Print 94 comment(s) - last by ElFenix.. on Oct 18 at 10:08 PM

  (Source: AnandTech)
Newegg lists Windows Home Sever OEM for $190

Microsoft is finally ready to roll with its Windows Home Server software platform. The Redmond, Washington-based software company pushed out a release candidate version of the software in June and released it to manufacturing in mid-July.

Microsoft Windows Home Server (32-bit) is now available to purchase by anyone looking to turn an old PC into a multi-functional storage/media/backup/remote access hub. Newegg lists the OEM version of the software on its website for $189.99.

Windows Home Server doesn't feature outlandish system requirements and will likely run just fine on a machine that is four or five years old. The bare minimum requirements are a 1GHz Pentium III processor and 512MB of RAM and many users have found much success with similar hardware.

For those that would prefer to buy a pre-built Windows Home Server system, there are plenty of solutions on the way. HP has a $599, 500GB EX470 server and a $799, 1TB EX475 server while competing solutions from Velocity Micro are also in the works.

Other companies who will produce Windows Home Server systems include Fujitsu-Siemens, Gateway, Iomega LaCie and Medion.

For more information on Windows Home Server and all of its features, be sure to check out AnandTech's preview.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

sticker shock
By Quiksel on 10/11/2007 10:24:54 AM , Rating: 5
$190? I was ready to plop down upwards of $125-ish, but call me crazy, I didn't expect to see $190 for a license of this thing.

Guess I'm out. For old machines, I guess it can breathe new life as a great fileserver, but doing this at $190 makes me feel like throwing the old one out the window and building a new one... $190 is not trivial, might as well go all out, eh?

RE: sticker shock
By FITCamaro on 10/11/2007 10:29:47 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah $190 is too much. You can achieve the same thing through XP Pro and free software. This should be priced the same as Vista Home Premium or XP Pro. Interesting that its designed to run on a Pentium III.

I've got a dual processor 1.1GHz PIII system with 1.25GB of SDRAM lying around now. Was thinking of doing something with Linux on it just for the hell of it.

RE: sticker shock
By phreaqe on 10/11/2007 10:32:45 AM , Rating: 3
i agree. i would be willing to pay around 100 for it. but if its almost 200 oem thats is absurd. i can get vista ultimate for that. i used to think this was a promising product and was excited about it. but i will not be buying it for 190 bucks.

RE: sticker shock
By LogicallyGenius on 10/11/2007 10:43:37 PM , Rating: 1
How much can we upgrade a 5 year old hardware ie. if we sell that first and try to get the cheapest in the market as new one with that price + 190$ (excluding the monitor keyboard etc ?

RE: sticker shock
By afkrotch on 10/14/2007 9:27:07 PM , Rating: 2
Worst price ever. I was truely excited about WHS. Was thinking it'd be $120 retail and like $70 OEM. That's a ludicrious price. I already have my file server running Win2k. I'm definitely not going to change. Really looked promising, but will ultimately fail among home system builders.

RE: sticker shock
By Lord 666 on 10/14/2007 10:09:29 PM , Rating: 2
Difference of opinion. I would gladly pay $200 more if it supported Domain Controller features and Group Policy or the ability to be joined to a domain.

WHS has many potential uses, particulary in the SOHO segment or remote office environment. With printer server, backups, and file storage... this is great for many of my clients.

RE: sticker shock
By Comdrpopnfresh on 10/11/2007 10:39:13 AM , Rating: 2
not "designed" for a PIII, just happens to be the minimal system requirements. Although, a low-clocked early p4 this might not run on- PIII's were beating up their big brothers for some time...

RE: sticker shock
By FITCamaro on 10/11/2007 11:00:44 AM , Rating: 2
I meant that its designed so that it will run on a Pentium III.

But yes, the Pentium IV didn't start to outperform the Pentium III until it got to about 1.8-2.0 GHz. But people still bought them like hot cakes (literally too since the thing ran so damn hot). I worked at Best Buy in college when the P4 came out and people only noticed the clock speed number. Intel did a great job of convincing people clock speed was all that mattered.

RE: sticker shock
By psyph3r on 10/11/2007 12:01:02 PM , Rating: 2
I spent several years of my life explaining over and over how AMD could be faster than intel with less clock speed....unfortunately that is digital marketing for you and the common humanoid

RE: sticker shock
By darkfoon on 10/11/2007 2:48:25 PM , Rating: 2
Just stick with the "linux thing" you alluded to.
No, I'm not a linux fanboi, but I like a nice performing system, and with those specs, you could get a very nice file server going in Linux. Might not be "Apple Easy"TM to set up (or even Microsoft EasyTM) but it would utilize the resources better than Windows.
I have a 1.4GHz PIII with 512MB RAM and I have it running a file server, LAN webserver, and Counter-Strike: Source dedicated server. It runs like greased lightning.
And as always, the price is just the cost of a CD-R and the electricity to power all the electronics needed to download the ISO ;)

Just my opinion/experience.

