Sign in
 
HomeWindows Server 2012Windows Server 2008 R2Windows Server 2003LibraryForums
Windows Server TechCenter >
> 
> 
Best upgrade path WHS v1

Answered Best upgrade path WHS v1

  • Sunday, August 19, 2012 5:19 PM
     
     
    Sign In to Vote
    0

    My WHS v1 is getting long in the tooth. It is host on a 3.2GHz P4 32-bit that was repurposed from a used company PC, about 9 years old. I have already purchased replacement hardware and was ready to install WHS v2 (2011) when I read articles on WeGotServed about using Windows 8. Now to confuse the issue even more there is Windows Server Essentials 2012. So I have some question that may help me decide:

    1. Will WSE2012 be included in the TechNet subscription?
    2. Will I be able to upgrade the beta to the full version?
    3. Can I merely copy my files from WHS v1 onto WSE2012 shares?
    4. Will all the clients need to have Window 8 installed?
    5. Will there be an update on TechNet to upgrade Windows 7 to 8?
    6. Is WSE2012 the best solution for a home system? (I was an admin 14 years ago.)
     

All Replies

  • Sunday, August 19, 2012 5:35 PM
     
     
    Sign In to Vote
    1

    My view, nothing official:

    1. Probably but not for a production environment as per your agreement with Microsoft.
    2. Upgrade "No" (undesirable anyway as a fresh install is better) - Migrate "Yes".
    3. If you have both Servers available, "Yes".
    4. No, Win 7 also.
    5. No idea.
    6. Probably not as it sets up a Domain which is overkill for home but it has other benefits over say WHS2011 (which incidentally is still supported until 2016) - you need to look at your requirements and choose the most appropriate for your needs including price (WHS - $50, WS2012E - $425).

    Phil P.S. If you find my comment helpful or if it answers your question, please mark it as such.

     
  • Monday, August 20, 2012 12:46 AM
     
     
    Sign In to Vote
    0
    Why not put WHS v1 on the new hardware?  If it does what you need, stay with it; I am.

    --
    ______________
     
    BullDawg
    In God We Trust
    ______________

    My WHS v1 is getting long in the tooth. It is host on a 3.2GHz P4 32-bit that was repurposed from a used company PC, about 9 years old. I have already purchased replacement hardware and was ready to install WHS v2 (2011) when I read articles on WeGotServed about using Windows 8. Now to confuse the issue even more there is Windows Server Essentials 2012. So I have some question that may help me decide:

    1. Will WSE2012 be included in the TechNet subscription?
    2. Will I be able to upgrade the beta to the full version?
    3. Can I merely copy my files from WHS v1 onto WSE2012 shares?
    4. Will all the clients need to have Window 8 installed?
    5. Will there be an update on TechNet to upgrade Windows 7 to 8?
    6. Is WSE2012 the best solution for a home system? (I was an admin 14 years ago.)
    BullDawg
     
  • Monday, August 20, 2012 3:02 PM
    Moderator
     
     
    Sign In to Vote
    0
    Why not put WHS v1 on the new hardware?  If it does what you need, stay with it; I am.

    --
    ______________
    BullDawg
    In God We Trust
    ______________
    BullDawg

    The problem with that is that mainstream support ends on January 8, 2013.  Sure it will continue to work after that, but do you want to continue to use a product that is no longer supported?
     
  • Monday, August 20, 2012 3:34 PM
     
     Answered
    Sign In to Vote
    1
    WHS v1 is OEM, and Microsoft never provided support.  Besides, security updates will continue through July 2015.  The Connector installs fine on Win 8.  It backs up Win 8 and is not limited to 2 TB for backups as WHS 2011 is.  I can easily add drives to the storage pool.  Unlike Windows 2012 Essentials, removal of a drive from the storage pool is very easy. 
     
    Sure its built on Server 2003R2, but the team that built WHS v1 around server 2003 did a heck of a better job than the WHS 2011 team did on server 2008.
     
    WHS v1 is on its third set of hardware for me.  Each time I upgraded my hardware, I considered WHS 2011 and just recently Window 2012 Essentials, but each time WHS v1 won out.
     
