Read through the post and have to agree that 10 users are surely enough.

WHS is just as the it states, for a home and home users. Would Windows Family Server sound better, just to state its for a home and family?

And the price itself reflect what its meant for, personal and family use.

"Advanced" editions could turn out to be nothing more then extra production cost for a handful buyers.  And if there is families with more then 10 persons, it would be normal to share one or more PC's.

In very rare cases, if there are, and MS is really eager to satisfy those cases, I would recommend a extra connector-fee sold separately in a special connector package.

No, please, don't do it! Multiple SKUs is *not* the way to go. You might as well be releasing a new SKU every time you add a new feature. I'd be inclined to support the majority view here of a single version of WHS with the ability to add more computers up to a point.

Hardcore users can go with SBS 2008. Ultra-hardcore users can go with Windows Server 2008. There are already enough products in the market by Microsoft covering just about every niche possible. We don't need any more.

Also, if you go down the license route, please don't call it a CAL, because nobody will understand the maze that is Microsoft licensing. Make it as simple to understand as possible. Don't even call it a license. Say something like "You've reached the 10 computer limit for Windows Home Server. Adding another computer will cost $xx. Would you like to continue?" - that way, people know what you're talking about :)

What are folks talking about - enough SKUs?  I think it would be great if kept the trend going - at both end.  How about adding a WHS Basic edition with a limit of 4 comptuers and only the NAS functionality. Then WHS Home edition (as is).  WHS Premium with change the licensing to add CAL based but include mail service.  WHS Ultimate would have the ability for households to share and backup data between them (you know - "families").  And similar to how "Windows Office Visio" is not in any of the Office suites, we could also add other features outside of the regular editions.  How about a WHS DVR module that is an option, but only on the Premium and Ultimate editions?

Having 4 or 5 editions can't possible confuse the market and slow down adoption...can it?

Just to add my voice to the cacophony that that's a terrible, terrible idea.

You're so used to being able to milk your monopoly that you're just going to kill another promising product.  You're competing against Linux-based NAS devices with this one, they're going to just keep getting better and they're not going to have arbitrary user/computer limits.

If people are running into issues with your artificial user limits, remove the limits.  Fix the product.  Don't spend your time trying to figure out how you can charge more money to your already dismal user base.

Really more than 10 computers in a home?  I think 10 is a reasonable number.  I am against creating a new sku.  This would take away development time away from adding features that more than .001 percent of the user population could actually use.  Why not simply increase the number of seats from 10 to 15 or 20 and leave it at that.  Personally, I would like to see MS spent time at adding additonal functionality/add-ons to WHS.  i.e., Phone center- a mini-pbx like add-in for homes.  Caller-ID, call loggiing, centralized phone book,answering machine, etc.  Another add-in would be a home recipe plug-in which could include recipes/with ingrediants steps, etc.  Finally more integration with Media Center.  Pooled/centralized tuners, WHS based recorded TV that can be shared, etc.

Guys, stop worrying about ways increase profitability by adding more sku's, it's not working with Vista and it won't work with WHS.  Focus on adding add-ins, that the mjority of the enthuasiast crowd want.

I'd be for multiple SKU's if the advanced SKU's offer more features other then just the number of computers/users.  I would love to see AD in the next release in at least a member server role if not acting as a DC itself.  Stuff like that to me is advanced, not the number of computers/users, I say just drop the limit all together unless there is a technical reason why it's there to begin with.

For me (7 computers in *da house*), 10 is a good number - although I think SBS is not an alternative to someone that does need more. In that case, the possibility to buy some more licences would be the ideal solution, I guess.

But since we are talking about upcoming features in a WHS_V2, I'll take the oportunity to press for the one I think is THE most important: the support (natively) for something like the LighstOut add-in. The ability to have some sort of power management in the server is VERY, VERY important.

And yes, we already have LighthsOut, but its installation is not straightforward and, as it is, it is not for everyone. It should really be included with WHS.

I think selling a CAL pack online for those few users that have more than 10 users is a reasonable compromise.  The problem I have with hearing SBS touted as an alternative is that there are a number of features that don't overlap...add the easy backup functionality, media sharing functionality, webguide, etc., etc. to SBS and I would buy it instead in a heartbeat.  I would far prefer to have AD (yes, I think IntelliMirror and folder redirection are cool and I can see a use for them, even with the beauty of Live Mesh available) but why should I have to give up some of the unique features offered by WHS?

Don't try and sell 2 versions, that would cause more trouble than it would be worth.

I have 12 PCs at home, but I decided that 3 of them didn't need to be backed up. (too old and slow)

When my kids get older this may become an issue, so I can see how some families are having trouble already.

What I would LOVE to see is Media Center added into WHS. Let it record my TV, so it will be the only system that has to be on 24/7.