RE: sticker shock
By omnicronx on 10/11/2007 3:15:51 PM , Rating: 5
If windows server did not make things easy than there would be no point. I can do everything that WHS can do with windows xp and 3rd party software. I was part of the beta and i have to say WHS's usability far outweighs anything you can get out of nix or xp with 3rd party apps. When my sister understands and is able to use all the features, you know they are on the right track =P

RE: sticker shock
By SirLucius on 10/11/2007 3:29:21 PM , Rating: 3
That's exactly why I plan on building a WHS system for my dad. He's been wanting to setup a file server for use at home, and while he's fully capable of understanding and maintaining a server using Linux or XP, he doesn't have the time or energy to do so. A system that's more "plug and play" so to speak is what he's looking for, and WHS delivers just that.

RE: sticker shock
By Blight AC on 10/12/2007 10:11:19 AM , Rating: 2
Agreed, WHS just works so very well. The backup is the best I have ever seen, with the option for complete re-imaging or just individual files, it is ZOMG! awesome. The backup alone makes it a good product, but then it also does so much more. A Media Server with the ability to play music, video and picture slideshows on my Xbox 360. A file server, that, once it's setup works as easy as Active Directory permissions, and a Web Server that works the same.

I do however agree that $190 is more then I was anticipating to pay. At that price I'd rather just pay the $500 and get new hardware and know that I'm getting full driver support, as well as low power hardware. Which is unlike my PC running the Release Candidate now, which... works, but currently the Gigabit NIC (Asus A7N8X Deluxe) doesn't work, and backups won't run on it, keeps reporting an issue with the backup service. So either it doesn't like my hardware/drivers or I got a bad download (I wish Microsoft listed the MD5 hash for the download).

Right around $125 would be perfect, $149 would be the highest we should see for it, considering it's OEM.

RE: sticker shock
By porkpie on 10/11/2007 5:43:42 PM , Rating: 2
I'm actually very excited about this software. After struggling with Linux for over a year for a home server, the thought of something simpler and easier is a real godsend.

RE: sticker shock
By RjBass on 10/11/2007 10:38:07 AM , Rating: 2
Agreed. I service many homes where the family's have multiple computers and their were some people out there who were actually pretty excited about this product. But at nearly $200 to redo an older machine, it's just not worth it.

RE: sticker shock
By Lord 666 on 10/11/2007 11:14:21 AM , Rating: 3
Honestly, what difference does $65 make? WHS is a decent product. Being a WHS beta tester, it does work best on modern equipment, its right now on a P-D 930 and three gigs of ram and runs smooth for me.

I work in NYC and live in NJ:

1. To park a car sometimes costs $55
2. The daily rate to get to work is $42 by "mass" transit
3. A decent dinner for two easily costs $65+

I have never understood on Dailytech why a $50 delta of cost really makes a difference? "When Xbox 360 drops by $50, then I'll buy it" or something similar for HD-DVD players.

RE: sticker shock
By Anosh on 10/11/2007 11:20:01 AM , Rating: 3
Well I guess either people don't have jobs, they have families or they (want to) buy so many gadgets that 50 actually determines if they can afford it or not.

RE: sticker shock
By omnicronx on 10/11/2007 11:26:45 AM , Rating: 5
If you have an extra 2ghz computer lying around, chances are you can afford the 50 bucks. If MS added in MCE support (for use with an extender) i would pay $200 in an instant.

RE: sticker shock
By Oregonian2 on 10/11/2007 1:56:54 PM , Rating: 3
Or it has to do with being frugal and only wanting to pay what you think it's worth, on principal if anything. At $200 the software would cost more than an old machine is worth, and that would ruffle a few frugal feathers just for that reason.

RE: sticker shock
By VooDooAddict on 10/11/2007 8:37:17 PM , Rating: 2

I was really expecting to pay about as much as a Vista Buisness OEM or MCE OEM.

Will I buy it? Probably. I've got an old Dual Xeon 2.6Ghz (Netburst) with a well aged student copy of Windows 2000 that I should probably replace with a non-student copy of an OS. Maybe I'll toss on a Linux Distro ... but I'd really like to be able to show a few people what WHS can do.

RE: sticker shock
By glennpratt on 10/12/2007 1:57:07 PM , Rating: 2
Student licenses should be OK even after school if you graduated from the school that provided it. Or are you talking about another kind of student copy.

RE: sticker shock
By RjBass on 10/11/2007 11:31:30 AM , Rating: 3
The average daily price for a consumer in NY usually doesn't reflect the populace as a whole in the US.

For instance, here in Kansas City, we don't really use mass transit (more because of our city's serious lack of it), homes and general cost of living are cheaper, parking downtown can cost usually about $10 a day.

So here in a metro areas that has just over 2 million people, things are cheaper. The people have a certain expectation in regards to the products they purchase, especially for their homes.

Now when I go to those same people and give them my price tag to convert their old computer into a WHS, they will look at my like I am crazy.

WHS is not even close to a necessary product. It is purely a luxury. So when you have family's that have multiple computers for work, school and other necessary things, and they have multiple children to feeds, a mortgage to pay, bills due etc... the cost of WHS really doesn't add up.

Now their are some people, such as yourself, who have no problems spending an extra $50 here and $65 there. But when it comes to my own family, I am thinking I can spend $200 on WHS and give my home network a nice little upgrade utilizing that old P4 with 512 megs of DDR down in the basement, or I can get a little more fuel for the car, maybe take the wife out to dinner, and purchase another Xbox game for the kids.

When I bring this up to my wife, as all monetary decisions are family decisions and not solely my decision, you can bet she will go for option 2.

