Are Vista and Windows Server 2008 Better Together?
|
News Analysis. Windows Vista must really be hard up. Microsoft is doing yet another Vista-plus-something marketing campaign. First Windows Live and now Windows Server 2008. |
Joining "Windows Vista + Windows Live" is "Windows Vista, Windows Server 2008 Better {together}."
Microsoft surrounded the Nokia Theater and Los Angeles Convention Center with banners proclaiming the new marketing slogan. I was there for the launches of SQL Server 2008, Visual Studio 2008 and Windows Server 2008.
I asked two high-level Windows Server executives about the new marketing campaign. "When bringing Windows Server 2008 out, a number of features that already were in Windows Vista become more interesting," said Bill Laing, general manager of the Windows Server division. Some features he identified:
- SMB (Server Message Block) 2.0 protocol
- NAP—network access protection
- Network client validation
- Group policy enhancements
"We think that it's the right time to roll out Vista with Service Pack 1," Laing told me this afternoon. "We felt that the two products—SP1 and Server 2008—[should release] together."
Yes, but is better together perhaps worse for the Windows Server 2008 brand? The market hasn't really embraced Windows Vista, which has received many lackluster, or even terrible, product reviews.
I asked Bob Visse, Windows Server marketing director, if perhaps association with Vista would tarnish Windows Server 2008.
"No, not from my perspective," he said. "Windows Server stands on its own. The product has been reviewed extensively by all the leading reviewers in the industry."
True, even eWEEK Labs praised Windows Server 2008.
"We actually think there is a big benefit of those two products together," Visse said. "I don't feel any problem being associated with Vista. I actually think it's great—the products will be great together. I think that people in the enterprise space will really start to embrace Vista with SP1."
I found Visse's response surprising because Vista clearly is a tainted brand. So I flipped the question around and asked: "Do you think Windows Server 2008 can extend some coattails to Windows Vista?"
"I really do," he said. "Windows Server sort of brings a home on the back end for all these new infrastructure improvements." With Vista, there was only "half of the piece of the puzzle. Bringing them together you have the full complement of the two products working together. So I actually think it will have some coattails for Vista."
I would say the same about Windows Live, strangely. Microsoft is using the two other brands to pull along Vista and hopefully shine away some of the tarnish.
But there is something deeper and more perplexing going on here. This afternoon, my eWEEK colleague Peter Galli and I chatted about the day's events and our different interviews. He had found nothing but glowing praise for Windows Server 2008. But, as he observed, Vista and Windows Server 2008 mostly share the same code base.
If the operating systems' core and plumbing are the same, why is Windows Server 2008 beloved and Vista loathed? I don't ask the question lightly. I've been saying for months that Vista's bad boy reputation is really undeserved.
The marketing campaign feels contrived to me, more about shoring up Vista than capitalizing on major benefits. That said, people cooing over Windows Server 2008 should really give Windows Vista another chance.
What, you never heard the story about the ugly duckling?
Comments (14)
Wow. Microsoft is now (after all these years) claiming Vista and Windows 2008 can integrate for interoperability. Whooop dee dooooo. How long did that take with the same code base? So how many more years do we have to wait for your other applications to work with each other?
So, class, what do we see that can prevent Microsoft from interoperating with their own projects because they are written in proprietary islands and Microsoft can't use XML to bridge between the applications to make them interoperable. Hell, OOXML is their lead interoperable foundation and even THEY can't make their own stuff work.
Microsoft has a technology deficit. Anyone out there want to challenge me on that assertion? I think the days of whiny roses is done and it's time to start asking some serious questions.
Anybody want to take the first shot?
Posted by Pedro Panza | February 28, 2008 1:08 AM
As a home user, server + vista has little meaning. Obviously, this campaign is aimed at trying to veer IT people over toward Vista by telling them it plays well with Server.
Ok, well lots of luck with that one. IT people are too savvy to buy into this sort of approach.
