ClioSport.net
Register a free account today to become a member!
Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Read more here.
you'd be better off going for the fulll version of sql rather than express if you want a decent set up.
As for 2008, not noticed much performance gain as these days servers are specced way above what is required anyway, but the clustering functionality of 2008 is much better, its much quicker to install and i do much prefer the look and feel of it, a lot more fresh.
Adding roles and features is a breeze too, our entire network is 2008 now, just finished a migration from 2003, very happy so far.
W2k8 terminal server with the gateway is also a massive improvement.
As for 2008, not noticed much performance gain as these days servers are specced way above what is required anyway, but the clustering functionality of 2008 is much better, its much quicker to install and i do much prefer the look and feel of it, a lot more fresh.
Adding roles and features is a breeze too, our entire network is 2008 now, just finished a migration from 2003, very happy so far.
W2k8 terminal server with the gateway is also a massive improvement.
Golf Mk6 Oil Burner
You would think Microsoft would make a nice tool where you can see benchmarks especially when its a combination of their own software. Guess the only way to find it is to install and test both on the exact same server. Obviously different components may have a different effect on each OS. If I end up going down this route I will post the results up.
I know what your sayin about SQL Server, i'm getting one of the top Quad core cpu's because express will only work with 1 physical cpu. It will also only work with 1Gb of ram but at the moment that is fine for the apps we are running. Next step would be sql workgroup dual cpu which is about £5k iirc.
I know what your sayin about SQL Server, i'm getting one of the top Quad core cpu's because express will only work with 1 physical cpu. It will also only work with 1Gb of ram but at the moment that is fine for the apps we are running. Next step would be sql workgroup dual cpu which is about £5k iirc.
Clio 182
2008 is notably quicker in pretty much everything from what I can gather on our test domain here, Hypervisor rocks too
The hypervisor sucks! Only good thing about it is that it is free with 2k8.... ESX FTW!
SLK 350
2008 is notably quicker in pretty much everything from what I can gather on our test domain here, Hypervisor rocks too
The hypervisor sucks! Only good thing about it is that it is free with 2k8.... ESX FTW!
Well it's clearly not quite as advanced as VM or ESX solutions, but it's not a bad inclusion and certainly for smaller businesses it's pretty useful.
Better than yours. C*nt.
2008 is notably quicker in pretty much everything from what I can gather on our test domain here, Hypervisor rocks too
The hypervisor sucks! Only good thing about it is that it is free with 2k8.... ESX FTW!
And ESX costs how much?
HyperVisor is actually pretty good. Pipe down and back in your box. When you're responsible for how you spend a limited budget, you'll understand why not everybody drives a Rolls Royce.
Better than yours. C*nt.
Just had all our enterprise licensing stuff through today so can start looking at 2008 now, I was thinking the TS side of things had been stepped up a little. Can you give me a brief overview of what's new?
Lots. And lots.
well we were running 2003 behind a box called Netilla for the remote access, everyone complained about it being crap and slow etc.
Just had all our enterprise licensing stuff through today so can start looking at 2008 now, I was thinking the TS side of things had been stepped up a little. Can you give me a brief overview of what's new?
We now have 2 TS2k8 in a farm and then a 2k8 gateway which handles the external access through ISA and so far the feedback has been very positive.
The only downside is the client set up takes a little time to set up as you have to install a certificate on their laptop and configure the RDC connection to talk to the gateway. However, I sent the document on how to do this to our marketing manager, who quite frankly is one of our most non-IT savvy users and after following the instructions she sent me a mail saying that it only took her 20 mins and works perfectly, so thats good.
Also, clients need to be running vista sp1 or xp sp3 to have the latest RDC client.
It looks a lot like vista to the user too so they like that.
One other major improvement is the single application use, I can create an RDC shortcut and call is saleslogix (the database we run) and put it on their desktop, when they run it they are running the app from the TS rather than their local machine but to them it looks no different as it simply runs that app and not a full session, so works a lot faster too as all the processing is done on the server. Great for apps that might run into compatibilty issues with some machines too, just get them to run it from there. This is something citrix has been doing for a while i believe so its nice to see MS now adding it in.
So all in all its great.
Just about to install Office communication server 2007 this afternoon to give everyone office communicator (MSN for businesses) so we can use it to know whether people are in the office, at there desk, on a fag break etc.
ChrisR
ClioSport Club Member
Where I am now use Netilla, it's s**t slow. Doesn't help that the service is outsourced (hopefully not for much longer), the third party company that look after it are nice guys but they aren't great with it.
Liking the Citrix esque app thing, badly need something like that here yet they won't go for something like Citrix.
ChrisR
ClioSport Club Member
I hate Netilla with a passion, always used Citrix before and going to this it's terrible The only redeaming feature was the VPN functionality seems to work well and I do think the performance issues are down to how the servers were built by the third party people, they really ballsed it up.
It turned out they hadn't actually setup a second server at our main site so we were running with just a single TS server, which had issues of it's own. They were lazy and just took an image of the existing server, renamed it and fudged a load of stuff to get it working, and now surprisingly it's performing as badly. ffs, fresh install ftw, but I don't even think they knew how, which is worrying.
The only redeaming feature was the VPN functionality seems to work well and I do think the performance issues are down to how the servers were built by the third party people, they really ballsed it up.It turned out they hadn't actually setup a second server at our main site so we were running with just a single TS server, which had issues of it's own. They were lazy and just took an image of the existing server, renamed it and fudged a load of stuff to get it working, and now surprisingly it's performing as badly. ffs, fresh install ftw, but I don't even think they knew how, which is worrying.
Clio 182
You see that is why i said it is good that Hyper-V is free!
ESX is not that expensive really, considering the features that you get but i do get to spend government money so yes budget is not really a problem
hyper-v can't do half the things esx can, thats why its cheaper (not Free, you have to buy a w2k8 license first whereas you don't need to add that cost for ESX until you talk vm's which is the same for both)
In 3-4 years MS will be where vmware are now, but think where vmware will be then.......
ESX might be the most expensive but nothing can touch it for features.
In 3-4 years MS will be where vmware are now, but think where vmware will be then.......
ESX might be the most expensive but nothing can touch it for features.
Similar threads