RE: sticker shock
By Sunbird on 10/11/2007 11:48:49 AM , Rating: 2
You said it yourself, its a luxury and I've never seen cheap luxury...

RE: sticker shock
By Lord 666 on 10/11/2007 12:20:20 PM , Rating: 2
That being said, isn't all of technology a luxury?

RE: sticker shock
By omnicronx on 10/11/2007 12:34:35 PM , Rating: 2
Can you survive without it? 500 years ago the answer would be yes, but people these days are actually dependent on technology to survive. I could name a handful of people i know that without electricity, would die in a month.
Stupid.. but the sad sad truth ;)

RE: sticker shock
By aos007 on 10/11/2007 2:05:45 PM , Rating: 2
Hardly stupid. It's a necessity. I live in an apartment highrise building, as does a huge portion of city dwellers - there is no alternative. Without technology and electricity, living in a highrise would be impossible, or so inconvenient and unsafe that it'd be essentially the same (without booster pumps to push up water, for example, or air circulation, or elevators, or fire prevention systems etc. - not to mention little things such as washer, cooking, fridge etc.).

Home server may be a luxury today, but electricity and technology in general are not. You'd need a massive reorganization of society to eliminate it.

RE: sticker shock
By Quiksel on 10/11/2007 11:38:28 AM , Rating: 3
sometimes you have to remember where an acceptable limit would be for a product to be "worth" the investment.

It's not to say that I've got to watch my pennies, and this one's waaaay too expensive, etc., it's more about utility and the value of that utility.

This is similar to the whole gasoline price hikes of the past couple of years... Some people go livid with the overall increase of the past couple years, however, until the price becomes truly obscene, people will continue to buy.

To me (and perhaps many others), this price for WHS is likened to the opportunity to be sold a gallon of gas for $5 instead of $3. To me, WHS is just not worth the $5. If we're talking the $3, I'm still in.

Make sense? This is really the heart of that perspective.

RE: sticker shock
By Oregonian2 on 10/11/2007 1:54:08 PM , Rating: 2
I guess it'll sell in NYC, even if not anywhere else.

RE: sticker shock
By Chris Peredun on 10/11/2007 2:31:48 PM , Rating: 2
I have never understood on Dailytech why a $50 delta of cost really makes a difference? "When Xbox 360 drops by $50, then I'll buy it" or something similar for HD-DVD players.

It might be a "small" delta, but enough drops in the bucket give you a full pail. That $50 can pay two week's gas for my car, food for the pets, Internet for a month ...

And the tendency of gadget-oriented individuals means they're never buying just one piece of technology at a time. When it's $50 saved on an Xbox 360, PS3, HD-DVD, WHS, and a new motherboard - "why, that's $200 I just saved!"

RE: sticker shock
By omnicronx on 10/11/2007 3:26:59 PM , Rating: 2
People like saving money, and bragging about doing so. Really in the end though you are right, the delta of $50 is so small on a product like the xbox 360 that it makes you wonder, if you are that tight for cash why are you spending $400?

RE: sticker shock
By Anonymous Freak on 10/11/2007 3:15:38 PM , Rating: 5
The apparent value of a $50 delta depends on the beginning cost.

For a $50,000 Lexus, yeah, $50 is literally NOTHING.

For a $5 Casio watch, $50 is beyond ridiculous.

For a(n expected) $125, $50 is a decent chunk.

RE: sticker shock
By ElFenix on 10/18/2007 10:08:59 PM , Rating: 2
who wants to bet this is partly just newegg selling a hot new product at a higher markup than normal?

Whats the difference.
By Kefner on 10/11/2007 11:16:28 AM , Rating: 2
Whats the difference between using Windows Server and an old copy of XP. I took an old pc, put and old copy of my Windows XP on it (have vista, and wasn't using my older XP license on anything) and I use that as my home server. Maybe Windows Server is just easier to work with, but for me, I don't see the benefit. I understand that you don't need a very powerful PC for Windows Server, but you don't for XP either. Not bad mouthing it, just curious if there is some great benefit of using Server over XP for a simple home server.

RE: Whats the difference.
By Sunbird on 10/11/2007 11:56:40 AM , Rating: 2
Yes there is, can make images of other PCs drives over the network for backup purposes, it can spread and duplicate files (that you designate) over the drives in the server providing a RAIDish safetynet for important files. And a few other things...

RE: Whats the difference.
By mmcdonalataocdotgov on 10/11/2007 12:00:58 PM , Rating: 2
All my user PCs already have local RAID.

RE: Whats the difference.
By TomZ on 10/11/2007 12:32:34 PM , Rating: 2
Machines with RAID still need to be backed up, if you want to prevent data loss. RAID decreases the probability of failure, but it doesn't decrease it to zero. There are a number of failures that could cause data loss even with RAID, e.g., power supply dies and takes out both HDDs together.

RE: Whats the difference.
By omnicronx on 10/11/2007 12:37:43 PM , Rating: 2
not if you run raid 1+0 =D
Doesn't everyone have enough money for 4 hd's per computer?

RE: Whats the difference.
By cochy on 10/11/2007 12:47:50 PM , Rating: 2
You still need to backup to protect against data corruption. Corruption spreads across the whole RAID no matter how many disks you have.

RAID doesn't replace physical backups.