    And best of all, its paid for!
     
    By the time security updates run out in 2015, I most likely will be on a non MS Home Server solution.

    --
    ______________
     
    BullDawg
    In God We Trust
    ______________
    Why not put WHS v1 on the new hardware?  If it does what you need, stay with it; I am.

    --
    ______________
    BullDawg
    In God We Trust
    ______________
    BullDawg

    The problem with that is that mainstream support ends on January 8, 2013.  Sure it will continue to work after that, but do you want to continue to use a product that is no longer supported?
    BullDawg
     
  • Monday, August 20, 2012 5:55 PM
     
     
    Sign In to Vote
    0
    How do you get over the OEM limitation of the software license being tied to a single set of hardware?

    Phil P.S. If you find my comment helpful or if it answers your question, please mark it as such.

     
  • Tuesday, August 21, 2012 1:58 AM
     
     
    Sign In to Vote
    0
    It has always activated on the Internet, except for one time when my Internet connection was dropping.  I punch in the product key, install, and it activates.  I bought WHS from Newegg as soon as it was available after RTM.  Keep in mind, there have been long periods between activations, more than a year each time, but I doubt if that has anything to do with it.   While the motherboard has changed, the NIC and most of the hard drives have remained the same.  The system/boot drive has never changed.  The hardware algorithm has always been a mystery to me; on other desktops, I change out a lot of items and no reactivation required.  On another, install a new video card, the driver for it,  and "boom" reactivation is required.
    --
    ______________
     
    BullDawg
    In God We Trust
    ______________
    How do you get over the OEM limitation of the software license being tied to a single set of hardware?

    Phil P.S. If you find my comment helpful or if it answers your question, please mark it as such.

    BullDawg
     
  • Wednesday, August 22, 2012 2:30 PM
     
     
    Sign In to Vote
    0

    I'm with BullDawg.

    WHS v.1 security updates will continue through July 2015 and it works fine with W8 clients. 

    I just wrote a list of pro's and cons for each system (WHS v.1, 2011 and 2012) to include what was important factors and with a weighting of importance to me such as price, add-ins available, ease of use, etc etc and each time I reviewed the new OS...WHS v.1 won out on almost all individual counts and by a long way once I'd factored in weighting the importance.

    I'll use this same approach for any WHS v.1 replacement....I will soon do it with W8 as I am considering if W8 with some extra non-MS software can replicate all the functionality of WHS v.1 as first suggested here: http://www.wegotserved.com/2012/07/03/building-windows-8-home-server-introduction/

     
  • Wednesday, August 22, 2012 3:12 PM
     
     
    Sign In to Vote
    0
    Unlike Windows 2012 Essentials, removal of a drive from the storage pool is very easy. 

    What is difficult about "..simply remove a physical disk within the pool, and add a different (perhaps larger) one"?

    Quotation taken from the Storage Spaces FAQ.

    Phil P.S. If you find my comment helpful or if it answers your question, please mark it as such.

     
  • Wednesday, August 22, 2012 3:45 PM
    Moderator
     
     Answered
    Sign In to Vote
    0
    What is difficult about "..simply remove a physical disk within the pool, and add a different (perhaps larger) one"?

    Quotation taken from the Storage Spaces FAQ.

    Phil P.S. If you find my comment helpful or if it answers your question, please mark it as such.

    There is one big difference between DE and SS:  with DE you can remove a drive from the pool even if you're not using duplication on any shares.  SS you can't do that (you pull a drive from a simple SS array and your array is gone).  (And, in my opinion, the method described in the Essentials FAQ to "upgrade" hard drives, while it should work, is pretty dumb for MS to even suggest as, by definition, you are "degrading" your storage pool for a period of time when you do that.)