Posted by mgo | February 28, 2008 3:42 AM
Wow are you seriously saying since they share the code base Vista should be good, since Server 2008 is good?
Come on!
Will you sit at server 2008 and use it to do anything a consumer would do, play music, email, surf the web, download photos, plug in your scanner or multifunction printer and have it not work, turn it off every day, put it in sleep mode......etc...etc.
Ummm no you wont. Server 2008 for the most part will be in a computer room/datacenter in a rack, or better yet in a VMware guest VM, with no one logged into it, most likely running one task....file server, domain controller, print server, Exchange server, SQL server....etc.
I am sure Vista with SP1 could perform the task of a simple work group file server. With no one logged into it.....if SP1 fixes the network file copy slowness.
Posted by Bettyblue | February 28, 2008 8:42 AM
We've been through this before ....
In Vista and in Server 2003, Active Directory can control almost triple the number of resources compared to XP. As mgo states, this is meaningless for the home user. It does, however, give executives in large enterprises the ability to enforce policies, such as, "Only company-issued 'brand x' thumbdrives can be used in company-owned desktops" that may have been in place but could be widely ignored by the "rank and file" before. The vertical integration (aka "lock-in") may be appealing to the senior management of some enterprises -- despite IT's savvy.
Posted by Karl | February 28, 2008 9:13 AM
Give VISTA another CHANCE? LOL - there are already a ton of reviews about Vista SP1 FINAL release and it still SUCKS!! Read any of the reviews of people who don't just distribute MS Koolaid but actually TEST products and indeed found it is still sluggish! I am not a linux fanboy or macfanboy - in fact I run MS OS on over 90% of the systems I support but I can attest to the fact Vista sucks.
I loved the comment from one of MS's own employees now brought up in the Vista class action suit - basically they said we should just require obscene horsepower to run it at a reasonable speed - much better than actually fixing the code! WOW - why bother actually having good code when you can just say get a more expensive PC so it doesn't seem AS SLOW.
I'm sure that will be Ford's new policy - we won't actually make our new sports car with enough horsepower so we'll require our buyers to use 120 octane so it doesn't seem as sluggish.
Posted by boe | February 28, 2008 10:28 AM
I'm running Vista quite happily on a Small Business Server 2003 domain. I don't get all the negative hype about Vista, as I have not had any problems whatsoever. As IT pros, aren't any of these naysayers embarrassed by their inability to get this OS running successfully?
In my opinion, most of this foolishness is based on the fact that bad headlines sell more than good. The rest of it is "me too" from people who have not tried Vista, but just accept whatever they read in the press (or on a blog). I don't remember anything else with this level of ability to turn everything into a negative. This astonishing resistence to change is inappropriate from a group who should be the first to embrace new technology.
Posted by DaveN | February 28, 2008 12:37 PM
I agree with DaveN, the blogspehere is all based on negative news to generate hit pages. I really wonder what makes these people writing blogs so informed of their opinion.
We have been using Vista for one year and we have not had any of the same constant issues people complain about.
Try it to believe it. Also for people who keep on saying that you being tied into the Microsoft Universe. It is up to each person to deceide what OS/Apps they choose to use. No one point a gun to their heads.
In the IT Environemnt, VMWARE wants everything to run in their environment to benefit their shareholders, IBM is the same with Notes, Webshepe and DB2. If you use Linux, Winodws or other they still sell hardware.
So chill out people
Posted by Bill | February 28, 2008 1:27 PM
DaveN 'n' Bill,
It's not so much that IT as a group are resistant to change; it's that Vista offers no compelling reason to change. MS' own TCO studies, http://www.microsoft-watch.com/content/vista/its_another_vista_tco_study.html, show that the benefits from converting to Vista do not come close to covering the costs to convert.
Corporate SysAdmins have pretty well figured out how to secure XP. Enterprises do not need the security and UAC enhancements in Vista. Unless one has a compelling need for the additional Active Directory Group Policy granularity I mentioned above, what other reasons are there to move to Vista? ............ Anyone??!!