RE: Whats the difference.
By omnicronx on 10/11/2007 1:03:00 PM , Rating: 2
not always =D... RAID disk arrays, store and evaluate parity bits for data across a set of hard disks and can reconstruct corrupted data upon of the failure of a single disk.

obviously raid doesn't replace physical backups, but it sure all hell minimizes the need to do so. Chances of irreversible data corruption with raid 1+0 is very small unless you are using old hardware and multiple drives fail (in which the failed drive would have to be the mirror of the drive that failed ) ;)

RE: Whats the difference.
By TomZ on 10/11/2007 1:29:36 PM , Rating: 2
What if you delete a file by accident, without sending it to a recycle bin? RAID won't save you there - all it does is replicate your mistake across multiple drives. :o)

RE: Whats the difference.
By Donkeyshins on 10/11/2007 4:36:43 PM , Rating: 3
Sorry. There is no failsafe data storage solution that can't be defeated by simple stupidity.


RE: Whats the difference.
By mindless1 on 10/12/2007 4:58:05 AM , Rating: 2

But you're always find some tool that says you should make daily backups to DVD and HDD and immediately drive to some offsite location to store that in a fireproof, waterproof, nuclear blast proof station on the moon.

Practically speaking, morons that try to suggest 1 in 1 billion failures completely miss the point. Computers and data are meant to make our lives easier, not the other way around.

RE: Whats the difference.
By TomZ on 10/12/2007 6:30:11 AM , Rating: 1
I do a lot of file management as a part of my job, and in my experience, accidently deleting a file is actually not uncommon at all - maybe 1/100?

Also FYI, it's easier than most think to lose a RAID1 volume. I had a drive power connection come loose once in a RAID1 volume, and due to a very stupid design of the Promise RAID BIOS and a little carelessness on my part, I ended up losing the entire volume of data.

The reason was that when the drive dropped out of the array, the stupid BIOS reset all the RAID settings (sector size, etc.), which prevented the data from being accessed until I could restore all those settings exactly to their default settings. Since I didn't have all the settings written down (how could I have known to do that?), I ended up using trial-and-error, trying all combinations of settings. No combination ever worked, even after hours of trying. I ended up formatting the volume and restoring data from my last backup. I lost maybe a day or two of work and e-mails.

So, LOL to you and your overconfidence that RAID will save the day!

RE: Whats the difference.
By mindless1 on 10/12/2007 4:55:25 AM , Rating: 2
Ok, but instead of playing devil's advocate, how about giving users responsiblity for their decisions?

Fact is, RAID has done a great job of keeping my data intact for many years. I do make periodic backups to (formerly other offline HDDs before DVDRW came along, then DVDRW for critical stuff and still removed HDDs for the rest).

This is where permissions come in, you don't give everyone full permission to a filestore.

RE: Whats the difference.
By TomZ on 10/12/2007 6:20:17 AM , Rating: 2
That's just stupid. Were you thinking at all when you wrote that post?

So basically you are saying that backups deprive users of their freedom/right to lose files due to mistakes, LOL!

Also, I don't see how permissions help solve the problem, unless you, for example, make document areas write-only. This would mean that a user could only create new files, and each time they save, they would have to save it as a new file. Is that what you're suggesting?

Think before you post!

RE: Whats the difference.
By mindless1 on 10/13/2007 4:06:33 AM , Rating: 2
YOu need to read again, and note I have lost no data.

Basically I'm saying (thanks for trying to imply otherwise, but if you had a valid argument you wouldn't have to try to put words in my mouth!) that if you make a stupid mistake and you admin the store, don't go crying to someone that there's some other fault. I'm saying that if you give anything more than read privledge to someone who shouldn't have it, that also falls under stupid mistake, as this should have another redundant backup if the user does need write privledge.

Does it dawn on your now that I didn't write "write-only" privledge, it was read-only. Write privledge is not to the central filestore, that is to a removed per-user area.

RE: Whats the difference.
By glennpratt on 10/12/2007 1:53:47 PM , Rating: 2
RAID and backups solve too distinct problems. RAID prevents downtime, backups prevent data loss.

Let's make a ridiculous analogy. Say your car is your hard drive and your data is your ability to travel. Backups are like insurance and RAID is like buying too cars. Insurance takes longer and you might have to get a rental, but in theory it's always there. Two cars can still easily be simultaneously stolen, burned or driven into a wall and leave you with nothing.

RE: Whats the difference.
By glennpratt on 10/12/2007 1:55:35 PM , Rating: 2
Um, too should be two. Twice...

RE: Whats the difference.
By Blight AC on 10/12/2007 10:33:25 AM , Rating: 2
What's the point of paying a premium and getting 4 HDD's for each PC when you can use that money to buy WHS and get similar redundancy, plus additional functionality (Web Server, File Share) and the addition of smart backups, where only one copy of a particular file is saved (so if you have 3 WinXP PC's only 1 copy of the Windows files is saved, reducing the amount of space needed for that redundancy).