    Ideally, what I would like to see is the ability to add and remove drives from the block-based storage pool (which is what DE v2 was before it got canned).  Of course, that's not going to happen this time around (maybe in Server 9 :)  )

     
  • Wednesday, August 22, 2012 4:41 PM
     
     
    Sign In to Vote
    0

    I agree for a simple array (but why would you) and yes, the instructions for SS do seem a little strange. However if you had a 2 disk array in either system the following would occur to replace one disk with another:

    • With DE, you tell it you want to remove a drive and if there is enough space it will copy the data on that drive to the remaining single disk - you are then in danger of data loss should it fail (but you have a backup anyway). You then add the new disk and the array is rebuilt, going back to your original level of resiliency.
    • With SS you pull out a disk and you are immediately at risk and are warned of the situation. Add in the new disk and the array is rebuilt.

    I don't see, in this scenario a difference in risk of data loss between the two. Actually in practice, space permitting, you would always add the new disk first. As I recall, DE only protects against a single disk failure while SS is more resilient and brings the advantages of ReFS also.

    Having said all that, I still find the act of pushing a software button to start the replacement process preferable to physically removing a drive!

    Phil P.S. If you find my comment helpful or if it answers your question, please mark it as such.



     
  • Thursday, August 23, 2012 12:50 AM
    Moderator
     
     Answered
    Sign In to Vote
    0

    I agree for a simple array (but why would you) and yes, the instructions for SS do seem a little strange. However if you had a 2 disk array in either system the following would occur to replace one disk with another:

    • With DE, you tell it you want to remove a drive and if there is enough space it will copy the data on that drive to the remaining single disk - you are then in danger of data loss should it fail (but you have a backup anyway). You then add the new disk and the array is rebuilt, going back to your original level of resiliency.
    • With SS you pull out a disk and you are immediately at risk and are warned of the situation. Add in the new disk and the array is rebuilt.

    I don't see, in this scenario a difference in risk of data loss between the two. Actually in practice, space permitting, you would always add the new disk first. As I recall, DE only protects against a single disk failure while SS is more resilient and brings the advantages of ReFS also.

    Having said all that, I still find the act of pushing a software button to start the replacement process preferable to physically removing a drive!

    Phil P.S. If you find my comment helpful or if it answers your question, please mark it as such.



    Simple array:  I will do a simple array for Videos (I don't want to waste doubling my server space for movies, that, if were to be lost, could be replaced).  (Besides, I wouldn't mind some of them getting "lost" as it is right now anyway.  :)  )

    Yes, I agree that in a duplicated environment (WHS) and a mirrored environment (Essentials), the risk is similar by removing a drive first.  But keep in mind, you pull a drive from WHS and you can still read it in another PC (it's regular NTFS) so you won't suffer complete data loss if a drive fails before the "rebuild" (actually just a copy) is complete.  With SS, you can't do that (if a drive fails after you have already pulled one, you lose everything in that pool, unless you are using a three-way mirror).

    Really, what the FAQ should have said is exactly what you said:  add a drive first (in this case, a "hot spare") so that once an "old" drive is pulled, the rebuild will automatically occur.

     
  • Thursday, August 23, 2012 6:03 AM
     
     
    Sign In to Vote
    0
    Another thing Phil, you have to pay $425 to lose the ability to push that button!

    --
    ______________
     
    BullDawg
    In God We Trust
    ______________

    I agree for a simple array (but why would you) and yes, the instructions for SS do seem a little strange. However if you had a 2 disk array in either system the following would occur to replace one disk with another:

    • With DE, you tell it you want to remove a drive and if there is enough space it will copy the data on that drive to the remaining single disk - you are then in danger of data loss should it fail (but you have a backup anyway). You then add the new disk and the array is rebuilt, going back to your original level of resiliency.
    • With SS you pull out a disk and you are immediately at risk and are warned of the situation. Add in the new disk and the array is rebuilt.

    I don't see, in this scenario a difference in risk of data loss between the two. Actually in practice, space permitting, you would always add the new disk first. As I recall, DE only protects against a single disk failure while SS is more resilient and brings the advantages of ReFS also.

    Having said all that, I still find the act of pushing a software button to start the replacement process preferable to physically removing a drive!

    Phil P.S. If you find my comment helpful or if it answers your question, please mark it as such.



