Microsoft Windows Server 2008 Leaked.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Shripad

Shripad

Innovator
Got the hit on piratebay in new torrents a while ago.
Seem that Windows Server 2008 X64 and X86 versions have leaked online through torrents just 1 day after it went RTM.
Leak seems to come from good old Betainsiders so its 99% good working copy...

Ouch..............................
 
oh the 2003 versions were better ... they never leaked and all (other then the memory I think) .. M$hit is really leaking and gong down the tubes.

Errr .. what did it leak? and is it pluggable ? :D
 
I've used the RC2, and was quite impressed. They've got a pretty good lockdown system in place, and it's really easy to use what they call "roles". But don't just try installing it on your desktops/laptops. I did, and was rather surprised at how stuff went.

Basically, you need to setup a role that allows you to install wireless networking, then you install the wirless networking feature, then you start the service manually, then you can access wireless networks.

Before you scream "OMG it is so difficult", let me tell you - it is supposed to be that difficult. Wireless networking is _never_ used on servers, so they want to make pretty damned sure you know what you are getting into. This is true lockdown - do not install a feature or run it unless asked to :)
 
Hmm... I dunno. The idea of roles exists in many fields, but generally not as a server administration tool AFAIK. You might have seen it in Win 2k3 to some extent, but here it is much more so. It is quite easy to use though. You can select various server roles (Virtualization, file, http, SQL etc), development machine... couple of other things I think. Then for each role, you can add various features (some of them will install by default with the role) and you may have to start services (I don't know whether you are always required to or not).

At best this might remind you of the Fedora installer which asks you whether you want a desktop, development, or server machine. But that doesn't do much while actually running the computer.
 
I know RBAC, that is a different concept from this.

RBAC - Role based ACCESS control. That provides roles to _people_.

Over here the roles merely indicate what different things the _machine_ can do. Different concepts entirely.

Windows doesn't have RBAC, but the permissions in Windows have always been finer grained in general. Still, something like RBAC would be nice to have.
 
obviously its a Server version of vista...hope i can pull it off on my VPC network...and i have doubts over the min 15 GB and 512 Mb ram requirement..that may b too much for my system....i
 
By the way Yamraj, Windows Server 2k8 has RBAC too. The Authorization Manager framework provides a very fine grained solution. Basically, you can create "tasks" to group "operations". You can then create "roles" and assign users to the roles. Moreover you can assign subsets of objects to roles (so instead of creating a role that can start virtual machines, you can have a role that can only start a particular (subset of) virtual machines).

Sounds like RBAC to me :)
 
it took me abt 15 mins to figure out where RRAS was.....and its not there by default as in 2003....what does MS gain by changing the names of components and keeping the content same....and its a memory hog too.....my 2k3 server with 384 mb ram with exchange running is performing fine..but this one with 512 isnt...on my vpc network...
 
Well, Server 2008 has the same base as Vista, so 512MB is probably a minimum. When I ran it, I didn't go above 1GB unless I was trying to run VMs (in which case it went up by the amount of RAM I committed to the VM). Unscientifically, I came to the conclusion that Server takes about 50MB more memory than Vista.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom