin choose which updates to apply to which PC's?
2. Given the relationship between 2003 and WHS... is it safe to say that the same will be for vNext and Longhorn Server? Will the WHS SKU be available around the same time?
3. 2003 comes with support for numerous different servers out of the box like HTTP, FTP, DNS, DHCP... will a Sam using WHS have the same control over them that he/she would on a 2003 box today?
4. Given that WHS will likely be updateable automatically via WU or manually through a separate download or WU... what sort of recovery/troubleshooting mechanisms does it have built in/support in case failed upgrades or other software/hardware issues that render
the unit unable to boot to a normal state where software based troubleshooting (ie event log, gui, etc) could begin?
5. So as to extend the lifetime of the hard drives, does WHS support hybrid drives?
6. What kind of (if any) network/application limitations (other than raw bandwidth) exist to prevent a user from setting up their desktop with a remote WHS?
7. Is there any in box support for backing up and recovery of the archive of the WHS to some external device such as a tape or another WHS? Mmm... WHS on WHS.
8. Are there any built in artificial limitations to WHS to keep it from eating away at current/future business/enterprise servers that accomplish a similar task? Limitations such as # of desktops that can use a given WHS, maximum disk space, backup age, backup
count.
9. Assuming a user is say... backing up nightly (and disk space is infinite), what kind of depth of history does a user have available to them at restore time? Rather than restoring to the last backup... can they recover to the day before last? Last week? Last
month? (again, assuming HD space is infinite).
10. Is there any support for federation between multiple WHSs so as to further extend the reliability?
11. What sort of protection exists (aside from WHS password(s)) to prevent malicious access to backup data via open wifi connection or screwdriver?
If you can't tell... I'm psyched and believe you me... it doesn't happen all that much.
Given that my mind is still racing with ideas of how to exploit and extend (in good ways) such a device I'm going to ask just one more question before digging into a few ideas.
So last but not least...
12. Is your team hiring? How about in July? (I've got a bit of indentured service due to tuition reimbursement until around then).
XxDesmus_MODxX wrote:Peronally you killed this video for me with this censored crap. I don't think I've ever watched a channel9 video that was censored like ths...truly sad.
Rory wrote:I see now that this may have been a mistake. Perhaps being honest isn't the best move.
Personally, I much preferred your way of doing it over those quick edits we've seen in past.
Do promise us though that if/when the cut content is finally announced... that you come back and post here what it was.
Jack Poison wrote:Who is the target audience for this?
Sounds overly complex for the average home user. (Looking at the On10 Video)
For me, it's great, but it would be much easier for me to simply install an XP box and open up file sharing (which I actually do now with my media center).
Microsoft still hasn't learned simplicity or timing. The UI is improved, it seems.. A nice start, but it isn't easy enough for the average mon/dad home user.
This technology, from what I can determine, is nothing majorly new. The Media Center PC has been out since 2004. MP3s etc., have been mainstream since Napster v1.0 (at least 1999). Why has it taken Microsoft so long to do this? Any why will it take forever to RTM?
dahat wrote:
Rory wrote: I see now that this may have been a mistake. Perhaps being honest isn't the best move.
You at least had the decency to point it out and address it... rather than leave it vague and people wonder "was that a bleep?" "did I just see an edit?" "what are the evil lawyers not wanting us to see and hear?"Personally, I much preferred your way of doing it over those quick edits we've seen in past.
Do promise us though that if/when the cut content is finally announced... that you come back and post here what it was.
Rory, don't worry about the edits. It's only natural that a video that comes out on the day of the announcement cannot reveal everything. In fact, I'm pretty sure there are questions/answers you will not be allowed to publish even post-launch. It's a commercial company with trade secrets, which help them outcompete the competitors. So?
The video was really an amazing source of information on what you can do with this thing, and the edits were sort of funny.
Regarding the target audience, my father in law (+65) wants one (let me clarify that: he needs one and knows it).
My own home definitely need one (count me on the Sam side), but I'm actually pretty sure my wife will be the one working mostly with it (and she's not a geek). And I'm excited to rid myself of work I really don't want to do.
My brothers with teenage children were going through the roof when I told them about Home Server.
