Shanen Boettcher shows off Vista Beta 2

Ok... this is wicked, Iain and Andrew show me a version of the next Windows Server OS that has essentially no UI, no desktop, no other apps... just pure Server goodness and a command line. Toss the monitor and give me just a scrolling LED screen on the front
and I'm set. Iain also talks to me about some of the other features that exist across all the version of this new OS and we ramble off topic onto how great the Sonos home audio system is... good stuff all around
I was testing CORE on p3 800 with 512MB RAM and it was running good.Jeroen Ritmeijer wrote:Are there any hard numbers about how much memory or CPU cycles this configuration saves? I doubt it is anything significant.
yeah I would like it to be login in text mode, no gui at all.... I like this
AaaApl wrote:Jeroen Ritmeijer said:Are there any hard numbers about how much memory or CPU cycles this configuration saves? I doubt it is anything significant.
I was testing CORE on p3 800 with 512MB RAM and it was running good.
So how is the MS print server configured in general?
Server has the queues and the drivers for each printer, then each queue will point to the specific HP DirectJet card using TCPIP (i.e. no NetBIOS)? So I assume you don't also get DirectJet broadcasts on the network which would confuse people - so PrintServer Queue is the only way to "get" to that printer with no backdoors to print directly to the card. Is this right? TIA
staceyw wrote:So how is the MS print server configured in general?
Server has the queues and the drivers for each printer, then each queue will point to the specific HP DirectJet card using TCPIP (i.e. no NetBIOS)? So I assume you don't also get DirectJet broadcasts on the network which would confuse people - so PrintServer Queue is the only way to "get" to that printer with no backdoors to print directly to the card. Is this right? TIA
...word to the wise for basic video/photography 101.
NEVER snap or video a person in front of a bright object, like an outside widow - hard to see.
Silly question. Iain mentioned by removing the UI about 70% of the attack area is removed, doesn't say much for Windows, but that's a moot point.
If the Server can be remotely administered (MMC snap in) won't attacks come from the remote machine, as in the 70% that was removed...
Jeroen - we usually don't go for hard numbers at beta 2 as there is still a bunch of flux. we believe it will be significant for some roles.
rasx - at the moment, no framework. from an inital point, their setup has dependencies on higher level (ie not included) things. sql is, at the moment in the same category. we're working this - i would really like sql...
kryptos - yeah we'd like a command line login as well, but you have to remember winlogon is all new in vista/longhorn - i would not want to block for just waiting on that. also there is a load of extensibility in winlogon - how would this handle that extensibility?
thats kinda unknown & its a corner case. i wouldn't hold you hopes up for text mode login...
staceyw - wow that idea of having a system on a key never occured to us. actually, it did, i'm just torquing you...
rj... - yeah you could do that with tools that exist in todays system, but there are no guarantees the system will work in that case. this is somehting that will be supported
tomax7 (1) - i thought it was quite slimming actually. & i need that...
(2) so let me get what you are saying - you ar ethinking that someone is going to use an attack vector that is on an admin machine using a remote mmc session? geez, if i were writing a virus or trojan for that scenario, i'd be a doof - "hey i have a good idea,
lets attack .01% of systems in the world being used by the most knowledgeable users". but seriously, that vector is the same as attacking a full windows installation. (don't think i am dissing you - that is a question that has been asked a number of times
internally)
finally - we're going at this as a first go around - we love seeing the responses - i am super happy to hear direct feedback on server beta 2, core or full - if you have issues send me a mail. i am guessing if you are here you could find how to mail me...
/iainmc...
i hate emoticons. except this one
...i am just a peon in the big world of computing, was just sharing my thoughts, akin to a root kit.
Not worried about being dissed, as I said, just a voice in the wilderness.
0.01% would make it even more a trophy
cheers
tom
Well first of all I like the idea of Server Core. It responds to the advantage BSD and Linux has in headless servers.
It would have many uses without .NET altough I would hope a .NET layer would be added as an option.
That is the whole point.. Everything gets added as it is needed and only if it is needed. This can also become the core of embeded software for robotics when those systems pass the power limits of mobile.net.
