Windows 10 Anniversary update: Your Last Chance Microsoft!

There are those in my profession that would call me unprofessional.  Others might even go so far as to say I'm just a disgruntled crank festooned with the requisite tin-foil hat when it comes to Microsoft Windows 10.

Here's the thing....

I don't care what you think.  I know what I've experienced and having spent most of my working career in the field losing countless hours to the cavalcade of flaws that is a new Microsoft OS I say with confidence...

Windows 10 is not an operating system, it's a delivery mechanism predicated on a marketing strategy.

I look at Windows 10 the same way I look at car commercials.  It's full of glitz, glamour and endless marketing campaigns with the sole intent of dangling shiny objects to distract you from it's intrusive and unreliable nature.

So yes, I've used it almost exclusively for a year, accepted the endless updates, 20 minute shutdown times and random lockups.  All with the intention of giving the OS a fair shake and hey the price was right.

In the intervening year between update 1607 and the launch of Windows 10 I've used the OS enough to find virtually no compelling reason to recommend it over Windows 7 for anything but support for the OS beyond 2020.

That Microsoft is now charging a minimum of $119 for the OS is an affront considering how much of a marketing platform Windows 10 is.

There are elements in Windows 10 that depending on the version are absolutely detrimental to an enterprise environment.  For example, in older versions of Windows you could get away with using a "Pro" version of Windows in your enterprise.  Yes, there were stripped down "Enterprise" versions only available to those with a Microsoft Licensing agreement but they were few and far between in my own experience.

A PRO version could connect to a Windows domain and allowed just as much control over the user experience.  The only caveat being a bit more overhead cruft inherited from its "consumer" roots.

Today a PRO version is much the same but unlike previous versions is subject to the "consumer" OS experience.   Meaning Microsoft and not your IT department is largely in control of the desktop experience in your enterprise.

Enterprise gives you all the control you used to have with "just" a PRO version but now you have to pay a subscription fee for that privilege.

I don't like that and I've taken active measures against that strategy including using SpyBot Anti-Beacon, refusing to connect my Microsoft account to the OS and denying the allure of the Microsoft Store.

Have you noticed that I've yet to say anything compelling about Windows 10?  That's because it's not and simply put there isn't anything compelling unless you work for Microsoft's marketing department.

Windows 10 is "probably" a better OS than its predecessors but you'll likely never see the benefit for all the cruft piled on top of it.  That's where the promise of the "Enterprise" versions come in but even they have been stained by the tarnish of a consumer OS.

So with the Anniversary update this is my last stand with Windows 10.  I expect many of my issues to be addressed or I'm jumping off the boat.  I could care less about "features" if they get in the way of what I'm trying to get done.

With that in mind I've documented my latest Windows 10 experience.  That being the installation and review of Windows 10 Anniversary update 1607.

I invite you to enjoy in 20 or so minutes what took me 2 1/2 hours.

What makes Windows 10 so bad?

Windows 10 is both the most advanced and most controversial operating system ever released.  Its focus on unifying the Windows experience across a myriad of devices is laudable but the premise of its launch is suspect.

While proponents and shills of Microsoft's latest SALES platform treat such observations as the ravings of the tin foil hat crowd, a cooler head finds legitimate issues with Satya Nadella's strategy for the platform.  

Ask yourself the following questions....

Can anyone trust an operating system that constantly monitors your habits for no other purpose than to sell you something?

Is it OK to force an operating system upgrade that you don't want? 

Let me show you why I can't take Windows 10 seriously in the video below...

9 comes after 8 and that's Windows' new name

Leo Laporte may have officially proclaimed the death of Windows 8 last year but Microsoft made it official this week.  The operating system previously known as "Threshold" has a real name, "Windows 9" and a real release target, April 2015.

According to Paul Thurrott, Windows 9 is meant to be everything Windows 8 wasn't.  For one thing, the desktop will regain its prominence as will the Start Menu.  Metro 2.0, as it's called, will be somewhat deprecated as more of a windowed app instead of a GUI mandate.

The bones have been rolled and the Shaman was right, Windows 8 couldn't succeed in spite of its futuristic aspirations.  It's not that Windows 8 is a flawed operating system, it's not and its performance and security underpinnings are second to none in the Windows world.  But that GUI...That collection of pulsating tiles that consumers were forced to swipe away just to get to their email spelled doom for the Windows known as 8.

Metro isn't a bad idea and I still hold firm to the belief that one day we'll see a workforce happily swiping, typing and talking to their monitors as easily as they send a text message now.  I get it Microsoft.  You were trying to push the concept of a Kiosk operating system that was not only visually attractive but with all those annoying menu bits out of the way. 

Microsoft saw how consumers eschewed scrolling down menus and tiny keyboards on their smart devices for simple taps and swipes.  The proof still exists with the success of Apple and Android devices while Blackberry languishes for all but the most faithful.

But it didn't translate well to the office.  With a stated 25 million copies sold with most of those likely pre-installs on new PC's (whose sales numbers were already suffering,)  Windows 8 just wasn't going to fly with the bean counters.

Incompatibility with legacy applications, an interface inconsistent with current workflows and no real justification to move from windows 7.  When you consider that many businesses are still just in the throes of moving off of XP, the  picture becomes clear.

Windows 8 was an operating system ahead of its time if not its market.  Consumers may be used to scratching and tapping away at their smart devices but not their PC's.  They still expect that "legacy" experience and that translates to corporate America as well. 

That's why 8 failed, If the Fortune 1000 isn't buying it, you just have to call a Microsoft operating system dead. 

Windows 9 is a pullback from the brink.  Still, in the long run the great experiment will cost them little.  There was no upstart, no competition waiting in the wings to unseat the giant from its throne.  Apple? the enterprise is more nuisance than market to them.  Expect OSX to disappear into an API for IOS within the next 10 years.  Linux?  If corporate customers won't tolerate a tightly integrated kiosk experience they won't stomach the wild West of an open source operating system either. 

At this point the best thing Microsoft could do to advance Windows is to split the development  between consumer and business releases again.  If you want one interface across all "consumer" devices then by all means do it.  Let it grace the likes of phones, tablets and yes, consumer PC's.  Just don't try to force it down corporate America's throat.

People don't like to be forced to do anything.  They need time to get used to it.  Windows 95 brought the desktop to the next step in its evolution.  It was more about clicks than menus and command lines.  Consumers got used to that and were soon demanding the same from their business PC's.  Thus came Windows 2000 which was really just windows NT with a facelift and some beefier networking bits. 

It was all about the interface and customers both corporate and consumer asked for it.  

That's the key, consumers have to feel like it's their choice.  If they want to be told what's good for them they'll buy an IPAD.  

Windows 8 Enterprise, Don't be so serious!

A review and usage demonstration of Windows 8 Enterprise Eval.

This isn't as dull as you think it'll be...

A very good friend did this up and I did a bit of editing.

Good information about the minor quirks of Windows 8 Enterprise. Enjoy!

Part 1.

Part 2.

Windows Server 8, Microsoft's Attempt at a New Server Paradigm

Article first published as Windows Server 8, Microsoft's Attempt at a New Server Paradigm on Technorati.

Server operating system releases rarely garner much excitement outside of IT circles.  They are the necessary evil coordinating all or our messaging, file handling and online services vital for networked world.  Even if you don't spend your days in a cube for a living and prefer to store your files in the cloud there is a server somewhere making it all possible.

As such they tend to not be very sexy.  In the case of Microsoft, most server operating systems appear on the surface at least to be a stripped down purpose built version of their desktop counterparts.   At their core they are with some important differences..  The primary differentiation is that they've been optimized for better storage, memory handling and security.

Which leads us to the latest offering from Microsoft, Windows Server 8. 

