Windows Server 2008 is called SP1. Adventures in doing things right?

CPP del SP2 para Windows Vista y para Windows Server 2008

Guillermo Taylor @ Microsoft — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 20:28:12 GMT

¿Y cuando salió el SP1 de Windows Server 2008? Si te estás preguntando esto, muy probablemente no sabías

is windows server 2008 any good

is windows server 2008 any good — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 20:03:49 GMT

Pingback from is windows server 2008 any good

Lost Drive Blog » re: Windows Server 2008 is called SP1. Adventures in doing things …

Sat, 23 Feb 2008 18:19:25 GMT

Pingback from Lost Drive Blog » re: Windows Server 2008 is called SP1. Adventures in doing things …

Lost Drive Blog » re: Windows Server 2008 is called SP1. Adventures in doing things …

Sat, 23 Feb 2008 18:19:24 GMT

Pingback from Lost Drive Blog » re: Windows Server 2008 is called SP1. Adventures in doing things …

re: Windows Server 2008 is called SP1. Adventures in doing things right?

Waethorn — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 15:30:32 GMT

"there was an IT guy that told me that the ore CPU was different , in order to run Rosetta, so I guess that he really did not know what he was talking about."

you're right.

"Bootcamp guide states to only use 32-bit versions of Windows."

Because of what I mentioned - Boot Camp only includes drivers for 32-bit versions of Windows, likely because Apple doesn't want to WHQL certify drivers, which is a requirement of x64 - it would take away marketshare from their 64-bit OS.

"VPN works and I can view images from all over the hospital system with Vista"

by any chance, did they use MediTech? it's pretty common. Also, do they use a Cisco VPN with Citrix? I hate that crap! Several hospitals around here use it, and yet they're using Windows Server 2003 for their back-end and yet it already has VPN support and Remote Desktop built-in. Properly configured, they don't need any of that extra crap added to it, and yet some "IT guy" (usually a friend of some administrator or exec) probably came in and said "You need to spend $35000 extra on this remote connection software" or some garbage. I hate to see that, especially when it means that money is taken away from really important things like *HOSPITAL BEDS*!

I remember when they told me about getting these mobile workstations on wheels for nurses to do electronic charting on. The things were just basic desktop PC's on a cart with one or two high-end UPS battery backups that took nearly forever to charge and lasted less time than the average laptop on a single charge. The things were a pain in the ass, and nurses complained about them. Previously, they were still doing paper charts for a lot of it, and only inputting the information at the nurse's station when necessary. It took one page of information to cover everything, but now it takes like 12 screens worth of info, and it's set so they have to answer some really irrelevent questions before it proceeds to the next field. The systems cost the hospital about $30,000 apiece. I look at that and laugh (and yet cry at the same time, given what industry it is). They wonder why the health care industry is now privatized with that kind of intelligence running the show.

I figure - you're getting custom software. What's the most logical choice in this situation? Ruggedized, convertible Tablet PC notebooks with software that (perish the thought) LOOKS LIKE PAPER CHARTS! How much simpler is that?!! From a cost perspective, you're looking at battery power and wireless already built in, and to add extra batteries is like, AT MOST $150 per notebook. Not $600 for an equivalent UPS. Then you're also keeping nurses happy, because it looks EXACTLY like what they were previously doing. For a baseline Tablet PC, you're looking at about $2000 on average, and no more than $5000/piece at a high point for ruggedized models. That's 1/6th the price of the overpriced workstation systems. You figure, if one breaks down, you could replace it 5x over for the same price as one of those desktops. ABSOLUTE STUPIDITY!

re: Windows Server 2008 is called SP1. Adventures in doing things right?

DRWAM — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 23:56:30 GMT

there was an IT guy that told me that the ore CPU was different , in order to run Rosetta, so I guess that he really did not know what he was talking about. Bootcamp guide states to only use 32-bit versions of Windows. Windows updates itself fine. I did get a couple of errors about the ATI drivers again, but all is OK now. VPN works and I can view images from all over the hospital system with Vista, so I guess that they finally finished upgrading the software [GE Centricity].

