SuperSite Blog

Faulty link (as of 12:41 EDT Aug 27).

Oh, and Paul, why am I reading this 3/4 hour before you posted it?  Server on standard time?  GMT?

Published Aug 27 2008, 01:27 PM by pthurrott

johnbaxter

The problem is likely that your profile has your local time set incorrectly. It doesn't change for DST so that's a probable cause.

It is rather unfortunate how little publicity WHS gets. Microsoft spends almost nothing promoting WHS, HP hasn't updated their WHS servers since the intro last year (should add more RAM and up the base hard disk capacity to 1 TB and 2 TB, respectively), and no other major hardware manufacturers have announced WHS products.

Is WHS a necessary feature?

Sell us on it, if its the greatest thing since sliced bread.

Ocean

WHS is a product not a feature.

Paul has done

A Preview www.winsupersite.com/.../whs_preview.asp

A Review of the beta www.winsupersite.com/.../whs_preview2.asp

A Review of the released product www.winsupersite.com/.../whs.asp

A Review of the HP version www.winsupersite.com/.../whs_hp.asp

A Review of the PowerPack 1 update www.winsupersite.com/.../whs_pp1.asp

And, as a teaser, here are the first couple of paragraphs of Paul's review:

----------------------------------------

Every once in a while, a technology comes down the pike that renews my faith in what I've dedicated huge chunks of my personal and professional lives to. Windows Media Center is a terrific example of that, because it touches on virtually everything that's interesting about technology to me: It's innovative, it's beautiful, and it's just fun, and people "get" it, and want it, the second they see it. Products like Media Center are pretty rare, however, and while I recall eagerly awaiting the first Media Center beta to show up on my doorstop in early 2002, the years since have been comparatively disappointing. Even Windows Vista, originally so full of vigor and promise, eventually became far less exciting because of interminable delays and dropped features. So it's been awhile.

This past year, however, my interest with technology has once again been tweaked, this time by Windows Home Server, a product that is, in many ways, related to Windows Media Center. That said, Windows Home Server (WHS) is quite a bit more pedestrian and workmanlike in the sense that you won't ever really sit in front of a WHS machine and "use" it as you do with Vista or Media Center. No, WHS is designed to sit quietly in a closet, or under a desk, doing its thing. But then it's that "thing" that is so exciting. And though it may be a tough sell for some people right now--WHS, like Media Center, is somewhat ahead of its time--I have no doubt that a huge percentage of Windows-using consumers around the world needs this product, whether they realize now it or not. Maybe when Apple copies it as Apple Home Server, or whatever, and supplies about 50 percent of the functionality three years down the road (you know, as they did to Media Center with Front Row and then Apple TV), people will finally get it. I don't think you should have to wait that long, however. WHS is here today, and it's a winner.

Ocean, sometimes you dazzle with ignorance.  And WHS is the greatest thing since sliced bread.  

If only it could do Outlook sync that would be even better.  But its primo stuff.  Particularly in HP's implementation (form factor-wise; I would like more RAM)

There's a lot of cool stuff going with Windows Home Server (WHS) lately. Especially now that PP1

Feature was a bad word.  My question was:  Is it something needed and necessary?  I read about the product, but came away with a shrug wondering exactly why it is "so exciting" as Paul calls it.

Still don't understand why people stoop to name-calling.  It's just technology.

Ocean

If there's one thing I've learned to be true about WHS in the time since it entered beta it's this: Some people see it and fall in love with it as though a hole in their lives had suddenly been filled while other people look at it and can't figure out why they'd care in the least.

In all that time, I have yet to figure out what puts a person in one camp or the other and it's rare that somebody is in between. It's not technical sophistication, it's not exposure to large or small networks, it's not a platform thing, it's not technophile vs technophobe. It's a real puzzle.

(I'm in the best thing since sliced bread category and I can't explain why and I've tried)

I guess it must be nice to have all that in one place...but I've already got discrete solutions for each of the things I'd use it for.

Thank you, mikegalos.  It was indeed my timezone setting.  But--I had that on GMT-7, right for Pacific time during DST.  The time on Paul's post corrected when I changed it to GMT-8.  At least now it was posted before I read it.

