Getting Started with Server Core

re: Getting Started with Server Core

kgreene@pathfind.org — Tue, 17 Jul 2007 16:56:51 GMT

Surely someone in Redmond will be slapped to their senses soon and realize the need to eliminate that black box cutely referred to as the "command line." If I want a command line, I'll travel back to 1983, thanks.

Don't try to sell me that, because I'm not going to purchase ANYTHING that requires an employee to be able to remember a convoluted syntax:

netsh interface ipv4 add dnsserver name=interfaceid address=ipofdnsserver index=1

Not the way the world works any more guys.

Instead of redesigning my kitchen

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/6895588.stm

how bout we put some programmers back into the GUI creation business.

re: Getting Started with Server Core

Chris O. — Tue, 17 Jul 2007 18:44:03 GMT

kgreene,

This post talks about Server "CORE".

if you need the UI, just install one of the more feature-full Windows Server 2008 version.

It's that simple.

re: Getting Started with Server Core

Ryan — Tue, 17 Jul 2007 19:50:47 GMT

KGreene, get a clue. This isn't about making things easier and prettier, it's about limiting attack surfaces and resource requirements. It lets admins run servers that only run specific roles.

re: Getting Started with Server Core

Dan — Wed, 18 Jul 2007 00:46:07 GMT

I've been using Windows Server products for years, and this is _not_ the direction I want to go. Reducing the attack surface is desirable, but not if it requires too much time to implement, or requires a lot of arcane syntax. I'll do what Chris O. said.

HOWTO: Windows Server 2008 Beta 3 Server Core

Tech Guru — Wed, 18 Jul 2007 05:24:36 GMT

HOWTO: Windows Server 2008 Beta 3 Server Core

re: Getting Started with Server Core

Steve Schofield — Wed, 18 Jul 2007 08:04:59 GMT

I'm excited for Server core for AD, DNS, Virtual Server, Clustering roles. No more reboots every month for IE, Windows media services. Deploy and forget!

re: Getting Started with Server Core

kgreene@pathfind.org — Wed, 18 Jul 2007 20:34:20 GMT

Reducing the "attack surface" does not require gutting the management interface.

Do not try to sell me a product that will require me to hire people who must relearn DOS command syntax.

World doesn't work that way any more.

Please REDEPLOY the Microsoft Kitchen programmers back to the Windows Server group.

re: Getting Started with Server Core

josebda — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 17:38:35 GMT

For details on all roles included in Server Core on the Beta 3 and the June CTP, check http://blogs.technet.com/josebda/archive/2007/07/25/changes-in-windows-server-2008-roles-and-features-from-the-beta-3-to-the-june-ctp.aspx

Días 5 y 6 de la peregrinación técnica - TechReady 5, parte 2

Guillermo Taylor @ Microsoft — Sat, 28 Jul 2007 10:55:25 GMT

Hola a todos. Decidí finalmente, además por tiempo y para dedicarme a preparar algunos "rituales" en

Get Windows Server 2008 now

The things that are better left unspoken — Wed, 08 Aug 2007 17:27:03 GMT

It is possible to obtain Windows Server 2008 through various public channels, even if you're not a devoted

Using Server Core as a Print Server

Ask the Performance Team — Tue, 11 Sep 2007 13:20:52 GMT

A few weeks ago we posted our initial walkthrough on Windows Server 2008 Server Core - getting the OS

re: Getting Started with Server Core

Steve Wiseman — Tue, 11 Sep 2007 14:33:52 GMT

Look people. If the command line is not the direction you want to go...then don't look over here. Just forget that Server Core even existed. It is an option in windows that I have been waiting to see for years. Why? Not only does it limit the attack surface but it limits the resource footprint. Now I finally have an option to deploy a dedicated box that will do one thing and one thing well. No extra memory needed to run explorer, or 100 other tools I don't need. So go back to your bloated cushy server interface, and leave those of us alone that can handle a command line. It is not hurting you. Microsoft is not going to take away th GUI. So what is the issue?

re: Getting Started with Server Core

bday — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 04:38:03 GMT

Server Core is an EXCELLENT direction to move in. Please do not let those in here trashing it lower your spirits.