    BullDawg
     
  • Thursday, August 23, 2012 6:22 AM
     
     
    Sign In to Vote
    0

    I agree that WHS v1 is on balance a superior solution to WHS 2011 with respect to storage management and client backup.  WHS 2011's lack of drive pooling, data resiliency, and the 2Tb limitations are issues for me even though I have work-arounds. Heck, I don't even use remote media streaming, which for many was a big reason to upgrade.

    However, a limitation with WHS v1 is the lack of support for advanced format disks. This means that only certain 2Tb or larger disks can be used safely. I currently have a mix of 2Tb drives, only some of which support work-arounds for Windows XP-based operating systems.  Also, file sharing in WHS 2011 has worked better and more reliably for me than in WHS v1 (it's faster overall, has lower latency for streaming media, and no odd slowdowns and lock-ups using offline files on the client).  Finally, the DLNA features of WHS 2011 are superior (though there are 3rd party products that can run on WHS v1 and do a good job).

    So there are pros and cons.

    Price notwithstanding, WSE 2012 seems like it would be a perfect replacement product if it did not impose a domain controller on your home network.


    • Edited by Gary Voth Thursday, August 23, 2012 6:23 AM
    •  
     
  • Thursday, August 23, 2012 2:31 PM
    Moderator
     
     
    Sign In to Vote
    0

    I agree that WHS v1 is on balance a superior solution to WHS 2011 with respect to storage management and client backup.  WHS 2011's lack of drive pooling, data resiliency, and the 2Tb limitations are issues for me even though I have work-arounds. Heck, I don't even use remote media streaming, which for many was a big reason to upgrade.

    However, a limitation with WHS v1 is the lack of support for advanced format disks. This means that only certain 2Tb or larger disks can be used safely. I currently have a mix of 2Tb drives, only some of which support work-arounds for Windows XP-based operating systems.  Also, file sharing in WHS 2011 has worked better and more reliably for me than in WHS v1 (it's faster overall, has lower latency for streaming media, and no odd slowdowns and lock-ups using offline files on the client).  Finally, the DLNA features of WHS 2011 are superior (though there are 3rd party products that can run on WHS v1 and do a good job).

    So there are pros and cons.

    Price notwithstanding, WSE 2012 seems like it would be a perfect replacement product if it did not impose a domain controller on your home network.


    Even the DC "issue" isn't really an issue.  Once you install the Connector software on a Pro OS or higher client, you can remove the client from the domain and put it back into a workgroup.  Everything I've tested still works (the only thing I haven't tested is to use RDC to connect to a client within the LAN from outside your home network via Remote Access, and now that I got my RWA set up issue resolved, I'll test that - as soon as I get the RC version of Essentials installed).

    I think the biggest hurdle for most WHS people is the $425 (it's just not in the "home server" price range, considering WHS v1 was $180 when it first came out and WHS 2011 is currently $50).



     
  • Thursday, August 23, 2012 7:35 PM
    Moderator
     
     
    Sign In to Vote
    0
    Even the DC "issue" isn't really an issue.  Once you install the Connector software on a Pro OS or higher client, you can remove the client from the domain and put it back into a workgroup.  Everything I've tested still works (the only thing I haven't tested is to use RDC to connect to a client within the LAN from outside your home network via Remote Access, and now that I got my RWA set up issue resolved, I'll test that - as soon as I get the RC version of Essentials installed).

    I think the biggest hurdle for most WHS people is the $425 (it's just not in the "home server" price range, considering WHS v1 was $180 when it first came out and WHS 2011 is currently $50).

    I just tested using the Remote Access website to login to a Windows 8 Pro with WMC workstation that had been removed from the domain.  It still works, although you have to "login" twice after selecting the client to connect to.  The first login is to login to the domain itself (and where you have to manually type in the internal domain name as part of the username, such as <domainname>\<username>) while the second login is to login to the client.
     
  • Friday, August 24, 2012 5:50 AM
     
     
    Sign In to Vote
    0

    I hope the DC issue is even less of an issue if MS makes it optional for clients to join the domain. I don't need the domain controller, but do want storage spaces.