There was a good question raised about how many CPU cycles are saved by not having a GUI. I think the answer is that by not having a GUI you force problems to be solvable from the command line and to be solveable via scripting or batch files. That is a breakthrough
in scale.
At less than 1GB of image one can also make pure computational blades that load the latest image over IP.
So I hope this is the begining of headless servers and faster grid like load balanceing from reduced demands.
Keep up the good work.
ChrisA wrote:Is Microsoft going to supply BASH, TCSH or any type of unix type shells? Where is a list of command line commands for core server? cmd.exe is a weak shell and unless enough cli tools are provided to make this thing really useful
iain wrote:actually what I'd really like is to provide powershell in server core. However, we're not there first go around but we're working on how this would happen.
iain wrote:
i just reckon if we don't promise anything to you guys we can exceed what you expect...
/i
iain wrote:actually what I'd really like is to provide powershell in server core. However, we're not there first go around but we're working on how this would happen.
i just reckon if we don't promise anything to you guys we can exceed what you expect...
/i
ChrisA wrote:I personally dont see the advantage to this system. The Linux "core" system is much more functional, has more tools and we still dont know the cli commands or what tools are available for the core server. if it matches the norm cmd.exe shell then this is destined to be a weak system. To label this a unix or linux killer is premature.
iain wrote:...
staceyw - wow that idea of having a system on a key never occured to us.actually, it did, i'm just torquing you...
To reply to some of the earlier questions and posts....
True, you can run Server 2003 headless and never use IE and Media Player, however, the binaries are installed and need to be patched when a patch comes out. With Server Core, the binaries don't exist on the box so no need to patch.
As Iain mentioned in an earlier post, we don't have hard numbers yet. There will be more resources available, since less is installed and running on the system. However, the big benefits are the reduced maintenance and management, the ~70% fewer patches.
We are looking into a including a subset of the .Net Framework for many of the reasons suggested in a future release.
We are also investigating including IIS7 for beta 3. Because there is no .Net Framework, it won't support ASP.NET, but it will support html, isapi, native asp, etc.
Andrew
ChrisA wrote:I personally dont see the advantage to this system. The Linux "core" system is much more functional, has more tools and we still dont know the cli commands or what tools are available for the core server. if it matches the norm cmd.exe shell then this is destined to be a weak system. To label this a unix or linux killer is premature.
Actually, i got a bounce from your email server...
(this: The message cannot be delivered due to a configuration error on the server. Please contact your Administrator. <mail1.microsoft.com #5.3.0 smtp;553 5.3.0 <robertodohnert@mail15.com>... user unknown>
We didn't do testing of the things you named - but we have heard of someone running apache.
There is stuff in the sdk on server core.
https://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/dnanchor/html/anch_serventdev.asp we won't do a separate sdk - that
would fork the codebase to hard. We want the flavors to stay the same.
Core is not a sku - its an installation choice - so standard, enterprise & data center editions can be installed as both full server & core.
/i
warren wrote:
ChrisA wrote: Is Microsoft going to supply BASH, TCSH or any type of unix type shells? Where is a list of command line commands for core server? cmd.exe is a weak shell and unless enough cli tools are provided to make this thing really useful
Windows isn't as shell-centric as Unix is.
Philosophically, you don't generally pass around bits of data between multiple programs in Windows. Instead, you write script in VBScript, JScript, etc. and have cscript (or wscript) execute it. You get contructs and tools (string manipulation, file I/O, logging, etc.) which are more or less equivalent to what you'll get from the GNU set of tools, as well as access to a lot of neat information and functionality that the OS provides, through WMI and COM.
Microsoft has already been providing piles of Unix command-line tools for years, including tcsh and ksh. More info here:
https://www.microsoft.com/technet/interopmigration/unix/sfu/migun2wi.mspx
Whether or not this stuff will be installable as part of Server Core is something MS will need to clarify someday.
Your edit above is correct, Server Core is just one of the options for how you can install Longhorn Server. It is an option that can be used when you want to run a minimal AD, DNS, DHCP, or File server box and not have to manage and maintain all the rest
of Windows on those boxes.
You can still install Server, which includes all the roles, the GUI, CLR, etc.
We are investigating what we can do with PowerShell and Server Core in the Longhorn timeframe, as well as how to keep improving it in future releases.