This is why many Unix/Linux/etc. administrators laugh at most people who consider themselves a Windows "admin". Most of those self proclaimed admins cannot survive without a GUI of some kind because they are no more than a hack with little to no real skill. Thank you Windows team for making server core a reality, many of us appreciate it!

I cannot wait to deploy some DCs in this method, basically making them appliances which cannot be screwed with.

re: Getting Started with Server Core

Ken — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 23:52:31 GMT

Sorry, but requiring 512Mb to run a print server is not reducing the footprint to run a single task!

How does not running MMC locally on a machine that clearly has a functional GUI, while allowing remote RPC, reduce the attack surface?

re: Getting Started with Server Core

JamesMc — Tue, 02 Oct 2007 20:01:34 GMT

I agree that this is a good direction for MS. We are looking to centralize our server infrastructure where I work. Being able to install a specialized appliance version of Windows Server handling DHCP/DNS/ and print services reduces energy, management, and cost requirements for those all so needy remote offices.

I've been looking at microITX boxes using a 6GB flash drive to run 2008 core. Has anyone tried this?

re: Getting Started with Server Core

designrapture — Mon, 22 Oct 2007 10:29:44 GMT

Don't mind people who are negative on the server core issue, they just don't get the point. Meanwhile, I have a question need some answer.

Say if I install a Server Core, move the profiles (C:\Users) to a seperate hard drive on the network, set pagefile to 0, and turn off automatic update, then is it possible to make the entire system (boot) partition read only?

The reason I'm asking is I'm considering some scenarios for low-cost blade servers. Consider a blade with a Core 2 processor, a chipset controller (if Intel could only make a CPU with integrated memory/hd/network control, but that's another discussion another place), maybe 4-8GB memory and a onboard Flash hard drive, this blade would not take more than 3U (maybe even just 2U) tall, and the enclosure could take up to 14-20 blades without heating up too much. Now considering the Flash hard drive, which btw, Sandisk already makes 4GB-16GB ones, a simple switch can physically turn it to read-only mode. According to Tom's Hardware, SSDs have incredible read speed compared to traditional hard drives, but write speed sucks, and will shorten their lifespans. However, if I can make the boot partition read only, and use a server (or blade) as file server for internal updates, I can make up a schedule, manually switch the hard drives back to read-and-write mode, update and afterwards, switch them back to read-only mode. Not only will this be easier for backing up, but will surely reduce attack even more.

Just some thoughts, but would like an answer.

re: Getting Started with Server Core

drew — Wed, 14 Nov 2007 10:58:13 GMT

without a command line deploying software to 4000 gets pretty boring and I have no desire to rob my company years of lost productivity ...

sever core gives us the ability to install iis via the command line i would pay thousands just to not wait for that darn add windows components dialogue that takes FOR EVER. :)

outstanding product move

re: Getting Started with Server Core

AB — Tue, 12 Feb 2008 12:20:00 GMT

Hi *,

I am searching for some details about Windows Server 2008 Core.

Is there any numbers - how much system performance was reduced from Server with UI to Core Server without UI. Is there really a benefit for Core Server?

Thanks

re: Getting Started with Server Core

madristaa — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 21:26:07 GMT

hi...can any one tell me how thread level parallelism is done in server core?

re: Getting Started with Server Core

hyve — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 20:03:03 GMT

This is a nice option for us people who prefer command driven OSs. Still no where near as tweakable as linux, but you cant blame them for trying.

re: Getting Started with Server Core

Pete H — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 00:23:48 GMT

Great job MS! All the complainers on this thread are not admins and have no idea what they are talking about. Server core is perfect for any situation where you want the OS to consume minimum resources. Like a hyper-v host. Or a light-duty file server. GUI fan boys: you can always admin a core box via MSC from remote machines... or do you not know how to do that? Posers.