Windows Server 8 Beta was released to the public on March 1st, 2012, one day after the Windows 8 consumer preview.  Hardware requirements are as follows:

Processor - Minimum: 1.4 GHz 64bit processor

Memory - Minimum: 512 MB RAM

Available Disk Space - Minimum: 32 GB

Optical Drive DVD-ROM drive

Display and Peripherals - Super VGA (800 x 600) or higher-resolution monitor

 Keyboard

 Microsoft Mouse or other compatible pointing device

Upgrade paths from Server 2008 R2 are supported with other versions of  Server 2008 allowed for the Beta release.  Microsoft makes available a 64Bit ISO and a VHD (Virtual Hard Disk) file as the installation media options.   The VHD option assumes at least Server 2003 and Microsoft Virtual server 2005 (Hyper-V).  VMWARE test installations would likely be better served by mounting the ISO as the install medium for a new VM.

As with all Beta installs, Server 8 should only be deployed in a test environment as there is no installation roll-back functionality.

There are two installation options, Server core which offers little more than a powershell window and a GUI version which adds a system manager applet similar (if not a bit gaudy) to the Server 2008 system manager.  In my use the Server Manager is functional but counterintuitive due to the haphazard  organization of the applets.  As an aside it's not very attractive either, looking much like one of those bad Powerpoint slides we've all had to suffer in a sales meeting.

Microsoft has stated that they want to move away from GUI administration tools on the actual server and instead manage server resources remotely.  That would explain the prominence of powershell and the GUI as a now secondary option for installation.

Microsoft has also touted is Hyper-V version 3.0 as a real challenger to the virtualization space currently dominated by VMWARE.  The new virtualization framework touts better support for more physical CPUs, larger storage volumes and larger RAM sizes.  Improvements in SAN performance are also claimed utilizing ODX (offloaded data transfer) which basically sends commands to the SAN directly instead of attempting to read and write data as though the storage were local.  Hyper V virtual machines are also said to support up to four virtual Fiber channel Host Bus Adapters.

Improvements to Hyper-V may be of most interest to IT departments with complex Hyper-V deployments who will appreciate support built into the management GUI.   Hyper -V also supports a new feature called  Hyper-V Replica which can be thought of as a kind of VM failover mechanism utilizing two Hyper-V VM's that are constantly kept updated. 

Improvements in Microsoft's Web Server, IIS and Remote Desktop services (Terminal Services) are also included with this latest release but what may be most striking has little to do with the dry technical stuff.  Server 8, like it's desktop cousin, has inherited the Metro Tile interface.

You'd be hard pressed to tell the difference between Microsoft Server desktops at a glance from Windows 2000 on.  Aside from tweaks to the start button they generally don't include the flash of their desktop counterparts and as such are fairly plain.

Not so with Server 8.  The Metro Tile interface has replaced the Start button/menu and includes tiles to manage the basic functions of the server.  Additional administrative tiles are available by enabling the option giving you access to most of the familiar tools any Windows admin would recognize. 

At first blush this seems like a pointless addition and more than one IT peer has balked at it especially in light of Microsoft's desire to move away from graphical interfaces.  Take a moment to consider the minimalist strategy Microsoft is now promoting, however and it makes sense. 

The desktop in Windows 8 is little more than a convenience primarily existing for backward compatibility for applications that require it.  Desktop  based applications can create a tile in Metro but will launch on the desktop instead of directly from Metro.

With the Metro tiles, senior administrators now have more control over the level of administration they allow to junior staff.  With virtually all aspects of the operating system controllable via Group policy it's not inconceivable to lock junior IT staff into only those functions they need to have with no opportunity to circumvent their limited access. 

Microsoft has not yet set a release date for Server 8 but it's likely that it will be within a few months of the desktop OS release.  Does that mean that Server 8 will replace current installations overnight?  That's unlikely considering that many companies are only now moving to Server 2008 R2 as legacy applications catch up to embrace 64 bit platforms.  In my own experience, there's generally a 2 year lag before a new server operating system starts to gain significant market share over its predecessors.  The most likely driver will be the improved virtualization for companies looking to move from VMWARE and improved resource and access management functionality.

Time will tell if Server 8 is embraced as many IT organizations chose to ignore the last Microsoft server  release,  For many IT organizations Server 2008 offered no real advantage over Server 2003 other than better 64 bit hardware support.  Many organizations also choose to skip versions which may translate into better adoption of the new server OS for IT organizations still using Server 2003.