Mike, part of the difference in WHS reaction may be similar to my situation.  I have two machines sitting here on my desktop.

For the most part, they do different things, and need therefore to contain mostly different data.  For the data which it is convenient to have synced, I do, via another couple of solutions.

And I have a couple of laptops (mostly as sandbox machines)--when I leave home I do not want work to follow me.

So for me, WHS sounds like a really good idea--for the other guy.  And mostly well done.  Based mostly on Paul's writings.

>> I have two machines sitting here on my desktop.

For the most part, they do different things, and need therefore to contain mostly different data.  For the data which it is convenient to have synced, I do, via another couple of solutions.<<

Bingo.  Live Mesh is   --awesome--   for this purpose.

I hate to cross post...but mikegalos, there are messages for you from jp and I at: community.winsupersite.com/.../windows-not-walls.aspx

--tayme

Ocean, well home server is home server.  It is not necessarily a syncing appliance, it's more of an aggregator, which is what it should be.  My thought re: Outlook sync was kind of an afterthought - and a feature thoroughly lacking in MS realm.  Curiously.  Third party solutions that do it well are also hard to find.  Anyway.

But it's great because you don't need discrete solutions, and because it is an appliance-style gadget, and not a separate server box that requires complex set-up and maintenance.   Bottom line is, if there is more than one PC in a household, chances are that a lot of data is replicated, and chances are that there's no good reason for that, and so there is probably a need for WHS, but people just don't realize it.

Ibarsky,

If people don't realize it, MS needs to fire their marketing guru, no?

"If people don't realize it, MS needs to fire their marketing guru, no?"

Probably, but think about how hard the concept of Tivo was for regular consumers to understand.  It was the kind of product that you didn't "get" until you actually used it, otherwise it felt kind of needless.  WHS is the same kind of product.

Disclosure:  I don't own either, but I "get" them and have considered them.

"I don't own either, but I "get" them and have considered them."

Considering that I can get a Bell ExpressVu (now simply called "Bell TV") HD PVR system with dual tuners, and can record HD programming directly from the satellite stream without converting to analog, or back again, or using a dual-box setup via cables, nor do I have to pay extra a month for "suggested viewing", I certainly don't get the reasoning for having a TiVo.

As if it weren't bad enough, last time I checked (which was a while ago, in all honesty) TiVo didn't even have HD recorders in Canada.  Until they actually offer HD recorders that actually record DIGITALLY, it just doesn't make sense.

WHS is worthwhile for home users that want to be able to access their media everywhere and all the time though.  The centralized backup system expands on OneCare's offering, which is what Microsoft likes to do - offer different levels of features at different price points.  OneCare already provides USB & 1394 drive sharing for centralized backups, but requires that the host computer be turned on.  It also doesn't offer the ability to create recovery discs, which WHS does.  Live Mesh has storage and access restrictions though, as well as not being locally self-managed.  To each their own.

Ocean,

No, not really.  You see, MS is in a pickle here.  (It's all my conjecture, by the way, so don't take this as official).  They make the WHS product that can power appliances.  Actually, marketing it to consumers (considering the most common denominator) is asking for trouble, as people would probably struggle to set it up correctly; not to mention, they need a spare box.

Now, what HP did with MediaSmart server is nothing short of spectacular - it is everything a WHS box should be (well, minus 1.5 GB of RAM; I so don't want to void the warranty by messing with it).  So it's up to the appliance manufacturers to do the marketing, which they have kind of been doing, but there's a lot of education that needs to take place, too.  Which is always difficult.

Waethorn, WHS is more than backup plus anytime / anywhere access to digital media.  Although the latter part is kind of significant.  But it can do remote access to your PCs, it can do media streaming (I stream my iTunes library finally, which avoids keeping several disjointed libraries on the individual PCs which is a PAIN to keep organized / synchronized).  It can do the file repository (again, accessible anywhere) which I use for work, etc.  It's like a server, with an additional web front end.  Pretty cool.

