locked
There will be an RSAT version for Server 2012 that runs on Windows 7, right? RRS feed

  • Question

  • RSAT For Windows 7 doesn't support Server 2012 according to the download page:

    http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=7887

    Remote Server Administration Tools for Windows® 7 with SP1 enables IT administrators to manage roles and features that are installed on computers that are running Windows Server® 2008 R2, Windows Server® 2008, or Windows Server® 2003, from a remote computer that is running Windows 7 or Windows 7 with SP1.

    While the only RSAT version that does support Server 2012 only runs on Windows 8!:

    http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=28972

    Remote Server Administration Tools for Windows 8 enables IT administrators to manage roles and features that are installed on computers that are running Windows Server 2012 from a remote computer that is running Windows 8.

    Now what, is this the permanent state of things? Will there a be an RSAT that supports Server 2012 and runs on Win7 or not? Windows 8 is not exactly well loved among the admins, requiring Windows 8 for the newest RSAT won't fly well guys...

    Friday, September 14, 2012 7:13 PM

All replies

  • +1

    Couldn't agree more on this.


    I do not represent the organisation I work for, all the opinions expressed here are my own.

    This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties or guarantees and confers no rights.

    - .... .- -. -.- ... --..-- ... .- -. - --- ... ....

    Friday, September 14, 2012 8:56 PM
  • "Windows 8 is not exactly well loved among the admins, requiring Windows 8 for the newest RSAT won't fly well guys.."

    Absolutely agree 1000%. Aside from the Microsoft MVP's and employees that post "Windows 8 is perfect, you are using it wrong if you disagree. Please tell your users to memorize 20 Windows key shortcuts or use PowerShell that they never had to do before to make sense of anything. No, we're not getting rid of Metro" responses on these forums, Windows 8 on the desktop is a complete flop as far as I can tell for administration. If I ignore the Modern UI, it's kind of usable, but a bit more of a pain than Windows 7. The single-windowed Metro "by design" view choice makes me want to chuck my computer out the window as it is impossible to get anything done without resorting to single-tasking, which is the bane to most admins and many power users.

    Please, when will the Windows Server 2012 RSAT tools for Windows 7 be released?

    • Edited by ABCFED Friday, September 14, 2012 9:45 PM
    Friday, September 14, 2012 9:36 PM
  • This needs to happen.
    Saturday, September 15, 2012 7:53 PM
  • +1


    Saturday, September 15, 2012 7:59 PM
  • Hi,

    So far, Remote Server Administration Tools for Windows 8 can be installed ONLY on computers that are running Windows 8.

    Regards,

    Yan Li


    Yan Li

    TechNet Community Support


    • Edited by Yan Li_ Wednesday, September 19, 2012 1:26 AM
    Tuesday, September 18, 2012 7:58 AM
  • Hi,

    So far, Remote Server Administration Tools for Windows 8 can be installed ONLY on computers that are running Windows 8.



    We know that. And that's exactly the problem!
    Wednesday, September 19, 2012 6:22 PM
  • I agree as well, it is ridiculous to think an administrator that may be managing both Windows Server 2008 (or older) and Windows Server 2012 needs to upgrade to that god aweful "Metro UI". I think this will become another Vista flush if they don't start thinking about the very people who put them where they are "the Windows Administrators".

    Tuesday, September 25, 2012 2:15 PM
  • "Windows 8 is not exactly well loved among the admins, requiring Windows 8 for the newest RSAT won't fly well guys.."

    Absolutely agree 1000%. Aside from the Microsoft MVP's and employees that post "Windows 8 is perfect, you are using it wrong if you disagree. Please tell your users to memorize 20 Windows key shortcuts or use PowerShell that they never had to do before to make sense of anything. No, we're not getting rid of Metro" responses on these forums, Windows 8 on the desktop is a complete flop as far as I can tell for administration. If I ignore the Modern UI, it's kind of usable, but a bit more of a pain than Windows 7. The single-windowed Metro "by design" view choice makes me want to chuck my computer out the window as it is impossible to get anything done without resorting to single-tasking, which is the bane to most admins and many power users.