    Storage spaces question...Is there no wizard/automated guide like in WHSv1 which walked you through the adding or removing of the drives?

     
  • Friday, August 24, 2012 6:13 AM
    Moderator
     
     
    Sign In to Vote
    0

    I hope the DC issue is even less of an issue if MS makes it optional for clients to join the domain. I don't need the domain controller, but do want storage spaces.

    Storage spaces question...Is there no wizard/automated guide like in WHSv1 which walked you through the adding or removing of the drives?

    Yes, there is a wizard of sorts in the Dashboard.  However, you can't "remove" drives like you can with WHS (or, at least not very easily, see my discussion with Phil Harrison above).  The only drives that can be removed from a storage pool through the Dashboard Storage Spaces tool are empty drives (which means, unless you JUST added the drive, you probably can't remove it through the Dashboard as the drive won't be empty).

     
  • Friday, August 24, 2012 9:11 AM
     
     
    Sign In to Vote
    0
    I have submitted a suggestion via Feedback.  Please up vote if you deem it worthy.
     
     
    Thanks

    --
    ______________
     
    BullDawg
    In God We Trust
    ______________

    I hope the DC issue is even less of an issue if MS makes it optional for clients to join the domain. I don't need the domain controller, but do want storage spaces.

    Storage spaces question...Is there no wizard/automated guide like in WHSv1 which walked you through the adding or removing of the drives?

    Yes, there is a wizard of sorts in the Dashboard.  However, you can't "remove" drives like you can with WHS (or, at least not very easily, see my discussion with Phil Harrison above).  The only drives that can be removed from a storage pool through the Dashboard Storage Spaces tool are empty drives (which means, unless you JUST added the drive, you probably can't remove it through the Dashboard as the drive won't be empty).

    BullDawg
     
  • Friday, August 24, 2012 2:26 PM
     
     
    Sign In to Vote
    0
    Thanks Kariya21 for your response and thanks BullDawg for submitting the Feedback suggestion. I had high hopes for Storage Spaces at one time. Now I'm not so sure.
     
  • Monday, October 22, 2012 12:47 PM
     
     
    Sign In to Vote
    0

    Why not put WHS v1 on the new hardware?  If it does what you need, stay with it; I am.

    --
    ______________
    BullDawg
    In God We Trust
    ______________
    BullDawg


    The problem with that is that mainstream support ends on January 8, 2013.  Sure it will continue to work after that, but do you want to continue to use a product that is no longer supported?

    I've read somewhere that Windows 8 systems based on UEFI system boards (as opposed to traditional BIOS system boards) won't be backed up with WHS V1 (or 2011). So if you have a mixed bag of systems (Win XP, Vista, 7, 8/BIOS, 8/UEFI) neither WHS v1, WHS 2011 nor WS2012E can be used to backup all of them?

    L8r, Henk
     
  • Monday, October 22, 2012 3:11 PM
     
     
    Sign In to Vote
    0

    I've read somewhere that Windows 8 systems based on UEFI system boards (as opposed to traditional BIOS system boards) won't be backed up with WHS V1 (or 2011). So if you have a mixed bag of systems (Win XP, Vista, 7, 8/BIOS, 8/UEFI) neither WHS v1, WHS 2011 nor WS2012E can be used to backup all of them? L8r, Henk

    It's not a UEFI board that is the problem, it's if the disk is formatted as GPT (which is needed if you are booting from a partition >2GB - for which you need a UEFI board) rather than MBR. This is not just a Windows 8 issue. I agree, there is not one Microsoft solution that will back up all those clients.

    Phil P.S. If you find my comment helpful or if it answers your question, please mark it as such.


     
  • Monday, October 22, 2012 5:47 PM
     
     
    Sign In to Vote
    0
    Actually, Phil, UEFI boot requires a GPT disk to boot from. So a UEFI-only motherboard will be a problem.