Waethorn,

The WHS backup technology is a generation ahead of OneCare's backup. (Not saying anything bad about OneCare, I'm a big fan but it's not only for a different user it's also uses different technology)

Three key WHS technologies:

1) Drive Pool. WHS users can dynamically add, remove or replace drives with no change to the data. The system dynamically allocates space to the storage pool. If you want to add a drive, plug it in, tell WHS you want it in the pool and the pool is just bigger. That the drive is a separate physical device is transparent. Want to replace a drive? Tell WHS which drive you want to remove and the data is moved off that drive. When WHS says you're ready, take out the drive and add the newer, larger one. Tell WHS to use it and the data flows back onto it.

2) Automatic data redundancy. If you have multiple physical drives, WHS can automatically make sure that data is mirrored across multiple drives without having to keep track of RAID configurations (Tricky when you add or remove drives on RAID systems)

3) Whole network based evaluation of files. When two or more of your systems have the same file (binary identical) then WHS doesn't make separate copies for each instance but keeps track of which systems need that file. You don't store three copies of the same file when you back up three computers.

Thx mike, but I knew that already.

As far as the user is concerned though, they don't see that, except for the reliability and space savings.

Also, Microsoft recommends against using RAID in WHS, just so you know.

Does WHS support DLNA-compatible media streaming?  DLNA uses technology that's part of UPnP, QoS media optimization, and Windows Media Connect.

BTW:  Care to take on this quandary? (see my comments at the end):

community.winsupersite.com/.../the-mojave-experiment-continues.aspx

"Say Hello to UnMac"

Waethorn,

Right. The whole point of the WHS disk management is to make RAID unneeded.

I know that WHS media streaming formats and using WHS with WMC is a hot topic on the WHS fora but don't know the current supported protocols. I have a friend pushing for better support for UPnP in Media Center but don't know how successful he's been at lobbying.

As to the quandry, sorry, don't have a clue about that one.

mike:  UEFI support in Windows Vista SP1 is more complicated than just enabling "UEFI Boot" on an Intel-based board.  For one, Intel boards don't come with any kind of EFI firmware code out of the box.  Secondly, once you have an EFI firmware with a shell and compatible EFI driver packages for your hardware, you have to have the EFI Shell set as the primary boot device, before any drives.

Lastly, you have to have EFI support of bootable optical discs so that the Vista SP1 DVD can boot (EFI shells that are configured properly and have the proper drivers for drive controllers and optical drives would support this as a sort-of Autoplay function).  Otherwise, you'd have to launch the setup program manually by specifying it on the commandline.

AFAIK, Intel doesn't have any prebuilt EFI firmwares that you can just load onto specific UEFI-supporting motherboards.  The code samples that they provide also don't have drivers for all of the necessary hardware on those boards either (drive controllers, drives, etc.), so you're on your own.  It's probably why EFI won't get off the ground any time soon.

If anyone is intereted in purchasing a HP MediaSmart Windows Home Server box, I have one that is like-new (still in factory protective plastic wrap) for sale:

cgi.ebay.com/Hewlett-Packard-MediaSmart-Server-EX470-UPGRADED-1TB_W0QQitemZ220273473336QQihZ012QQcategoryZ51215QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

Rick,

Nice to see somebody from the neighborhood (relatively) on here. I was on Mercer Island on Tuesday.

I like WHS - but why can't MS get Dell or anyone other than HP to get involved.  And why can't HP act like they care about this product.

What about a new version of the hardware? Rght now, I see a first iteration box with the same chip/memory/disk that was first offered over a year ago.   In this market, everything should be upgraded much more frequently than HP does for this product.

How many notebooks & desktops is HP selling in Aug2008 that were the EXACT SAME configuration as Aug2007?

I would not recommend this product to my friends because the current hardware is inadequate, can't be upgraded, and shows no hope of getting to "server" class [dual-core, 4GB, 2TB+ storage].

Mike, yep - I am in Redmond's back yard...

Since my folks want to add some security cameras to our house, we're going to need a dedicated computer with server power to run a 24/7 CCTV and DVR system. I'm considering one of the Windows Server's to run this security camera system. Its a similar setup to what I've seen and used at corporate security CCTV and DVR setups.

I'm wondering if Windows Home Server would be up to the task? Or perhaps a Windows Server 2003 or 2008? Since my father has been sold on Vista, he's definitely look to technology add a new level of defense to the house. Since my kids spend a lot of time here, they want to protect them as well. Anyone care to chime in?