(I just got off the phone with some individuals at Microsoft who informed me that some of my original thoughts here on SBS and EBS features were actually incorrect. I have corrected them now.)

SBS is finally catching up to the Server 2008 wave, and with it we get another new server that's tagged for the mid-size market.

SBS 2008 arrives with two versions:

• The standard edition includes Exchange Server 2007, Windows SharePoint Services 3.0, ForeFront Security for Exchange Server.


• The premium edition adds support for SQL Server 2008 Standard Edition instance on a second server (if desired), and includes the necessary licensing to support this dual-server architecture.

Windows Essential Business Server 2008 arrives with two editions:

• Standard Edition includes software and CALs for three servers: Management Server includes Server 2008 "standard technologies" and System Center Essentials 2007. Messaging Server includes Server 2008 "standard technologies", Exchange Server 2007 Standard Edition, and ForeFront Security for Exchange Server. Security Server includes Server 2008 "standard technologies", Exchange Server 2007 Standard Edition, and ForeFront Threat Management Gateway, Medium Business Edition.
• Premium Edition adds a fourth server: Database Server includes Server 2008 "standard technologies" and SQL Server 2008 Standard Edition.

Pricing has also been released, with the following as retail prices:

• Windows Small Business Server 2008 Standard Edition software, including five CALs, $1,089 (U.S.); additional CALs $77 each (U.S.)


• Windows Small Business Server 2008 Premium Edition software, including five CALs, $1,899 (U.S.); additional CALs $189 each (U.S.)


• Windows Essential Business Server 2008 Standard Edition software, including five CALs, $5,472 (U.S.); additional CALs $81 each (U.S.)


• Windows Essential Business Server 2008 Premium Edition software, including five CALs, $7,163 (U.S.); additional CALs $195 each (U.S.)

Get more information and links to additional data from the press release at: http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2008/may08/05-13PublicPreviewPricingPR.mspx

Digg it!

Sphere it!

Del.icio.us

Reddit!

Newsvine

Posted by Greg Shields | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Rumors are apparently flying about a potential Citrix buyout by IBM or Cisco. I could see IBM from the managed servcies standpoint, but I could definitely see synergies between Cisco's of-late "delivery" theme they've been pushing aligning with the Citrix product-set. And, Citrix has got to be hurting after their $500M XenSource purchase, making them ripe for takeover.

From InfoWorld:

Citrix's stock went from a low of $30.60 Tuesday to a high of $33.75. Rumors of Citrix being purchased fueled the higher trading prices, says Jeffrey Gaggin, an enterprise software analyst for Avian Securities. Gaggin cautions that he has no way of knowing whether the rumors hold any truth.

But it would make sense for IBM or Cisco to purchase Citrix because Citrix's acquisition of XenSource last year made it a strong player in the virtualization market, Gaggin says.

Your thoughts? Would this be a good thing?

Digg it!

Sphere it!

Del.icio.us

Reddit!

Newsvine

Posted by Greg Shields | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

As I continue my multi-day campaign to dispell the Vista rumors in the world, I find further evidence of the media's role in pushing the "Vista sucks" meme. Now let me first say that administrators everywhere are a busy bunch. Actually taking the time for a thorough analysis of new technology to gain one's own opinion requires an amount of time that many administrators often don't have today. But when established and respected media outlets like ZDnet and InfoWorld continue to push this anti-Vista meme, I wonder if they realize the harm they're causing to the industry that is "systems administrators".

My reasoning for this commentary comes from today's column written by Adrian Kingsley-Hughes, a reknown blogger whom I read regularly and has lately taken to task what appears to be his own very subtle anti-Vista campaign. Through some careful title wording, today's column suggests that everybody's throwing the baby out with the bathwater: Who's giving Vista a miss and waiting for Windows 7?.