    Please, when will the Windows Server 2012 RSAT tools for Windows 7 be released?

    I'm an Microsoft MVP, and due to the enforcement to Metro and removal of classic start menu I share the opinion, that Windows 8/Server 2012 are too far from being perfect and that Microsoft is at fault with that decision.

    That's however my personal opinion, and others may have different opinions.

    If there is no support for RSAT tools on Windows 7, you may have to declare a real or virtual Windows Server 2012 as your administrative workstation as workaround.

    Far from perfect, but not supporting RSAT for S2012 on Windows 7 would fit too well into the current schema to destroy, what makes Windows 7 desktop that successful (i.e. removal of Gadgets from Windows 7 instead of fixing the security issue behind them and removing features like Aero, Flip3D and such from Windows 8).

    Best greetings from Germany
    Olaf

    Tuesday, September 25, 2012 3:06 PM
  • I agree with the sentiment, though my reasoning differs. I haven't installed Windows 8 Enterprise yet, so I'm neutral on the user experience - as either a "normal" user or an IT professional.

    What I can say is that as an enterprise that has been on Windows 7 since January 2010, there's no way we're going to move off the platform within the next two years at least. This isn't just a software decision, but also a hardware one, as we operate off a three year leasing cycle and it would take that subsequent year or two to even have rotated out enough of the fleet to consider the option.

    Giving this some context, I am not going to be running a machine radically departed from the SOE environment, as my team is the final escalation point the business has for issues that level 1 and 2 can't resolve. I can't very well do that from Windows 8.

    Putting these two considerations together, you could suggest that I install Windows 8 and then virtualise a Windows 7 guest. It's not a great suggestion as I'm not then really running a like-for-like system when compared to the SOE fleet. However, even more importantly, the fleet machines do not support SLAT (as per this CPU reference chart where it's listed as Intel EPT), meaning I couldn't run a virtual machine in Hyper-V on Windows 8 if I wanted to, and this right here is the crux of the issue.

    Unlike our desktop fleet, our server environment is largely virtualised, meaning we could go to Windows 2012 at any point in time. Yet where does that leave us from an administrative perspective? Simple: in an untennable situation. It couldn't be worse timing, either, as we are/were taking a serious look at Hyper-V 2012 with a view to moving across from vSphere 4.

    It's on the verge of being comical, but the lack of administrative tools for Windows 7 is having a very real impact on our ability to responsibly roll out Windows 2012 - particularly as we're a heavy user of the Server Core platform. I would have though more would have been done to promote early adoption of Server 2012.

    We can, if it's deemed financially worthwhile, set up a Server 2012 machine with the RDS role and manage servers from that, but apart from costing real money, it's crude. Most of us are busily running Powershell/WMI/COM scripts and various MMCs against multiple servers from our desktops all day long.

    I'm not particularly disappointed as I understand the reasoning behind it. I just felt it was worth contributing that the theory hasn't worked in anyone's benefit from a practical viewpoint now that both Windows 8 and Server 2012 are actually here. Orphaniing Windows 7 as an administrative client so soon feels to me like an oversight.

    Cheers,
    Lain

    Saturday, September 29, 2012 4:10 AM
  • Hi,

    For consoles that haven't changed, it does work to connect to a Server 2012 computer using Windows 7 RSAT. Obviously this isn't recommended and I haven't run extensive tests, but I did find that I was able to load (for example) the DNS MMC on Windows 7 and provision a Server 2012 computer. 

    However, any console that is integrated with the new version of Server Manager in 2012 requires Windows 8 RSAT because you have to actually run the Win8 version of Server Manager, which Windows 7 doesn't know about.

    -Greg

    Monday, October 1, 2012 8:20 AM
  • RSAT has always followed the operating system release:

    Server 2008 --> Vista RSAT

    Server 2008 R2 --> Win7 RSAT

    Server 2012 --> Win8 RSAT

    I have not heard of any plans to release a supported version of the Win8 RSAT tools for Windows 7.