My family (incl inlaws) wants 5 home servers, counting only the early adopters, provided that Windows XP is sufficient on client PCs. 5 of 13 households isn't bad, so I don't understand what this "lack of target audience" is about.
But just release it to the European market in time for 2007 holiday shopping, and we'll see what happens.
Rory wrote:And, as you'll learn over the coming months, Windows Home Server is more than what we've been able to show you so far. Understandably, the team wants to hand out information bit by bit when they feel it's appropriate.
By the time it's all out there, I think you'll have a better understanding of how this product provides value for a larger demographic than you think.
I hate to say it, given that I work for the company and am biased (it's natural to be partial toward the company for which one chooses to work), but trust me when I say that there's much more to this story than what we've shown, and it's going to be pretty cool.
Rory wrote:
You do realize, I hope, that you're basically asking that we either ruin our own reputation or lie to you.
I find both of those options to be out of the question.
So, I edited.
XxDesmus_MODxX wrote:To be honest, I am quite impressed with this WHS, but I was really hoping for some kind of minimal Exchange support. I would love to have easy access to Outlook Web Access and all the other wonderful benefits of Exhange.
Sure it’s not Exchange, but it’d be a heck of a lot more reliable than your email server being on a dynamic ip address.
dahat wrote:
XxDesmus_MODxX wrote:To be honest, I am quite impressed with this WHS, but I was really hoping for some kind of minimal Exchange support. I would love to have easy access to Outlook Web Access and all the other wonderful benefits of Exhange.
I thought the same thing for a lil while but realized that given that WHS will be remotely accessible, there’ll likely be a free DNS service made available for owners of WHS that gives em an A record to find their way home... and likely an MX record will be thrown in for free so that you could use Windows Live Custom Domains.Sure it’s not Exchange, but it’d be a heck of a lot more reliable than your email server being on a dynamic ip address.
Hi All. Charlie Kindel here...
My apologies for taking so long to reply to this thread. I had hoped to post something right away, but I'm here in Las Vegas for CES and it has been insane.
As I get time, I will try to go through all the messages in this thread and address the questions people have posted the best I can.
In the meantime here's a list of resources on Windows Home Server with more information and other perspectives:
Home Server owners will be able to set up a free internet address, like username.homeserver.com, to remotely access their servers.
Some features are only available with Windows XP SP2 or Windows Vista Business (or higher) systems, making the only way to get certain features is through Vista Ultimate. In other words, Home Server is going to be a major reason to buy Vista Ultimate, and Media Center aficionados will have to have at least one Ultimate PC to use certain features I can’t talk about and take advantage of Previous Versions.
XxDesmus_MODxX wrote:
Rory wrote:
You do realize, I hope, that you're basically asking that we either ruin our own reputation or lie to you.
I find both of those options to be out of the question.
So, I edited.
You are right, I do apologize. I guess it was just one of those "I am so excited for this product" and then to have some of the info be left out just felt...something. Anyways, I apologize.
XxDesmus_MODxX wrote:Either way, this is a great product, but I do also think it will be a hard sell right out the door simply because "normal" people associate anything Server with complexity.
XxDesmus_MODxX wrote:Also, do we have any kind of 100% confirmation on if this software is going to be available separately for custom builds? Their seems to be a great deal of confusion regarding this on the web. Some sites say yes, software can be purchased separately (Such as Paul), and others say no, it won't be available outside of OEMs and system builders.
So any final definitive answer?
Rory wrote:
I think we all know how frustrating it can be to hear about a product over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again. Or, to hear about a feature that is later removed.
Vince 15 wrote:I do have a question about the way WHS ensures reliability of data. In the video you say it doens't actually use a raid, but something easier. The question is... how much space doesn't it use for redundancy? Does it waste half the space, or it is smarter like a raid5? I think this is a very important issue, that can bring real geeks to use WHS instead of building a NAS by themselves.
Thanks!