RE: Whats the difference.
By omnicronx on 10/11/2007 3:33:49 PM , Rating: 2
Don't confuse raid with what WHS has, it's not raid, it just acts like raid 0(somewhat). By that i mean if you have a 200GB drive and a 300GB drive, WHS will combine both drives to act like one 500GB drive (you will just have 1 big c: drive), with no duplication or splitting of data across drives. When i was testing the beta i was using 3 150GB drives because thats all i had hanging around. Pretty cool if you ask me, so many people have extra hardware like HD's just waiting to be used and don't want to be hassled by the headaches and extra costs of a raid setup.

RE: Whats the difference.
By ninjit on 10/11/2007 3:50:25 PM , Rating: 3
It's called JBOD
"Just a bunch of disks"

RE: Whats the difference.
By TomZ on 10/12/2007 6:52:16 AM , Rating: 2
No, calling it JBOD means you misunderstand how it works. Instead, think of a higher software layer that automatically manages placement of files/folders onto physical drives and has the capability to mirror certain folders onto 2 different drives. In addition, it gives you the ability to roll back to previous versions of a particular file. That's quite a bit more that JBOD.

RE: Whats the difference.
By ninjit on 10/13/2007 1:56:27 AM , Rating: 2
No, you didn't read what I was responding to.

omnicrox wrote:
WHS will combine both drives to act like one 500GB drive (you will just have 1 big c: drive), with no duplication or splitting of data across drives.


He maybe wrong and Windows Home Server does actually do mirroring, backup, etc. I don't know I haven't used WHS myself.

But the functionality he describes as "like RAID 0" is JBOD, he just didn't appear to know that term, and I was informing him of such.

RE: Whats the difference.
By mcnabney on 10/11/2007 4:04:51 PM , Rating: 2
You are actually wrong. It will control multiple disks and span files across them, but you can mark files/folders for extra backup protection. So you can mark your family pictures so that they are copied onto 2 or more drives to protect against drive failure, but the DVD images are just stored anywhere since if they are lost you can just re-image the disk. It certainly isn't RAID 0 since it is not striping, it isn't RAID 1 since everything isn't backed up, but it does provide some backup ability that JBOD doesn't.

RE: Whats the difference.
By mmcdonalataocdotgov on 10/11/2007 11:59:14 AM , Rating: 3
For the average joe-pc user, WHS automates a lot of the stuff an average tech-savvy user (like most of the posters here) can do with any basic machine and a little planning - and more importantly, knowledge of what to do and when. (Whew, that was one sentence.) It does add a health monitoring feature, but that might be to up-sell. If you have automated updates, or do them yourself regularly, then there is not much here for you.

I would spend the money to add a hard drive ot two to the mule I already have (Windows Server 2003).

RE: Whats the difference.
By psyph3r on 10/11/2007 12:13:45 PM , Rating: 2
yea, it's me in a box. I charge fifty dollars +5 dollars per gig per month to do what this software does....might have to consider offering it as a "Service Upgrade" muahahaha...

it'll make my life easier and I could expand since I won't have to make visits every month to every customer. this sounds delightful to get rid of several systems abandoned at my house for a small up charge. setups and upkeep of standard servers in a USER environment was too much of a pain in the ass before.

RE: Whats the difference.
By mindless1 on 10/12/2007 5:03:28 AM , Rating: 2
Are you on crack? For $50 + $5/gig a month you could just automate uploads to your website. All it takes is a reasonably wide (broadband) pipe, but who would spend that sum without even having broadband?

I was harsh, hey if people are willing to pay it you are entitled to it. It's about what they value and in some scenarios it's worth that fee and much more (business uses), but today the topic is a home server OS instead.

RE: Whats the difference.
By mindless1 on 10/12/07, Rating: 0
RE: Whats the difference.
By TomZ on 10/12/2007 6:33:18 AM , Rating: 2
You missed the point. The purpose of health monitoring is to let you know of problems before they become serious, e.g., your HDD getting ready to die. It also warns you about less serous things like unapplied OS updates. It's more proactive compared to the approach you advocate, which is to fix it after it completely breaks and where you've probably had some downtime and maybe lost some data.

RE: Whats the difference.
By mindless1 on 10/13/2007 4:10:23 AM , Rating: 2
You seem to miss the point. I don't need health monitoring. Health monitoring is only important to those without a solid redundancy plan. I won't bat an eye if a drive fails right now, it makes no difference if I had a few days notice.

As for warning about unapplied OS updates, did I ask for that? No. Do I care? No. It's not like we can't check that anyway and do so cautiously instead of being nagged to install something that occasionally causes more problems than it solves.

You imply problems (using the strategy you claim important) while I don't have these problems ignoring your strategy. One way has proven better than the other.

RE: Whats the difference.
By BitJunkie on 10/14/2007 1:11:28 PM , Rating: 2
I'm going to say you miss an ever bigger point. While it's nice to assume that the world revolves around ourselves, there are other people out there in userland who might have different needs.

Maybe for example someone else doesn't have a bullet proof redundancy plan, maybe they don't even understand what redundancy is all about. In which case having a system tell them the world is about to end is a good thing.

If you don't need it, don't use it. But your kind of technological fascism that dictates what should be in a mass market product is kind of laughable. The same way you spouted endless bollocks about Vista being bloated, other people have different needs and usage models. If you don't need it, go find a different solution.

RE: Whats the difference.
By kirbalo on 10/11/2007 12:14:52 PM , Rating: 4
One thing that's different, and a showstopper for me, is that you can't connect to it with an x64 system. WTF? I can understand that the WHS is 32 bit...fine. But any x64 based system CAN connect to a XP 32 bit box without a problem. Both XP x64 and Vista x64 use NTFS, so it really doesn't make much sense to me why this is so limited...and for $189?

