Jump to content
The Inquirer-Home

Windows Server 2008 R2 RC goes public

The incredible shrinking server
Friday, 22 May 2009, 01:16

TECHNET AND OTHER Microsoft fan bases are, as of today, able to download the Windows Server 2008 R2 Release Candidate (RC).

The now-public RC brings some new features expected in yet missing from the previous Beta. Features such as WOW64 are now standard, as well as the now no longer broken Windows Deployment Services, DirectAccess Diagnostics, Windows PowerShell and Live Migration services amongst others.

The 2.86GB ISO is available through Microsoft's own download site and the ISO image includes install options for all four versions of Windows Server 2008 (Enterprise, Datacentre, Web and Standard). You might want to get the keys off the Microsoft site and download it using a torrent client… ours was veeeery slow.

Anyhow, the anticipated release date of Windows Server 2008 R2 is about the end of this year, and from what we've just seen it seems that the Vole can start rubbing its money grubbing paws together in glee.

Microsoft has done something quite shocking, we've been told. It has lowered the OS footprint to less than 128MB which, if this proves to be true, will be quite a drop from obese profile of the Windows Server 2003 bloatware.

Windows Server 2008 R2 is shaping up to be, it seems, perhaps a decent rung in the Volish server ladder, if not an entirely digit-worthy release. µ

Share this:

Comments
Uhh..

Isn't this a little late? I've been running the RC of R2 for about two weeks. Oh well...

posted by : Rick White, 22 May 2009 Complain about this comment
Less sarcasm more facts

Perhaps the inq might try focussing on writing story content rather than constantly needing to out-do each other with venomous sarcasm.

Windows 2003 R2 bloatware ? Surely it depends on the services installed.

I don’t know, perhaps our computer-room is unique, but all of our servers running 2003-R2 only have 128MB RAM, and all work quite well.

posted by : Ted, 22 May 2009 Complain about this comment
Saracsm

As you know, venomous sarcasm is not funny, it hurtsies us. (Notice "venomous")

IT people and techies in general hate sarcasm, we are not a sarcastic bunch, of people.

Remember, sarcasm is bad. Please write articles that contain raw information, preferably database code & no comments.

Thank you, drive through.

posted by : Someone Special, 22 May 2009 Complain about this comment
Sarcasm take 2

I don't know where the special guy works but he is definitely special...

yes sarcasm can be taking too far but generally that is the kind of humor IT and techs deal with. Our types of personalities are more prone to coming up with play on words and sarcasm... I can't believe this guy... sarcasem is awesome... learn to use it right and appreciate it... If you can't take a poke then you shouldn't poke back... but all in all its a blast.

The OS memory footprint drop is a good thing... guess the windows7 code and r2 are in line in that respect.

posted by : Normal IT, 22 May 2009 Complain about this comment
Take Five

Normally I would be reluctant to brave the existential thickets and torturous trails of implied intention in internet postings, but I've waited and no one else has bothered, so Optimator in hand, here I go...

"Someone Special" appears to have been serving up a little helping of sarcasm, just barely seasoned with a tiny touch of subtlety. The question is, do we give "take 2" the benefit of the doubt and assume his dish is a comic falafel battered in obscurity, or based on the use of language, grammar, and mode of expression, simply conclude that:

Normal IT == Clueless F*ckwit

?

Put that in you vonDrashek and smoke IT!

posted by : Whatever, 22 May 2009 Complain about this comment
Crap!

Ah, the curse of citing someones use of language... I inadvertently omitted a letter which significantly changed the meaning of part of my post. Here's the missing letter, insert it where you choose...

r

posted by : Whatever, 22 May 2009 Complain about this comment
No Latch....

Sorry, yet after two discs & 8 atttempts, 2008 R2 would not even latch onto BOOTUP as O.S software. Micronuts.

However, did pick up 5.1 Gigabyte update for Vista Ultimate32. makin vista about 14 gb install, from start. Now tell Me, Will Next O/S be DL Disc or Blu-Ray? Next NT series definately beginning to look Blu.

Next: let me discuss my night b\drasnking AMY winehouse serum, AMY Bit Under Again, ripping Off Fans With excuses, Yet Being Both Lesbian & Gay isn't easy. Its Those DogBiscut Nips That ruin theFOOD source worldwide....AMY Is Great, Yet When College Crowd starts Believing, Its Kamakazie Mission.

posted by : vondrashek, 23 May 2009 Complain about this comment
Never cease to amaze me

Mr author, Server 2003 code is analogous to Windows XP's - yes, the same code that all you silly 'IT' folk praise the pants off of, especially when relative to Vista's. (Now, we're not saying that Vista isn't a bit more resource heavy overall in comparison to other OSs from same company, but) it just goes to show how ridiculous you 'tech' people really are; you contradict yourselves (it seems in the name of adding spice to your articles). Please sir, go read a Server '03 whitepaper and educate yourself.

posted by : collinvaughn, 24 May 2009 Complain about this comment
cease to amaze me

collinvaughn; no XP (NT5.1) does not share codebase with Win2K3 (NT5.2)
However XP x64 and Win2K3 are the same codebase (same servicepacks and all)

posted by : Per Hansson, 24 May 2009 Complain about this comment
Advertisement
Subscribe to the INQ Newsletter
Sign-up for the INQBot weekly newsletter
Click here to sign up Existing user
Advertisement
INQ Poll

Windows 7 impressions

How is windows 7 working out for you?