PDA

View Full Version : Slimserver on Microsoft Windows Home Server OS?



TiredLegs
2007-04-19, 14:49
Anybody here know if Slimserver will run on the forthcoming Microsoft "Windows Home Server" OS? http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/winfamily/windowshomeserver/default.mspx

Paul_B
2007-04-19, 19:05
It can't see why it shouldn't as WHS is based on Windows 2003 server. However, I have just been accepted on the WHS beta programme and will be installing it shortly so can confirm then.

ctbarker32
2007-04-19, 19:28
I've installed it on the previous beta and it seemed to run fine. I didn't do much testing. I have re-purposed that particular machine so I can't add any other details.

-CB

jmschnur
2007-04-20, 13:07
Is 6.5.1 compatible with Beta 2 of Windows Home Server. If so how does one install on the WHS platform?

I will put off instaling for a while under I hear some user feedback.


__________________
Joel

teq
2007-04-23, 05:22
Is 6.5.1 compatible with Beta 2 of Windows Home Server. If so how does one install on the WHS platform?

I will put off instaling for a while under I hear some user feedback.


__________________
Joel

Hi,

I installed 6.5.1 on the latest Windows Home Server Beta (I joined the Beta this weekend). Slimserver installs exactly the same way as on XP. The features seem to be exactly the same, apart from the ability to automatically start at system start (vs. at login) - though maybe this option already existetd earlier, and I simply never have noticed it. So far no problems, but also no real reason to use Home Server as compared to normal XP (from a Slimserver perspective, that is).

Compared to a Linux installation (I set up Slimserver on Ubuntu 6.04 Server a few weeks ago), setting up Slimserver on Windows Home Server is a lot easier (don't need to worry about Samba settings, UTF-8 vs. ISO-settings, configuring the firewall correctly, etc.), i.e., the total process of installing Windows Home Server and Slimserver up and running took me approximately 1,5 hours. Performance seems to be not quite as good, at least Slimserver's web interface seems less "snappy".

I haven't made up my mind yet whether I will continue to use Windows Home Server (and eventually purchase it) or not. As stated, from a pure Slimserver perspective, it doesn't make sense to use it because it doesn't seem to have any advantage over XP. I need to play around more with the other features, although at the moment the main selling points seems the backup functionality.

Cheers,

teq

byKnight
2007-04-27, 10:51
I'm having good results too with SlimServer on WHS (CTP release).

j.e.f.f
2007-05-03, 05:42
I mentioned this in another post.

I'm having goof results with SS on WHS CTP, except when using the stream.mp3 feature to stream music to a software player like WinAMP. It works fine for all formats except WMA.

I've tried 6.5.0, 6.5.1, and May 2nd's compile of 6.5.2. I've tried replacing socketwrapper.exe, and I've tried enabling windows media services oj the server, but WMA's just don't get transcoded.

Thoughts?

Paul_B
2007-05-03, 13:16
I am really not sure about Windows Home Server. Conceptually it has potential. But I can't help thinking it is a re-packaging of Windows Small Business Server (SBS is very evident on WHS). Windows 2003 is now virtually at the end of its life and Longhorn is due for release at the end of the year.

If WHS were based on Longhorn Core then I would be a lot more interested

IPGuy
2007-05-26, 09:14
Problem with being based on Longhorn core is that is supposed to be entirely 64bit, while many OEMs and DIYers need to be able to set WHS boxes up on older/cheaper CPUs.

byKnight
2007-05-27, 08:29
Problem with being based on Longhorn core is that is supposed to be entirely 64bit, while many OEMs and DIYers need to be able to set WHS boxes up on older/cheaper CPUs.

Exactly. WHS doesn't need a bleeding-edge box. It works well on old stuff, as well as low-power newer stuff.

JJZolx
2007-05-27, 10:48
Exactly. WHS doesn't need a bleeding-edge box. It works well on old stuff, as well as low-power newer stuff.

I wasn't aware that WHS was being sold to anyone except OEMs, so installing it on 'old stuff' (or 'newer stuff' for that matter) may not be an option for anyone. Buying a WHS storage server from HP and other OEMs may.

IPGuy
2007-05-27, 19:30
A. Microsoft has announced that it will sell a "OEM" version for small volume vendors and DIYers, so anyone should be able to pick up a copy at NewEgg or the like.

B. Even for WHS hardware vendors, some cheap setups will likely use PIII class, Celeron, or VIA C7 processors, not 64-bit AMD or Intel Core CPUs.

Studio_Two
2007-06-18, 04:27
I have been storing my media files on a Linkstation (and running SlimServer on my PC).

WHS looks like a great option ...

IPGuy
2007-06-21, 22:34
As network storage(fileshares) and running slimserver goes, its really no better or easier than a generic NAS or linux box. Where it really shines is (1) remote access and (2) seamless backups for windows PCs in the house.

Paul_B
2007-06-22, 00:12
I am not really sure what Microsoft are upto with WHS. The current version is built on Windows 2003 Server which is almost at the end of its life. The setup and general operation is straight from Small Business Server (SBS) with a some additional customisation.

I would think that this product would suit a Longhorn Core implementation much better. Then the hardware requirment drops significantly and would suit fanless systems that could live in the living room.

woodp
2007-07-04, 11:33
Hi,

I installed 6.5.1 on the latest Windows Home Server Beta (I joined the Beta this weekend). Slimserver installs exactly the same way as on XP. The features seem to be exactly the same, apart from the ability to automatically start at system start (vs. at login) - though maybe this option already existed earlier, and I simply never have noticed it. So far no problems, but also no real reason to use Home Server as compared to normal XP (from a Slimserver perspective, that is).

Compared to a Linux installation (I set up Slimserver on Ubuntu 6.04 Server a few weeks ago), setting up Slimserver on Windows Home Server is a lot easier (don't need to worry about Samba settings, UTF-8 vs. ISO-settings, configuring the firewall correctly, etc.), i.e., the total process of installing Windows Home Server and Slimserver up and running took me approximately 1,5 hours. Performance seems to be not quite as good, at least Slimserver's web interface seems less "snappy".

Similar experiences here, although I migrated from CentOS (and the Linux perl, mysql, and permission problems) to WHS RC-1. The 6.5.2 installation was uneventful and my favorite Sirius Radio plug-in (yes, that's a plug!) is working in the background.

I'm pretty impressed with WHS and SlimServer!