No IT Professional in her or his right mind is going to go to the CIO to say, "We need to convert to MS Vista to embrace new technology and stay current with Microsoft." Amateurs may embrace new technology for newness' sake, but Pros know that they need to offer a compelling business case to convert.
As to "try [it] to believe", sure, I tried the Vista beta - ho hum; I'll try Server 2008 through DreamSpark - it happens that I'm taking an MSCS night class this spring; and I'll try Vista again -- if I can find it offerred for free.
IT ain't fools. It's not about resistance to change. It's about not spending the company's dollars unless there are business benefits to be gained. I'm not from Missouri and I don't play a Missourian on TV, but show me how Vista will benefit my organization. Then, we'll talk about converting.
Posted by Karl | February 28, 2008 5:12 PM
When the best you can say is: " I've been saying for months that Vista's bad boy reputation is really undeserved." So what you really mean by this is that Vista is at best mediocre software.
Unlike you, I do not have money to burn on mediocre, or worse operating system software (VISTA) which dosen't do anything that XP did not do with a few freeware programs added in. In fact, XP is not nearly so infested with the DRM and WGA krap that Microsoft Bill and Steve seem to just love. And you see fit to overlook at every turn and post, I might add. But then, I have no reason to promote a product like Vista, which is by almost everyone else, a poor product, at best review. Sorry, your logic escapes me, why anyone, who is tech savvy would want Vista, and therefore Vista Server.
Why give the filfhy rich more money for a substandard product?????
Posted by The Hand | February 28, 2008 7:57 PM
What kind of empty headed hit-piece is this?
Vista doesnt need any more "shoring up" than XP did before it.
Why is this person being published on a ZD site?
Worthless drivel. This sounds like it was written by a 12 year old.
Posted by sorry | February 29, 2008 1:11 AM
Karl,
I agree with you. I'm not upgrading any existing hardware to Vista, but as I retire PCs, the new ones will be Vista. I'd prefer not to support two desktop OS's, but I'm not going to jump through hoops to find PCs with an obsolete OS where development has essentially stopped.
Another poster makes a very good point about group policy - some of that new stuff is great. However, I'll be able to get most of it by installing the client side extensions on my XP and Vista desktops, and by upgrading the AD schema on the WS03 servers.
Posted by DaveN | February 29, 2008 12:06 PM
@sorry:
That is a brilliant argument! You are a genius! I only wish that I'd come up with that myself!
Posted by A. D. Hominem | February 29, 2008 10:28 PM
HEROS in the Server Farm!
Today I was glad, proud, elated, inciplicated, to officially launch our Windows Server 2008 Suite of products!
At the "rally/news conference" I waxed eloquent in praising IT workers, calling them the "Heart and Soul" of our industry!
"They are HEROS! One and all! They wade through the pirana-infested waters of the internet! Battle the dragons of bad code! Fight off the anti-Microsoft trolls! Slay the demon-hackers! They fearlessly, boldly blaze the trail of technology leading the masses into the shiney, glowing city of the future! A beautiful future! A Microsoft dominated future!"
I was so excited that I didn't realise that I was flailing my arms, leaping up and down and drewling on the podium. I'm just glad that we banned video cameras or I would have another one of those Monkey-boy videos to deal with!
Folks, Windows Server 2008 is just that good! If it doesn't have you flailing, leaping and drewling after using it for a few days, you just don't really understand what you are looking at!
Posted by steveballmer | March 1, 2008 2:09 PM
steveballmer is HILARIOUS! I've been testing with 2008 server and really. It's not all that. Big whoop. Server roles. Whoop de freaking do. IIS 7. Whoop de freaking do. Core server. Total crap. Hyper-V. Where is it? NTbackup? gone. Sorry. We aren't ever going to update our Windows servers. They will be put on new Linux machines and be run as VMs until they are legacy. Sorry MS. There just is no "there" there with server 2008.
Posted by Brett | April 25, 2008 6:32 PM