    --Joseph [MSFT] http://blogs.technet.com/b/joscon/

    Monday, October 1, 2012 4:51 PM
  • RSAT has always followed the operating system release:

    I have not heard of any plans to release a supported version of the Win8 RSAT tools for Windows 7.
    It's called planned obsolescence, and that's why Msft makes billions and we do not.

    Don't forget to mark your posts as answered so they drop off the unanswered post filter. If I've helped you and you want to show your gratitude, just click that green thingy.

    Monday, October 1, 2012 5:07 PM
  • +1 we need RSAT for windows 7 and server 2012

    http://jeramythompson.blogspot.com/

    Monday, October 1, 2012 8:05 PM
  • RSAT has always followed the operating system release:

    I have not heard of any plans to release a supported version of the Win8 RSAT tools for Windows 7.

    It's called planned obsolescence, and that's why Msft makes billions and we do not.

    Don't forget to mark your posts as answered so they drop off the unanswered post filter. If I've helped you and you want to show your gratitude, just click that green thingy.

    Truer words were never spoken.  Thank you, this is made my day.

    +1 We need RSAT for Windows 7


    a-smitty824

    Friday, October 5, 2012 8:25 PM
  • Hi,

    I don't want to drag this thread on, but I feel I should say that adding support for current operating systems into older tools isn't as simple as it sounds and I hope it isn't most people's belief that this is not done intentionally just to sell more software. A single Win8 computer can run RSAT to connect to very many 2012 servers, and RSAT is available free =)

    -Greg

    Friday, October 5, 2012 8:40 PM
  • This answer misses the point. Corporate policy might be to start rolling out Windows 2012 servers in addition to 2008 servers - in some cases as replacement,s in other as new servers. Corporate policy might be to stay with Windows 7 for the next 12 months at least.

    So MSFT are saying that they will not fully support that - and you either have to deploy some Windows 8 systems to admins, accept that the Win7 tools are not going to be "fully featured" when connecting to Windows 2012 servers. Or what... decide not to implement Server 2012, or perhaps migrate to another sever O/S that is more flexible?

    Saturday, October 6, 2012 8:30 PM
  • RSAT has always followed the operating system release:

    Server 2008 --> Vista RSAT

    Server 2008 R2 --> Win7 RSAT

    Server 2012 --> Win8 RSAT



    The difference though is that these systems weren't such a UI mess that is Windows 8.
    Saturday, October 13, 2012 3:22 PM
  • Completely agree. Server 2012 has some lovely new features and I'm already using it in production. Windows 8 is just a mess, it brings no useful new functionality to a desktop and would generate howls of despair if I rolled it out to my users who don't like change. It's just not fit for enterprise deployment without significant work. Windows 7 on the other hand is excellent, the culmination of many years of development Microsoft finally created something hard to fault. It's hard to comprehend why they threw away all this away and created such a disaster.

    Surely Microsoft must have realised during the development that the only real appeal of 8 is on a tablet and admins would be looking for tools that run on their Windows 7 machines? Or perhaps they were taken in by their own hype?

    I wonder if Microsoft's "It's great just the way it is" attitude will change in 6/12 months time when nobody has adopted it?

    Using RDP to administer the servers isn't the end of the world, but it seems a step backwards.

    Monday, October 15, 2012 1:05 PM
  • RSAT has always followed the operating system release:

    Server 2008 --> Vista RSAT

    Server 2008 R2 --> Win7 RSAT

    Server 2012 --> Win8 RSAT



    The difference though is that these systems weren't such a UI mess that is Windows 8.

    Agreed.  I think that the migration to Windows 8 represents a far more significant shift than did the migration to Windows Vista or Windows 7.  While the UI for Vista/7 was tweaked and enhanced somewhat from previous versions, the functionality was mostly the same.

    Windows 8 completely changes this, by Microsoft's own admission.  While Server 2012 is a fantastic product and will likely be embraced very quickly by many enterprises, Windows 8 is unlikely to see much adoption at all for the next couple of years as many enterprises are STILL transitioning to Windows 7 from XP.