Too bad...I'll wait for x64 compatibility to justify close to $200.

RE: Whats the difference.
By deeznuts on 10/11/2007 1:03:00 PM , Rating: 2
They are working feverishly for the 64 bit connector/thingamabobber. Read it on the official whs forums. But it might be months away. Sucks I guess, but my only 64 bit machine doesn't need backups, actually none of my machines really do, I wipe my comp clean quite often anyway, so I'll be purchasing one of these days.

microsoft software subscription
By johnsonx on 10/11/2007 10:44:39 AM , Rating: 2
I just got the October 2007 update to my microsoft software subscription set (I forget what it's called officially, it's the one you pay $299 for if you've signed up as an MS partner, includes almost all MS software...), and there's no Windows Home Server in there. Does anyone know if it will be included in the next update or if there's a way to get it?

RE: microsoft software subscription
By Etsp on 10/11/2007 11:12:39 AM , Rating: 2
The action pack subscription? Possibly not. Personally though, I would avoid that abomination for now until they get their heads out of their a**es.

I know for my subscription, they included 10 licenses of Vista. The key they provide was for Vista Buisness Upgrade 32 bit, but no Windows XP to upgrade from. Then they shipped a disk of Vista 64 bit that doesn't say anything on it about being an upgrade edition, but requires you to use the same key, and the same 10 licenses and is therefore, also an upgrade.

Basically, to use the Vista they supply in the action pack legally, you have to go out and buy Windows XP
The purpose of the Action Pack is to help resellers understand Microsoft products so that they can resell them. How do they expect us to push their defunct operating system when they don't provide the means to use it legally? I know
of the workaround...

But it is illegal to do without the Licenses for XP.

Avoid it until they get their act together, or guarantee in writing that you will be getting either the full version of the product, or previous versions of the product for the purpose of the upgrade.

After discovering this, I am starting to get a better idea of why Microsoft is the single most pirated company out's quite painful to be legitimate with them.

RE: microsoft software subscription
By Master Kenobi on 10/11/2007 11:21:13 AM , Rating: 2
I have the TechNet subscription that gives me access to their software.

RE: microsoft software subscription
By BPB on 10/11/2007 11:43:09 AM , Rating: 2
Got this on the front page of the blogs. I have a developer subscription and hope to get it from here for free soon. But I'm not holding my breath...
Product Availability for Vista SP1, XP SP3, and Windows Home Server
In response to Color's comments/questions:

Vista SP1 is expected to RTM in the first quarter of 2008, and we would expect to have it on Subscriber Downloads very shortly after release.

XP SP3 (did you mean Office or Windows XP?)

---Windows XP SP3 “SP3 for Windows XP Professional" is currently planned for 1H CY2008. This date is preliminary .

---Office XP SP3 is a public download:

Windows Home Server - our acquisitions team is working with the product group to include this in the MSDN offering. We expect it will be offereed, but we do not have an estimate of availability.

Posted Monday, October 08, 2007 10:13 AM by MSDNSubscriptions | 3 Comments
Filed under: product availability

RE: microsoft software subscription
By Etsp on 10/11/2007 12:10:05 PM , Rating: 2
It seems I should have gone that route as well... and I believe I will as soon as my subscription to the action pack expires. The would-be advantages of the action pack is that it includes more than one license per subscription for many products. Sadly, it is poorly executed at the moment.

RE: microsoft software subscription
By Master Kenobi on 10/11/2007 12:45:49 PM , Rating: 2
My technet gives me 10 licenses per key unless otherwise specified.

RE: microsoft software subscription
By darkpaw on 10/11/2007 12:52:15 PM , Rating: 2
The real differnece in my understanding is that the Action Pack license can be used in production systems as long as they are owned by the company. MSDN/technet licenses are only supposed to be used for testing purposes, not day to day use.

RE: microsoft software subscription
By johnsonx on 10/12/2007 1:28:15 AM , Rating: 1
While I did find it irritating that the Action Pack included only Upgrade licenses, I gather that the rationale was that most ActionPack subscribers already had XP from previous editions. I had let my action pack laspe years ago, and so officially had no XP from which to upgrade. However, I seriously doubt Microsoft is going to argue with a signed-up Partner who paid for their software pack just because they clean-installed a few copies of Vista Upgrade. It installs, it activates, it passes WGA, who cares after that?

Agreed though on your last point. With many things software and media related these days, it's such a headache to comply with all the rules after paying for something that it often seems better to just pirate:

"What, you paid good money for that? Ok, here are all the rules of what you can and can't do, and here's where we treat you like a probable thief anyway. We're going to hassle you all the time about this, since we have your money and know who you are!"

On the other hand:

"Oh, you pirated that, and didn't pay anything for it? Hey, use it however you like. No rules, no restrictions, the sky's the limit!"

RE: microsoft software subscription
By darkpaw on 10/11/2007 2:29:17 PM , Rating: 2
A year or so ago, they stopped shipping OEM disks with the Action Pack subscription. You have to be signed up as a system builder to the the OEM copies now (never did that, so don't know whats required). Since WHS is being sold only as an OEM, I doubt it'll show up in the normal AP update.