In his commentary, he asks three questions of his readers. The first tells an interesting tale of the power of punditry. In this question we see how the recent "grass is greener" thinking affects the administrator population through the assumption that "Windows 7 has got to be better":

Continuing down this path, he suggests that continuing with Windows XP over the long haul -- even in the case of reduced support options -- is a better idea than making the jump. This concerns me particularly because a decision like this is more involved with risk-reduction in terms of support contract options than how one favors a particular OS:

Lastly, we arrive to the kicker. His last question illuminates much of the problem with the Vista debate of today: Due to that inability to set aside the proper time, many people are choosing to believe the punditry over their own eyes. Though a goodly number of people (administrators or not) want to believe the "Vista sucks" meme, most of them are sourcing their information not through their own opinions, but of the opinions of voices in the media.

This last question tells the true sad tale about Vista's relevance in today's business networks. If we at the grassroots level can't be bothered with taking the time to form our own opinion, then Vista is doomed to wither on the vine. The punditocracy's been slighted by it and refuses to look back.

I get emails constantly from readers of both this community and my work with Redmond Magazine and MCPmag.com. Those readers tell me their joys and pains with Vista. The messages I get with positive affect towards this OS reveal administrators who simply took the time to learn the new interface with all its quirks, changes, and newfangled widgets. The other half tell me stories of pain, but in most cases also a too-quick decision to drop it and run back to the comfort of what's familiar. Nearly all the anti-Vista messages I get arrive full of incorrect assumptions and old data.

As an old buddy of mine likes to say, "Give Vista a chance." I think we need to add to his comment, "...a rather extended one."

In fact, I challenge every Vista hater who reads this community to try the upgrade once again. But this time, give the new operating system three months. That's the length of time you'll need to grow accustomed to where its icons have moved, where the "hidden" parts have been relocated, where your needed drivers are, and how to best manage it using Group Policy and other centralized management tools.

If after three months, you still think Vista sucks and has no place in your IT environment, then I'll concede defeat.

But I want to hear about it. If you're a Vista hater willing to take on the "Give Vista a Chance Challenge" drop a comment here or email me at gshields@realtimepublishers.com. I respond to every message and we'll track your progress.

Digg it!

Sphere it!

Del.icio.us

Reddit!

Newsvine

Posted by Greg Shields | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Early plans for the MCITP coming out of Microsoft telled a tale that MCITP's would be forced to re-certify every three years. For the Server 2008 MCITP that re-certification would involve re-taking one exam.

Late last week Microsoft announced an about-face on this policy. The new policy eliminates the "every three years" requirement to read that an MCITP will retire in whole when the underlying technology goes out of mainstream support.

From Trika's blog (in its entirety)...

 
Continue reading Microsoft Announces a Change in MCITP Retirement Plans...

Digg it!

Sphere it!

Del.icio.us

Reddit!

Newsvine

Posted by Greg Shields | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Are you in the process of deciding between obtaining a Master's Degree -- perhaps in some element of IT -- and obtaining additional certifications? Its a tough decision, and one in which there aren't really any good answers.

Certification Magazine came out this month with an excellent cover story on the problem. I've read through the piece twice. The first time to read its contents and the second to get some pull quotes for this blog post, and I still find myself at a loss of what to do. You really need to read this piece in its entirety to get a full perspective on the decision.

Taking the perspective of both employers as well as graduates, the piece doesn't definitively answer the question. But it does provide further fodder for helping you with your own decision.

Read it and come to your own decisions at: http://www.certmag.com/articles/templates/CM_gen_Article_template.asp?articleid=3320&zoneid=1

Digg it!

Sphere it!

Del.icio.us

Reddit!

Newsvine

Posted by Greg Shields | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Are you in the process of deciding between obtaining a Master's Degree -- perhaps in some element of IT -- and obtaining additional certifications? Its a tough decision, and one in which there aren't really any good answers.

Certification Magazine came out this month with an excellent cover story on the problem. I've read through the piece twice. The first time to read its contents and the second to get some pull quotes for this blog post, and I still find myself at a loss of what to do. You really need to read this piece in its entirety to get a full perspective on the decision.

Taking the perspective of both employers as well as graduates, the piece doesn't definitively answer the question. But it does provide further fodder for helping you with your own decision.

Read it and come to your own decisions at: http://www.certmag.com/articles/templates/CM_gen_Article_template.asp?articleid=3320&zoneid=1

Digg it!

Sphere it!

Del.icio.us

Reddit!

Newsvine

Posted by Greg Shields | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Snarf! Lee Pender over at RCP Magazine does a little digging and comes to the conclusion..."Maybe not all that much".

At least, that's what the economists are saying.

Here's the link to Lee's comments: http://rcpmag.com/blogs/weblog.aspx?blog=1856
And here's the article he read to come to those comments: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a94d92e0-cd99-11dc-9e4e-000077b07658.html

So, what's your opinion? Is Microsoft actually evil? And I mean like seriously evil here? Sound off!

Digg it!

Sphere it!

Del.icio.us

Reddit!

Newsvine

Posted by Greg Shields | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

If you haven't been to the Microsoft Management Summit, you're missing out on one of the best conferences that relates specifically to the topics of managing and monitoring Windows systems. If you're an SMS/SCCM or MOM/SCOM administrator (or, well, anyone who believes in centralized, proactive management), then this is the conference for you.

I just found out last night that two of my submitted sessions have been approved. So, I will be spreaking again at this years MMS. The two sessions I'll be presenting are:

Using, Troubleshooting, and Customizing the Security Configuration Wizard
- and -
Demystifying the Configuration Manager SQL Database

I've taught variations on both of these topics before, so I've really got the presentation down well. I'd love to see you there!

Sign up at http://www.mms-2008.com.

Digg it!

Sphere it!

Del.icio.us

Reddit!

Newsvine

Posted by Greg Shields | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Looks like in some cases this launch is becoming The Launch that Wasn't. The tripartite Heroes Happen Here launch event that starts late next month is supposed to celebrate the release of Server 2008, SQL Server 2008, and Visio 2008. But one of the three masters of ceremony will be late to the party.

According to a Microsoft press release...

 
Continue reading SQL Server 2008 RTM Delayed to 3rd Quarter 2008...

Digg it!

Sphere it!

Del.icio.us

Reddit!

Newsvine

Posted by Greg Shields | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Michael over at 4sysops reports that an update to the Adminpak.msi administrative tools is now available on Microsoft's web site. He also reports that there are still concerns about using them on Vista:

Notice that I just opened some of the tools and played a little with them. I didn’t really run a complete test. Since Microsoft doesn’t officially support the Adminpak tools for Vista, it is certainly better to wait for SP1 and RSAT. One cannot rule out the possibility that you break something on your servers if you use them on Vista.

If you run the Adminpak tools on Windows XP, then it probably makes sense to update them, especially if you are managing Windows Server 2003 SP2 with them. I recommend skimming over this knowledge base article before you install it. It is important to note that you have to uninstall the old version first. Don’t just click on “reinstall” when you install the new version.

Get your copy of the updates here:
Windows Server 2003 Service Pack 2 Administration Tools Pack for x86 editions
Windows Server 2003 Service Pack 2 Administration Tools Pack for x64 editions

Is it just me or has Microsoft been overtly, excessively late on getting remote admin tools for Vista released? Am I the only one that thinks this delay in getting the tools out could be another of the reasons why admins have a bad taste on Vista so much?

Digg it!

Sphere it!

Del.icio.us

Reddit!

Newsvine

Posted by Greg Shields | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

InfoWorld reports today that Vista SP1 might be released on 2/15. I know a lot of people who are delaying any decision on Vista until the release of SP1. At least, this "wait until SP1" has traditionally been the industry standard.

From InfoWorld:

A Taiwanese news outlet Wednesday reported in a story that Vista SP1 would be released Feb. 15, but "that date is as good as any other," said Michael Cherry, an analyst with Directions on Microsoft. "For all we know, they could make it available tomorrow."

Through its public relations agency Wednesday, Microsoft declined to comment on the Feb. 15 date beyond reiterating the software would be available in the first quarter. Still, several sources who work closely with Microsoft said a mid-February release is not unlikely, and they expect the software to be out before the end of March.

Chris Swenson, director of software industry analysis for the NPD Group, said that analysts have heard Feb. 15 as the target for SP1, but it's not something Microsoft would confirm publicly to give itself time to make adjustments in case of negative feedback on the current release of the software.

Are you waiting for SP1? Will SP1's release drive a Vista adoption in your network?

Digg it!

Sphere it!

Del.icio.us

Reddit!

Newsvine

Posted by Greg Shields | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Microsoft announced fairly recently that Windows 7, the next desktop release to replace Vista, will be generally available at the end of next year.

Microsoft must be feeling the heat with the slow corporate Vista adoption to make this announcement. Making an announcement like this is tantamount to saying, "we recognize that you just don't have the Vista love. But wait, we've got an update coming up soon." The cconsequence of Windows 7's accelerated release will likely force many enterprises to make hard decisions about which O/S they want to upgrade to.

Windows 7 is a compelling release. Its touted to be smaller, faster, and operate on less powerful (and expensive) hardware. That alone would make an upgrade decision to Vista seem very difficult for many enterprises.

So what's exciting about Windows 7? Read on...

 
Continue reading Windows 7 (the Vista Killer?) to be Released at the End of 2009....

Digg it!

Sphere it!

Del.icio.us

Reddit!

Newsvine

Posted by Greg Shields | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

InfoWorld presents a report that shows FireFox has more overall patches than IE: "In the browser field, Firefox led the way with 64 bugs, compared to 43 for Internet Explorer, and 14 each for Opera and Safari."

In related news, the report also shows that Red Hat...

 
Continue reading FireFox is More Buggy than IE...

Digg it!

Sphere it!

Del.icio.us

Reddit!

Newsvine

Posted by Greg Shields | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBacks (0)

I've been writing a lot recently (here and here) on the odd juxtopisitions in pricing between market leader VMware and the other players like Microsoft and Citrix.

In doing that I've gotten some responses from individuals around the industry about what might be driving today's conditions. One response in particular that I got was the following:

I’ve heard from some partners that VMware is quietly matching Citrix's XenSource and Microsoft's Hyper-V pricing, as long as customers will sign multi-year ELAs.

I can't confirm if this is only for certain, shall we say, "premium" accounts or for all accounts. But I wonder if VMware is quietly changing the price for their products depending on your level of committment with them.

Are you seeing examples of this from either side? Let us know...

Digg it!

Sphere it!

Del.icio.us

Reddit!

Newsvine

Posted by Greg Shields | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Today's list of blog posts seems ripe for market news, so let's take a look at another analysis. With Server 2008 coming out next month, and with Terminal Services so substantially improved over all previous versions, is there an upcoming play with Microsoft putting the squeeze on current Citrix customers?

Citrix licenses go (at the Platinum level) for something like $600 per CCU. Now that includes lots of other goodies like application streaming, monitoring with EdgeSight, and transport security with their SSL VPN appliance. That product set is good in many places.

But at the same time Microsoft's Terminal Services comes for nothing more than the cost of the TSCAL (which Citrix users have to buy as well). Server 2008 includes transport security now, and an SSL VPN. Application streaming and monitoring are similarly available, but with added cost.

With Terminal Services rapidly approaching the quality of Citrix, how will this impact Citrix's future viability? One wonders if Microsoft is putting the squeeze on their partners -- of which many are also Citrix partners concurrently -- to sell theirs over Citrix. The opposite is also potentially true.

If you're a partner of either Citrix or Microsoft, are you feeling the squeeze? Or, if you're an end user of either product, have you felt your partner's messaging change much? Let us know...

Digg it!

Sphere it!

Del.icio.us

Reddit!

Newsvine

Posted by Greg Shields | Permalink | Comments (6) | TrackBacks (0)

An interesting statistic, compliments of 4sysops:

The results of my poll about Vista’s User Account Control (UAC) are quite impressive. More than 2000 4sysops readers voted so far. 67% have disabled UAC altogether, 5% disabled the elevation prompts, 3% changed other UAC settings and only 24% use the default UAC settings.

Michael, a fellow UAC dissenter, continues with commentary on what he thinks you should do. That doesn't necessarily mean getting rid of it:

But these numbers surprised me anyway. I think this poll shows that more than 70% of IT pros reject UAC. I’ve been criticizing UAC ever since. I’ve read several times that one of the major reasons why Microsoft introduced UAC was because they wanted to encourage developers to distinguish between applications that need admin privileges and those needing just standard user rights. I wonder if this approach will work considering that the majority of IT pros disabled it anyway.

I am a supporter of separating administration work from ordinary Windows usage, but UAC is just a bad solution to this problem. Su/sudo under Linux is certainly a better one. However, that doesn’t mean that I recommend disabling Vista UAC. You can just turn the elevation prompts off and let UAC enabled. UAC improves security not only by asking for approval if an application changes important system settings. I blogged about the reasons not to disable UAC more than a year ago.

Michael and I are in complete agreeance on what to do with UAC. Disabling it isn't necessarily the right solution. However, getting rid of its elevation prompts will make your experience (and, thus, your users) a lot easier. You can read Michael's entire post with links to information on how to do just that here.

Alternatively, keep an eye on this space. In the next week or two, Realtime will be making an announcement with some info on UAC that I think you'll appreciate.

Remember too that UAC rears its head again in Server 2008. So the decisions you make today about Vista's behavior will directly impact how Server 2008 behaves once its installed into your network.

Digg it!

Sphere it!

Del.icio.us

Reddit!

Newsvine

Posted by Greg Shields | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Microsoft heard our screaming about Reduced Functionality Mode in Vista and has announced that they're eliminating it with SP1:

Today the Windows group announced some changes in their increased efforts against piracy and new steps being taken to protect Windows Vista (see http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/features/2007/dec07/12-03wga.mspx for details). These changes are coming in Windows Vista SP1 (due out in Q1 2008). Along with disabling some of the known exploits that counterfeiters are using, changes are being made to product activation. Specifically, the Reduced Functionality Mode (RFM) is being replaced with new notifications to let customers know that their systems are not genuine when they do not activate or when their systems fail validation.

This is a step in the right direction towards further enterprise acceptability of Vista. These changes will also manifest into Server 2008. From the same press release...

 
Continue reading Changes to Product Activation & Licensing with Vista SP1 & Server 2008...

Digg it!

Sphere it!

Del.icio.us

Reddit!

Newsvine

Posted by Greg Shields | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Microsoft announced last week that Server 2008 Standard Edition will actually get some bennies previously only available for Enterprise and Datacenter Edition. Namely, every copy of Server 2008 Standard Edition will include a license for one free virtual machine atop the physical instance.

This is in addition to the current policy whereby Enterprise Edition gets four extra virtual licenses and Datacenter Edition gets unlimited extra virtual licenses. This is in my opinion an obvious shot-across-the-bow towards positioning Hyper-V as an alternate to VMware.

Digg it!

Sphere it!

Del.icio.us

Reddit!

Newsvine

Posted by Greg Shields | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

With Microsoft positioning Hyper-V as a nearly-zero cost alternative to VMware, Parallels releasing update after update to their impressive Virtuozzo product, and Citrix jumping in the game with compelling pricing on Citrix XenSource, I'm growing ever amazed at the pricing decisions currently being made by VMware.

VMware recently announced changes to its pricing structure that could potentially screw existing customers. At the same time VMware's prices are going up, everyone else's are going down. I wrote about those changes here. If you are a current VMware customer, you should definitely take a look at this post. You may be in for some sticker shock if you've got a high core count on your hosts.

From a recent article on SearchServerVirtualization.com:

"They're very hard to negotiate with," Enck said. "Customers don't feel they're getting the recognition they deserve for making a long-term commitment."

The best deal VMware typically extends customers is a two-year enterprise license agreement, which extends out over the time of the Microsoft Hyper-V launch, Enck said. Microsoft's entry in to the market, however, will probably force VMware to lower its pricing, which could spawn further resent