I did install Tiger on my custom PC, but artifacts from the pointer were just too much for me to tolerate. Then I just bought a new Intel Mac to replace an old 1999 G4.

re: Windows Server 2008 is called SP1. Adventures in doing things right?

Waethorn — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 03:55:51 GMT

Actually, now that I think about it, if in-box or Windows Updates don't work, there's no hope of running x64 versions of Windows on a Mac anyway, because there's little chance that Apple is WHQL-certifying their drivers, and x64 requires them (or else it stops at every boot time to confirm you want to boot into Windows with non-WHQL drivers). This applies to either a native install (if it's even possible, given the EFI compatibility issue), or in Boot Camp.

I'd bet this is why Apple isn't supporting x64 even in Boot Camp - I wouldn't put it past Apple to never do hardware certification on Windows at all in the future.

re: Windows Server 2008 is called SP1. Adventures in doing things right?

Waethorn — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 22:28:13 GMT

Also, forgot to mention: If Vista SP1 x64 works natively on a Mac, you'd most definitely need to be able to use generic drivers for your hardware.

Obviously, this means going to Intel's website and getting the latest chipset driver, as well as to ATI or NVIDIA's website for the latest video driver. Other hardware would probably work with the in-box drivers supplied with Windows Vista (generic mouse and keyboard, don't really need a monitor driver).

That is, so long as Apple didn't change the Plug'N'Play ID's (PnPID's) in the hardware firmware. If they did, the generic drivers wouldn't work. Likely the drivers on Windows Update wouldn't work either in this case - only Apple would be able to supply them. Apple doesn't make their hardware, but many hardware vendors allow companies to modify PnPID's so that the original manufacturer doesn't need to support it with their drivers. In these scenarios, the company that purchases it (Apple in this case) would customize the drivers with the modified PnPID's so that the driver would detect the hardware and properly install, and they themselves would support it, almost as if they created the hardware in the first place. It can be a mess sometimes, but that's the way the industry works.

re: Windows Server 2008 is called SP1. Adventures in doing things right?

Waethorn — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 22:19:31 GMT

The chipset is a standard Intel chipset (it's likely a 945, or 965 chipset on an iMac, or the equivalent mobile version on a Macbook [Pro]). I'm not sure exactly what it is on a Mac Pro, but it'll be an Intel Xeon compatible server chipset. It's likely the Intel 5000 series chipset, since that's the one that supports Xeon 5000 series CPU's. The difference is that a Mac doesn't use a BIOS. They use an EFI, which also supports GPT disks - they use a complicated GUID partitioning system, instead of the more common Master Boot Record format which is what is used for BIOS's. Rosetta doesn't play into it - it's just a software layer for compatibility with Universal applications that also support PowerPC architecture.

Since Mac's adopted (or is it adapted?) an earlier EFI version as a BIOS replacement, they can't run Windows natively, and require Boot Camp to emulate one (as well as an MBR disk). Likewise, Mac OSX requires an EFI so it doesn't run natively on PC's. The hacked versions of Mac just patch the kernel so that it works correctly with a BIOS.

With Windows Vista SP1 supporting UEFI, the questions arise: Can Vista SP1 work natively on a Mac without Boot Camp?, and: With PC's adopting UEFI support, will Mac OSX run natively on them?

The answer depends on how compatible the Mac EFI is to the standard UEFI, which is really what I'm questioning here.

For the record, all Intel desktop/mobile chipsets from the 965 chipset family and higher support UEFI, but Intel doesn't provide updates for them - that's left to the manufacturer to support. All 3000 and 5000 series Intel server chipsets support UEFI. I'm not sure about the status of UEFI updates for server chipsets, but I'd imagine Intel is in no hurry to change over BIOS updates to UEFI format, since there really isn't any advantage at this point. Apple only went with EFI to lock out PC's from running OSX.

Also for the record, Itaniums (the Intel CPU's for datawarehousing and high-performance applications), are all fully 64-bit (only), and all use an older version of EFI.

re: Windows Server 2008 is called SP1. Adventures in doing things right?

DRWAM — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 20:19:17 GMT

I will investigate getting the install DVD with SP1. However, the 'word' that I heard is that all of your assumptions are correct, it's not a standard Intel chipset [uses hardware at CPU level for Rosetta] and that Bootcamp tweaks down the RAM. I filled both RAM trays with four 512MB sticks [total 4GB] as it optimizes RAM use in that configuration. Vista has been performing well. I am used to a faster startup, but it certainly is not long. Of course, there is almost no software on it, but it will get there. Now with Bootcamp, you just prepare a volume or partition and just use the regular Vista or XP install disk. After the Windows install, you add the Mac hardware drivers right from the Mac install disk. But everything seemed to work without them, except for all of the keyboard functions. Vista is kinda nice and actually worked faster with my 8GB USB [no Readyboast] thumb drive than Leopard, the drive is a little slow, compared to my 2GB stick.

re: Windows Server 2008 is called SP1. Adventures in doing things right?

Waethorn — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 15:46:47 GMT

@DRWAM: something I'm curious about is whether or not Vista SP1 will support native install on a Mac rather than using Boot Camp. Vista SP1 includes support for UEFI, but I'm wondering if the Mac's older EFI will work with Vista. You'd need a Vista SP1 DVD to do that, but I expect that Microsoft has some kind of program that allows users to purchase updated DVD's with the SP1 bits like they have previously with CD/DVD tradeups or x32/x64 version changes.

Of course, you'd need an x64 version of Windows Vista to install on UEFI, and Apple doesn't support it (they don't provide x64 drivers when Boot Camp creates the driver disc). That leads to another question: Is Apple hardware customized in such a way that you can't use generic drivers, such as the standard Intel Chipset Installation Utility driver, and ATI or NVIDIA's graphics drivers?

Oh, and about your 2GB problem - try "separating" the RAM as much as possible on the Mac Pro so as to enable dual-channel mode (refer to the user guide). Otherwise, blame Apple. On a 32-bit Vista system, you will likely not see any more than 3.125GB (3 & 1/8ths GB), but you should still see more than 2GB if you have 4GB installed (unless Boot Camp is screwing something up).

re: Windows Server 2008 is called SP1. Adventures in doing things right?

DRWAM — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 22:33:07 GMT

I overclocked the P4 CPU to 3.51 GHz, but my cheap RAM could prevent me from going higher. The Silent Tower Cooling system should keep it cool enough for more. Vista runs well on the Mac Pro Tower, but only sees 2GB of the 4GB of RAM. It's Vista Home Premium 32 bit version.

re: Windows Server 2008 is called SP1. Adventures in doing things right?

lilserenity — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 20:34:41 GMT

Vista isn't that bad. I don't mind it, I just prefer Xubuntu on my ageing (is it 5 years already?!) ThinkPad T40 for the basics. My home PC has to run Windows 2000 a.) it's a bit old and b.) my slide scanner is only compatible with XP up to SP1b... no SP2 for me...

Work is also a no no as it's slow enough anyway, the 2.26GHz P4 at work is beginning to show its age even with 2GB RAM.

When I finally build a new PC, probably a basic dual core Pentium I'll dual boot Windows 2000 and Vista on it.

Am I the only person who doesn't really have any problems with Windows, Mac OS and Linux? :) I think I've said it before (on my blog) but the 'war' over operating systems has been over a long time -- they're all very good and we as consumers for computing platforms have never had it so good.

I don't think we'll be rolling Windows Server 2008 any time at work though!

re: Windows Server 2008 is called SP1. Adventures in doing things right?

DRWAM — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 16:33:59 GMT

Well, today is my birthday. I just installed Vista on my Mac Pro Tower without a hickup from Vista. I used a partioned drive, which had a backup of the Mac and Bootcamp decided to erase the entire drive, although I only selected the empty partition that was to be used GB for Windows. All is well and I am posting using Vista now! This is pretty cool. I would not have done it without all of your comments of wisdom and how you all like Vista. I will be trying to setup my work stuff on it, although I built a 3.4 GHz P4 with2 GB RAM 2 yrs ago.

Thanks Paul and everybody,

Doc