RE: microsoft software subscription
By johnsonx on 10/12/2007 1:34:25 AM , Rating: 2
perhaps I need to do that then, as I am a small scale system builder as well (mostly I do it because I find it fun... no real profit in the thin markup on hardware compared to service which I consider to be 100% profit!)

A little late DailyTech..again.
By imaheadcase on 10/11/2007 12:06:27 PM , Rating: 2
WHS has been available at newegg for 2 weeks now.

RE: A little late DailyTech..again.
By imaheadcase on 10/11/2007 12:09:37 PM , Rating: 2
On a side note I priced a nice WHS setup with just newegg for about $600 with 2x750gig hd.

RE: A little late DailyTech..again.
By ninjit on 10/11/2007 2:26:59 PM , Rating: 2
That sounds pretty good, care to share the contents of the cart?

RE: A little late DailyTech..again.
By Etsp on 10/11/2007 12:12:15 PM , Rating: 2
I looked for it three days ago and couldn't find it...

RE: A little late DailyTech..again.
By Etsp on 10/11/2007 12:15:40 PM , Rating: 2
Bah, it's not listed as an operating system, but rather as server software. That's why I couldn't find it

Why no $70 upgrade version?
By mcnabney on 10/11/2007 4:10:28 PM , Rating: 2
There is mention of using this on an older PC which would most likely already have XP (or NT/98) installed. Why not a cheaper upgrade version since that hardware has already had to pay the Microsoft OS tax? This software really isn't an O/S in the terms that a consumer is thinking. You aren't going to be playing Medal of Honor on it or anything. It is a dumbed down version of a five year old server platform. The only thing unique about it is the disk management. For most uses a customer would be just as happy picking up a NAS and bypassing some of the invasive DMCA quirks that Microsoft has added. I would wager that this O/S is going to be following Bob.

RE: Why no $70 upgrade version?
By Donkeyshins on 10/11/2007 4:31:13 PM , Rating: 2
Well, first of all, this is based upon the Server 2003 kernel, so your 'upgrade' from XP or NT/98 wouldn't really apply as I defy you to find a 10-license version of Server 2003 for under $190. Second, there isn't an 'OS tax' - I've been involved in the Beta and I know that the WHS team put a lot of time and effort into this product - it is more than fair market value for the R&D time invested.

For those folks who are complaining that the price is $50 too high and it would be easier and cheaper to build something similar using XP and 3rd party applications, please go ahead and do it. Then figure out how many hours it took to get a system running that does everything that WHS does. Then divide this number by 50.

That is how much your time is worth. Don't forget to mention that to your boss next time you are negotiating a pay raise.


RE: Why no $70 upgrade version?
By mcnabney on 10/11/2007 6:53:44 PM , Rating: 2
It may be based on Server 2003, but it is crippled. The value of Server 2003 licensing is based upon the commercial marketplace. It is a tool to make money. In the home setting it loses all of that value. Outlook Express = Free. Microsoft Exchange and Outlook = very expensive. Home Server is much more of an Outlook Express-like product. Based upon a more expensive product, but designed to be Cheap and simple.

I have always purchased OEM versions of NT/XP/Vista for considerably less for the hardware I assemble myself. But that is a fair price because I actually utilize the O/S in many ways every day. The Home Server O/S is only interacted with when it needs to be managed. Much like a router would need only occasional interaction. The rest of the time Home Server needs to manage only the most basic I/O requirments (this is why a $10 CPU will do). The Home Server O/S just doesn't add any value to the user's experience.

A good comparison would be a NAS, which can be purchased for a little more than the O/S cost alone.

A better comparison would be for hardware companies to build the same type of Home Server products that we are anticipating, but using Linux to save on the inflated O/S costs.

RE: Why no $70 upgrade version?
By mindless1 on 10/12/2007 5:10:56 AM , Rating: 2
LOL, I don't give a damn if it does "everything", when are the shills going to learn that it's not a competition to achieve random goals MS deems important to meet?

As for nonsense about "mention that to your boss", let's be clear on this point:

If you are so incompetent that you were piddling around not setting up a server until now, waiting for THIS product, you already should have been fired.

"Your time"? DOn't be an idiot. If you haven't yet found a solution for a fileserver before now (making this product only an additional learning curve and more time spent), you are simply a n00b trying to pass the buck and claim MS did it, and they're to blame when your inability causes problems.

Bosses don't like excuses why they need to pay again for tech that already existed. The number one complaint is excessive expenditures for hardware and OS that wasn't needed. This is a good example @ $200 per.

As for the challenge of "go ahead and do it", don't you GET IT YET? We already have, did you really think people said "oh we need a fileserver but it's not important until MS says it is and releases a custom OS for home servers"? That's just so silly!

RE: Why no $70 upgrade version?
By TomZ on 10/12/2007 6:46:04 AM , Rating: 2
Did you reply to the wrong post? I don't see how the OP said anything about not having found out about fileservers prior to WHS, or many of the other points you make.

Anyway, to address the points you make, I'll give you an example of what I have here in my home. We have 4 computers in our home, two for me, one for my wife, one for the kids. We also have a server - it's currently running Windows Server 2003R2.