    And don't even get me started on using Windows 8's "Start Page" over RDP for those of us who have to use jump boxes to get to our administrative systems.

    Thursday, October 25, 2012 7:21 PM
  • RSAT has always followed the operating system release:

    Server 2008 --> Vista RSAT

    Server 2008 R2 --> Win7 RSAT

    Server 2012 --> Win8 RSAT

    I have not heard of any plans to release a supported version of the Win8 RSAT tools for Windows 7.


    --Joseph [MSFT] http://blogs.technet.com/b/joscon/

    Yes, it's true: you guys were always a bunch of disgusting, arrogant, crooked piece of work, forcing everybody to switch instead of f'n providing the necessary tools to manage your server junk... are you saying we can expect more of the same, just even more disgusting a' la your incompetent, chair-trowing, angry fat beancounter CEO (Ballmer)?
    Monday, November 5, 2012 5:35 PM
  • Hi,

    I don't want to drag this thread on, but I feel I should say that adding support for current operating systems into older tools isn't as simple as it sounds and I hope it isn't most people's belief that this is not done intentionally just to sell more software. A single Win8 computer can run RSAT to connect to very many 2012 servers, and RSAT is available free =)

    -Greg

    I don't want to come out and openly call you a lying sack of but it's actually ABSOLUTELY NOT TRUE, it was ALWAYS EASY to circumvent the stupid-primitive limitations you guys tried to put in place, only to milk more OS upgrades and in cas eof Win7->Win8 SHOULD BE EVEN EASIER than ever (no, you don't need SMB3 in order to manage a cluster via FCM though obviously you could release SMB3 in a SP2 for Win7 if you would care about your customer AT ALL.)

    Just sit aorund, don't do anything but stupid $500-600 tablets, that's your new business model now, at least according to your clueless, uber-incompetent, angry fat beancounter CEO and his ilks - we will slowly migrate off of your crap in the next 2-3 years, thank you.


    Monday, November 5, 2012 5:40 PM
  • Completely agree. Server 2012 has some lovely new features and I'm already using it in production. Windows 8 is just a mess, it brings no useful new functionality to a desktop and would generate howls of despair if I rolled it out to my users who don't like change. It's just not fit for enterprise deployment without significant work. Windows 7 on the other hand is excellent, the culmination of many years of development Microsoft finally created something hard to fault. It's hard to comprehend why they threw away all this away and created such a disaster.

    Surely Microsoft must have realised during the development that the only real appeal of 8 is on a tablet and admins would be looking for tools that run on their Windows 7 machines? Or perhaps they were taken in by their own hype?

    I wonder if Microsoft's "It's great just the way it is" attitude will change in 6/12 months time when nobody has adopted it?

    Using RDP to administer the servers isn't the end of the world, but it seems a step backwards.

    Unfortunately it WON'T - the nature of MSFT is an utter mess, it's ruled by incompetency and unbelievable bureaucracy up to the highest levels eg Ballmer and his arrogant-scummy golden boys like Sinofski, Belfiore etc.

    Monday, November 5, 2012 5:42 PM
  • Why not install Win7 on your PC and install RSAT for 2008 R2 on it.

    Then install Win8 on a virtual and install the RSAT tools for 2012 on the win8 machine.

    Any tools in the Win7 RSAT that don't work for the 2012 servers, just pass the MSCs through to your desktop via the VM applications (as remote apps) from the Win8 VM <- Yes I realise this is a pain but it gives you the opportunity to find out which tools work and which don't.

    As per previous posters, RSAT is relatively new (since vista) and has never been made available to support a non-matched newer server OS with full functionality. Just deal with it and move on... or spend your life moaning about it... your choice!

    Tuesday, November 6, 2012 3:53 PM
  • I know we've seen a number of replies on this post, but allow me to chime in and add my vote in saying that not making RSAT for Server 2012 available for Windows 7 is indeed a mistake on Microsoft's part and very unfortunate.