I suspect AD might be a bit much for the target customers, but I am curious as to how authentication works. If I have a family desktop on which everyone has an account and a laptop I use for my own personal use, is there a way to indicate that the "Bryan" on both machines is the same person? And how do you account for spoofing (since login name can be changed)?RodAtWork wrote:This product does look very interesting to me! I, too, wonder if it will support Active Directory, so that each person in the household needs to only have one account on the network, log into any machine with the same username/password, update it in only one place, etc.
Bas wrote:So, is there any chance that we may see drive extender in future versions of windows, or as an add-on? Sounds like this is a great way to ensure data reliability on your client PC's, too, without the need to get into RAID.
Thanks, that's pretty much what I had hoped for. Obviously WHS is the only goal right now, but who knows?
One other thing that popped in my head: on my laptop and my desktop PC at home, I have subscribed to the same bunch of RSS feeds. Sometimes I catch some feeds while working on my laptop, but when I read them, they're still marked as 'unread' on my desktop,
because it will have found the new content from the same feed too.
In the end, it turns out that whenever I see a feed appear in bold in IE7 or Outlook 2007, I need to open it and check if there is actually new content, or if it's just content that I've already read on another PC.
Long story short: will there be a way to use a centralised RSS feed store on WHS, so that if I read a feed on one PC, it'll be marked as 'read' on all other PC's too?
trafficreport wrote:I have an extremely technical and on-point question:
What was the little video screen on the left of his monitor, um, monitoring?
I wanted to pull it up like they do on all the shows these days and instantly see a pixel perfect view of it just by selecting it, but I don't have the make believe application that does that.
Very cool vid btw. Please send a WHS to my home address as soon as it is available.
Evoroth wrote:Will it have the ability to put the machines on a domain and control user accounts via group policy? Because that would be the kind of thing I'm looking for at home at the present.
It seems like the PC Backup feature is rather separate from the shared folders feature.
User --------- Client PC -------------- WHS ---------------- Remote Access
Peter <-----------------------------> Shared Folders -------------> Peter
Paul <-----------------------------> (Previous Versions)
(Data Redundancy)
(User Access Controls)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter's Machine ----->PC Backup
Paul's Machine ----->(Single Instance Storage)
(Data Redundancy)
<-----(Complete PC Restore)
Assumptions:
1. Only files stored in shared folders can be accessed remotely.
2. Only files stored in shared folders will provide previous versions.
3. Paul cannot access a file backed up from Peters machine that is not in a shared folder.
4. Only the most recent backup can be restored?
5. Users can restore individual files that have been backed up from their PCs?
Since you are still around Charlie could I get you to take a stab at some of my previous questions?
Note: from reading here and elsewhere it sounds like 8 and 9 have been answered (10 user max, yes)
eddwo wrote:It seems like the PC Backup feature is rather separate from the shared folders feature.
User --------- Client PC -------------- WHS ---------------- Remote Access
Peter <-----------------------------> Shared Folders -------------> Peter
Paul <-----------------------------> (Previous Versions)
(Data Redundancy)
(User Access Controls)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter's Machine ----->PC Backup
Paul's Machine ----->(Single Instance Storage)
(Data Redundancy)
<-----(Complete PC Restore)
Assumptions:
1. Only files stored in shared folders can be accessed remotely.
2. Only files stored in shared folders will provide previous versions.
3. Paul cannot access a file backed up from Peters machine that is not in a shared folder.
4. Only the most recent backup can be restored?
5. Users can restore individual files that have been backed up from their PCs?
dahat wrote:Arg... on the way out of my day job I had a couple of questions come to mind... which lead to others which lead to still more... Sorry to bother Charlie but I’ve got to ask...
1. The on10 video told us that WHS was able to keep up to date and inform you of the security status of the machines in your house with tidbits such as the status of the firewall, Windows Update and what not... does WHS get involved with anything more than monitoring of those subsystems such as... being central repository for in-house WU downloads (ie so only a single copy of each patch is required)?
1a. If it is able to be more involved in the updating and management... how much control can it grant/restrict to the desktop? Can a WHS user/admin choose which updates to apply to which PC's?
dahat wrote:
2. Given the relationship between 2003 and WHS... is it safe to say that the same will be for vNext and Longhorn Server? Will the WHS SKU be available around the same time?
dahat wrote:
3. 2003 comes with support for numerous different servers out of the box like HTTP, FTP, DNS, DHCP... will a Sam using WHS have the same control over them that he/she would on a 2003 box today?
dahat wrote:
4. Given that WHS will likely be updateable automatically via WU or manually through a separate download or WU... what sort of recovery/troubleshooting mechanisms does it have built in/support in case failed upgrades or other software/hardware issues that render the unit unable to boot to a normal state where software based troubleshooting (ie event log, gui, etc) could begin?
dahat wrote:
5. So as to extend the lifetime of the hard drives, does WHS support hybrid drives?
dahat wrote:
6. What kind of (if any) network/application limitations (other than raw bandwidth) exist to prevent a user from setting up their desktop with a remote WHS?
dahat wrote:
7. Is there any in box support for backing up and recovery of the archive of the WHS to some external device such as a tape or another WHS? Mmm... WHS on WHS.
dahat wrote:
8. Are there any built in artificial limitations to WHS to keep it from eating away at current/future business/enterprise servers that accomplish a similar task? Limitations such as # of desktops that can use a given WHS, maximum disk space, backup age, backup count.
dahat wrote:
9. Assuming a user is say... backing up nightly (and disk space is infinite), what kind of depth of history does a user have available to them at restore time? Rather than restoring to the last backup... can they recover to the day before last? Last week? Last month? (again, assuming HD space is infinite).
dahat wrote:
10. Is there any support for federation between multiple WHSs so as to further extend the reliability?
dahat wrote:
11. What sort of protection exists (aside from WHS password(s)) to prevent malicious access to backup data via open wifi connection or screwdriver?
dahat wrote:
If you can't tell... I'm psyched and believe you me... it doesn't happen all that much.
Given that my mind is still racing with ideas of how to exploit and extend (in good ways) such a device I'm going to ask just one more question before digging into a few ideas.
So last but not least...
12. Is your team hiring? How about in July? (I've got a bit of indentured service due to tuition reimbursement until around then).
ckindel wrote:
We have open positions for a senior Program Mananger and for Software Development Engineers in Test.
Thanks for the answers Charlie, good stuff.
ckindel wrote:
dahat wrote:
3. 2003 comes with support for numerous different servers out of the box like HTTP, FTP, DNS, DHCP... will a Sam using WHS have the same control over them that he/she would on a 2003 box today?
Some yes, some no. We look at it like this:
Our #1 goal is to nail Peter's experience. If Peter always acts like a Peter we do everything possible to guarantee that he/she(?) has an "appliance like" experience of simplicity, consistecy, and reliability.
Sam wants what Peter gets, but also wants to be able to "play" some. Sam needs to undertand though, that, his/her playful nature carries some risk depending on how hard he/she plays.
Some things will definately break Peter's expereince ("net stop whsbackup" or running Disk Manager and changing properties of drives WHS is managing for example). Some, *might* break Peter's experience...we can't (and won't) test every server application out there that runs on W2K3. Or every built-in W2K3 service that WHS is not natively utlizing for that matter.
I’m just having some ideas that would be best use on a WHS like box but that might rely on the option of some of the backend server options being there... or being provided elsewhere (good thing I’ve been writing my own DNS server in C# out of curiosity
and boredom).
ckindel wrote:
dahat wrote:
6. What kind of (if any) network/application limitations (other than raw bandwidth) exist to prevent a user from setting up their desktop with a remote WHS?
No comprende your question. Sorry.
As grand WHS is and useful as it is to most PC users out there... there are those who I wouldn’t want to let near one physically even though I’d think they’d benefit immensely from ones use so I’m forced to wonder... would it be possible for me to setup
a WHS at home internet connection and configure my parents PCs out of state to backup to my WHS (assuming bandwidth is not an issue on either side).
The also can be viewed from a road warrior prospective... your laptop is backed up every night while at home... but if you find yourself on the road for an extended period of time... is your laptop able to call home and get backed up (assuming bandwidth is
not an issue) using the normal means? ... or would the user have to backup their desired files manually to the file share? (also assuming they aren’t using some sort of enterprise WHS at work)
That does lead to another interesting query... regardless of if a backup is happening locally or remotely (if possible) is the actual communication along the wire encrypted?
ckindel wrote:
dahat wrote:
11. What sort of protection exists (aside from WHS password(s)) to prevent malicious access to backup data via open wifi connection or screwdriver?