On our server we have the usual stuff a family might store there - digital home photos, digitized home video, our CD collection digitized, our documents, etc. Also, I run periodic backups of the server using a USB drive connected to one of the computers.

Isn't it obvious how Windows Server is overkill for our home use, and how WHS will be much easier to manage, and give us capabilities we currently lack? For example, sure, I could turn on IIS, develop a web site to share our pics on the Internet - but that sounds like a lot of work, and WHS can do that just by enabling a switch. Also, WHS can back up our computers and possibly also eliminate our server backups as well.

WHS fits an emerging need in multi-PC households that need a central store. In our home, we recogized that need years ago, but for most folks that is just now becoming an emerging need. In addition, setting up WHS is going to be a lot simpler than putting together a Windows Server or Linux server, and WHS is going to give a lot of capabilities that are hard to emulate in a traditional file server. Because of this, I think that WHS will be pretty successful.

OEM for $190?
By mindless1 on 10/12/07, Rating: 0
RE: OEM for $190?
By TomZ on 10/12/2007 6:48:55 AM , Rating: 2
Well, all you have proved is that you are not in possession of the facts. You should read AnandTech's preview (linked in the article) if you want to know the real story about WHS - pros and cons. In the meantime, you can live in your little fantasy world of denial. Enjoy!

RE: OEM for $190?
By mindless1 on 10/13/2007 4:12:59 AM , Rating: 2
I'm not the one who thinks this is so hard that suddenly this new product matters.

Take the hint, either you know what you're doing and that makes this product years past due and of no use, or you don't and are thus unfit to judge.

RE: OEM for $190?
By TomZ on 10/13/2007 11:14:39 AM , Rating: 2
As I said to you in another post, I set up Server 2003 in order to accomplish what WHS does. In addition, WHS is going to be far easier to set up and maintain, and it gives a lot of capabilities that Server 2003 doesn't have.

Because of this, when I get around to it later this year, I'll probably set up a WHS to replace my Server 2003, at least for at home.

RE: OEM for $190?
By rsmech on 10/13/2007 11:45:52 AM , Rating: 2
You are the one needing the hint, this product is not for you. You have the knowledge. But that puts you in the minority. How many times have family or friends called you to fix something for them. It makes you feel good to help I understand, you have a better solution for them then this. But you cannot make it to everyones house who needs your help. This allows them to do it themselves. That is the point. You don't have to be as knowledgeable as yourself to implement this. People like yourself can do better, but before this others had nothing. So understand this product doesn't target your needs or anyone you help, it's everyone you cannot help this is for.

RE: OEM for $190?
By johnsonx on 10/14/2007 1:40:58 AM , Rating: 2
I do know what I'm doing, and have been doing so professionally for close to 20 years. I find this to be an interesting product for a home server. Certainly there are plenty of ways to get to a similar, or even better, result using a regular version of Windows, Linux, or even one of the smarter NAS boxes. But not everyone really wants to do it all piecemeal, even those of us who know precisely what we're doing. When it comes the computers at home, I've had enough headaches from dealing with customer computers all week that I just want things to work without much bother.

By the way, from reading dozens or perhaps hundreds of your posts, I can honestly say your nickname is quite accurate.

Whats wrong with the price???
By erikstarcher on 10/11/2007 1:12:12 PM , Rating: 2
I just looked up the cost from microsoft and it is only $7.00 more than windows xp pro so the only way it costs "way to much" is if you are not buying (or don't already have installed) a legit copy of XP Pro. It has a lot more features like network backup and restore of your other computers, remote logon and download from the internet. Yes, you can do this with xp, vista, linux or whatever your favorite os is, but it is not designed for you! It is designed for mom and pop to be able to use (not install, just use). It isn't designed for tech savy people, it is for the general population. I have been runing the beta version, hacked to look like xp with themes, directx, system restore, etc. It will do everything that XP Pro will, including play games. I don't want another computer running (4 already) so I needed to get this running on my every day machine and I love it. The only thing I would like added is the Media Center App so I could use this in place of the media center I have in my living room.

RE: Whats wrong with the price???
By Etsp on 10/11/2007 1:49:13 PM , Rating: 2
Um... if I remember correctly, the cost of XP Jumped around the time of Vista's release

Found a better price
By System48 on 10/11/2007 11:42:00 AM , Rating: 2
It's only $163.77 at

By BrownJohn on 10/11/2007 11:52:18 AM , Rating: 2
Here is a good list of things to do with your old computer:

By drunkenmastermind on 10/11/2007 7:21:00 PM , Rating: 2
1. An expletive said allowed.
2. Inner rage followed by a burst of anger.
3. A sudden launch out of my chair.
4. Stillness during the reset.
5. Despair leading to depression.
6. Hopelessness.
7. No will to live.

"If you can find a PS3 anywhere in North America that's been on shelves for more than five minutes, I'll give you 1,200 bucks for it." -- SCEA President Jack Tretton

Most Popular ArticlesAre you ready for this ? HyperDrive Aircraft
September 24, 2016, 9:29 AM
Leaked – Samsung S8 is a Dream and a Dream 2
September 25, 2016, 8:00 AM
Inspiron Laptops & 2-in-1 PCs
September 25, 2016, 9:00 AM
Snapchat’s New Sunglasses are a Spectacle – No Pun Intended
September 24, 2016, 9:02 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki