Windows 10 pilot rollouts will surge in early 2016, says Gartner (Boundless Optimism Everywhere)

The NT Server line is very mature. Server is a solid product, as solid as it's gonna get, IMO. All that has changed lately (for my money anyway) is the GUI, which adopted Win8's unfortunate Metro look, much to my dislike on a server OS. Other than that the changes have been just window dressing (so to speak).

There is much more to this server upgrade than meets the eye, and much more I think than we've seen in some past upgrades. Take a look at Nano Server as an example, and consider the kind of bottom-up refactoring it took to make that work.

On the client side, I think the biggest factor is going to be WMF5, and how much of that will back-port to W7 and how soon that will be available.

On the server side, the major change in the GUI is a shift in philosophy. They spent most of their effort on getting rid of it.

If ONLY "tens of millions" of the users are familiar with the operating system a month from now, what about the other 90 million users? Is Gartner implying that they haven't a clue what they're doing in Windows 10? Somebody explain this Marketing Speak to me, please...

The 10 million will be familiar with the "undocumented features" (that which we call "bugs/glitches/FUBAR").

The rest will have to wait their turn to recognize that something is wrong....

Enterprise business customers won't get on this bandwagon for at least another 3 years

I'm in IT. What I'm hearing from IT directors, techs, etc is that a fair number of companies are already in the process of moving to Win10. Reception has generally been good.

Not me, I'm the conservative type. Will wait for the first service pack, at least.

I like what I see from it, though. Incorporates the things that I like from Windows 7, without all of the radical design changes of Windows 8. I think that users in my community will accept it.

And all of the hand-wringing on FR about privacy intrusions, etc? Well..... Yes, Windows 10 is a lot more intrusive .......if you don't know what you're doing. All of the the "intrusions", though, can be turned off. And, will be in the build that gets distributed to the users in my company. Microsoft can do its own #$#@$@$ consumer research, we don't need to do it for them. :-)

> There is much more to this server upgrade than meets the eye, and much more I think than we've seen in some past upgrades. Take a look at Nano Server as an example, and consider the kind of bottom-up refactoring it took to make that work.

Not a fair comparison. Nano is extremely cool, and very different, but honestly, when you or I say "Windows Server 2016" no one thinks we're talking about Nano Server implicitly. Nano has no GUI. According to Microsoft, Nano Server has 93 percent lower VHD size, 92 percent fewer critical security advisories, and 80 percent fewer reboots than Windows Server.

Nano was also absolutely necessary if Microsoft was to remain a player in cloud server farms. Putting regular Windows Server in an Amazon EC2 setting is certainly possible, but it's just silly unless you have no other option. The Nano approach is the only sane one, and I'm very glad Microsoft finally saw the light and produced a serious release of Windows that doesn't have a flaming GUI as its interface.

> On the client side, I think the biggest factor is going to be WMF5, and how much of that will back-port to W7 and how soon that will be available.

I'm concerned that Win7 won't get nearly the attention it should with backports and such. Something is going on to move everything to Win10, and it's something no one is talking about (yet). I hate to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but there's some crazy shiite going on behind the scenes.

> On the server side, the major change in the GUI is a shift in philosophy. They spent most of their effort on getting rid of it.

Well, that's a relief. The sooner we can administer Windows like a serious server instead of a video game, the better.

Not a fair comparison.

I didn't think it was a fair comparison to limit the assessment of the upgrade to just the full GUI installs, when that's not where they've been focusing their development efforts.

Nano server is a different animal, but still built on the same code.

Headless Windows servers and command line management are not new. The default installation option is Server Core, which is not as lean as Nano, but still much better than a full Server install with the GUI.

Nano server is not standalone. Those instances will run in containers, and you need at least a Server Core instance to provide the hypervisor. You can also run Linux instances in containers along side them. Even discounting Nano Server, that still leaves the upgrades to Hyper-V to provide the container environment and management platform to consider. I'd consider at least that much to be very much a part of what people think of when you or I say "Windows Server".

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.