Trying to make people's home secure (either physically or just with wireless networks) is a bit like tyring to boil the ocean. As much as we'd like to be able to, we can't force people to not be stupid about how they configure things (not securing their wireless or leaving their front door unlocked). We're confident that as long as someone does not have physical access our solution is solid.
Any encryption at all on the disk for the backup and/or share contents?
EFS? ... no, that’d make key recovery tricky... Key based on admin password? ... changing pw would ruin things fast... don’t mind me, just trying to read your team’s mind... none at all but possibly broken into smaller pieces (based on changes or block
size) is starting to sound better.
ckindel wrote:We have open positions for a senior Program Mananger and for Software Development Engineers in Test.
I'm probably breaking some rule about doing recruting here on C9, but I literally just discovered that we have on other open position: A very experienced developer who can twiddle bits at the lowest level but can also deal with huge algorithmic complexity.
Darn none the less, I’m more of a SDE person and my bit twiddling skills are good... but likely not to the level that you are looking for... so I’ll have to keep watching.
Any idea which team yours is listed under on the Careers site?
The concept is awesome, it is just unfortunate it took/taking so long to become a reality. I'd already have this purchased, configured and running if it was available. Anyway at all to get on the private beta list?
Sounds very similar to a product I have been using for many years, Mirra, except with many additional features that Mirra should have come up with ages ago. Such as remote access to the server or workstations on the home network not just the files. Ability
to share the backed-up files on the network. Abilty to expand HD space by adding internal or external storage devices.
2 things specific to my personal scenario which would definitely sell me on the WHS.
1. If there are shared folders on WHS, such as music, videos, pictures, will the only way to access them be through a "media connect" compliant device? Or as long as the device can see a shared folder in XP it will be able to see a shared folder in WHS?
2. Since the WHS, is likely to be online at all times, is it possible to use the WHS to run a website so it is not necessary to have two computers running at all times?
You definitely have a very, very, very eager fan of this application only a couple things possibly stand in the way of me selling my Mirra to change to this solution. I am amazed at how long it took to create an alternative solution, but it sounds like this
is worth the wait. Keep up the good work!
Tharnax wrote:
1. If there are shared folders on WHS, such as music, videos, pictures, will the only way to access them be through a "media connect" compliant device? Or as long as the device can see a shared folder in XP it will be able to see a shared folder in WHS?
Tharnax wrote:
2. Since the WHS, is likely to be online at all times, is it possible to use the WHS to run a website so it is not necessary to have two computers running at all times?
I have 5 PCs setup in common areas of the house and with a family of 6 I got tired of my kids, wife, and me complaining about the location of their files and email accounts. This prompted me about 3 or so years ago to setup a SBS in my house. Ever since
then I've been wondering why MS hasn't come out with a server product that was designed for the home user. To my pleasant surprise it looks like they will be coming out with one.
However, since I bit the bullet and figured out how to install a SBS at home, I wonder if WHS will offer me anything more than what my SBS is giving me? After some initial learning curve, SBS has been a "set it and forget it" product for me.
I primarily use the SBS for:
1. "My Documents" redirection to the server.
2. MS Exchange to store email accounts and messages.
3. Shared network drives
4. IP Router
5. Remote Web Workplace
What I would like it to do:
1. Parental controls at the server level (internet filter, pc time limits, etc.)
2. Media distribution (Sling type service, dvd server)
3. Firewall, virus, spam, protection at the server level rather than configuration at each PC.
4. When a new PC is added to the network all user configuration is pushed down from the server from internet favorites to drive mapping (I know, SBS can probably do this but I'm a CPA not an IS guy.)
Good luck to the MS team and waiting patiently for my private beta test invite.
Hi,
is there any location where can i find stuff on the Drive Extender technology? how files are spread across disks an so on...?
Regev
felicitaciones muy útiles los comentarios continúen adelante desde Carora Venezuela para ustedes