    I'm not on the WHS team, I just post a lot. :)

     
  • Monday, October 22, 2012 6:13 PM
     
     
    Sign In to Vote
    0
    Agreed, but you can boot from a UEFI motherboard with a MBR disk and that can be successfully backed up on WHS2011.

    Phil P.S. If you find my comment helpful or if it answers your question, please mark it as such.

     
  • Tuesday, October 23, 2012 7:27 AM
     
     
    Sign In to Vote
    0

    Thanks guys for your answers but they left me a little confused. Ken says you can only boot UEFI motherboard systems from GPT disks, Phil agrees but at the same time says you can still boot from MBR disks on UEFI?? Am I missing something? (Phil, I think you meant booting from > 2 TB disks?)

    I am going to replace my last XP desktop with a new Windows 8 system shortly and I want to upgrade both may sons netbook (7 Starter, BIOS) and his rather new desktop (7 Home, BIOS, 128) to Win 8. My wife’s laptop hast Vista Home but I won’t upgrade her system to 8 because it is too old. And she won’t replace her laptop to a new system with 8 before she finishes her study sometime in the middle of next year.

    So if I want to backup all those systems I’ll have to avoid WS2012E for the time being (due to the Vista laptop) and stick to my WHS v1. I also have to avoid UEFI (due to WHS v1). What good does UEFI for Win 8 (and 7) anyway, apart from being able to boot from > 2 TB disks (which I won’t because my boot disk will be SSD).

    I am also considering a Win RT tablet (Surface, if Microsoft will release it in the Netherlands) and I realise I won’t be able to backup that system with WHS v1 (nor does it backup my Nokia Lumia 800 –WP7.5-). Will WS2012E backup Win RT tablets (and WP8 devices)?

    Maybe I should consider a “long” transition time with both WHS v1 (for legacy systems) and WS2012E (for new systems).


    L8r, Henk
    • Edited by Henk Bollen Tuesday, October 23, 2012 7:28 AM signature
    •  
     
  • Tuesday, October 23, 2012 11:59 AM
     
     
    Sign In to Vote
    1

    I think Ken is referring to a UEFI boot rather than just having a UEFI capable motherboard? My ASUS P8Z77 is a UEFI motherboard, boots from a MBR disk <2TB (SSD) and is successfully backed up on WHS2011.

    Release notes for WHS2011 states:

    "The Windows Home Server 2011 client computer backup features do not support the use of GPT hard disks

    If a client computer is running Windows Home Server 2011, and it has a hard disk that is configured to use the GUID Partition Table (GPT) format, you cannot use back up or restore data from the operating system, individual files, or folders on that computer. However, you can restore individual files or folders from other computers to a client computer that uses GPT formatting.

    In the event that a client computer is configured to use GPT hard disks, you must employ an alternative method to back up or restore that computer."

    Phil P.S. If you find my comment helpful or if it answers your question, please mark it as such.

     
  • Tuesday, October 23, 2012 3:44 PM
     
     
    Sign In to Vote
    0

    My 2€ again....

    In my view WHS v.1 is far superior to 2001/2012 given price/add-in support etc. BUT...for me that's because it supports all my devices (and I can control my house, control the server from my phone..etc.etc).

    So stick with it if it supports your environment. I may move some clients to Surface tablet or other devices but by then the cloud will be a better place for data.

    The OS is becoming redundant.

    If all your docs were available via Skydrive on any device (please MS release Office for Android!) then traditional PC backup and even the concept of having a server in the home is redundant. I think this is why MS have taken the approach they have.

    Time to move beyond traditional support options and move towards device independant solutions with data sync'd to whatever you use to access it....if only the apps were there

     
  • Wednesday, October 24, 2012 12:34 PM
     
     
    Sign In to Vote
    0

    @ Phil: So WHS 2011 does backup MBR drives on UEFI motherboards, and WHS v1?

    @ Samalama: I agree there is a shift towards cloud computing, but … Skydrive doesn’t let me store all my music, pictures and video’s there (simply not enough space). And my TV won’t connect to Skydrive to play those media files. It does however connect to my home server’s media connect option.

    My Nokia Lumia 800 (Windows Phone) does have Office ;-)