    I won't deny that Windows 8 makes a nice operating system for tablets, phones, and possibly touch-systems (e.g., kiosk-PCs, and K-5 education, at least if Microsoft makes group policy control of the Metro/Modern interface a reality).  However, it currently  has severe limitations for heavy multitaskers, multi-monitor users, and anyone without a touch interface.  Which in many cases means it limits the IT support personnel, the very people who you (Microsoft) want to be pitching Server 2012 to.

    In its current state, if I pitched Windows 8 as a client operating system as a replacement solution to the clients and organizations I work for, I'd get fired, or at least considered incompetent.  The new UI hampers productivity for people who have multiple enterprise apps (e.g., a web browser with multiple windows and tabs, Word, Excel, Outlook, perhaps a note-taking app, VoIP phone client software, business-level IM software like Lync, etc.) all open at once on two monitors and are trying to get a job done.  For that reason, expecting anyone who requires productivity to upgrade to Windows 8 just to get the RSAT tools is going to cause IT professionals to question whether they should keep Server 2008R2, SBS 2011, and other older Microsoft server operating systems around just a little while longer, perhaps even longer than that (such as, through the end of the extended-support lifecycle) even if other bonuses of Server 2012 are enticing to them (and to me, they are).

    This is a serious step backwards, which causes me to question Microsoft's strategy going forward.  Are businesses no longer Microsoft's most important customers?


    Everyone gets everything he wants. Me, I wanted to be a sysadmin. And for my sins --they made me one.

    Sunday, November 11, 2012 8:15 PM
  • I'm not sure I follow you here.  I don't understand the perspective that Win8 isn't an enterprise ready OS.  I run multi-mon with pretty much every Office app, our internal tools, Lync, etc and I don't have any productivity issues.  I should also mention that I am not on a touch interface on my PC at work.  To say I am a heavy multi-tasker would be putting it mildly :)

    What RSAT capabilities are you looking for in Win7 that you're unable to accomplish exactly?  I'm not trying to be antagonistic here, I'm honestly trying to get your feedback to see if there is something we can address later.


    --Joseph [MSFT] http://blogs.technet.com/b/joscon/

    Monday, November 12, 2012 12:09 AM
  • I'm not sure I follow you here.  I don't understand the perspective that Win8 isn't an enterprise ready OS.  I run multi-mon with pretty much every Office app, our internal tools, Lync, etc and I don't have any productivity issues.  I should also mention that I am not on a touch interface on my PC at work.  To say I am a heavy multi-tasker would be putting it mildly :)

    What RSAT capabilities are you looking for in Win7 that you're unable to accomplish exactly?  I'm not trying to be antagonistic here, I'm honestly trying to get your feedback to see if there is something we can address later.


    --Joseph [MSFT] http://blogs.technet.com/b/joscon/

    We just want to keep what we have. Windows 7 works great. Sometimes our policies state that we can't upgrade. Sometimes we are on Open Business and don't have a license. Why are we forced to upgrade just to run RSAT? Some of us - amazingly enough - actually HATE Windows 8 and the new Metro. That's a bunch of crap to only release RSAT for Windows 8.

    Monday, November 12, 2012 1:35 AM
  • Fair enough.  But what are you trying to do in Win7 that you cant do via another means (RDP, SCVMM, etc) is what I am asking.  RSAT releases, as previously stated, have always been tied to the OS release.  There are specific technical reasons for this but I am interested in the scenarios you're lacking now so that we can get that feedback to the development teams.

    --Joseph [MSFT] http://blogs.technet.com/b/joscon/

    Monday, November 12, 2012 1:59 AM
  • Fair enough.  But what are you trying to do in Win7 that you cant do via another means (RDP, SCVMM, etc) is what I am asking.  RSAT releases, as previously stated, have always been tied to the OS release.  There are specific technical reasons for this but I am interested in the scenarios you're lacking now so that we can get that feedback to the development teams.

    --Joseph [MSFT] http://blogs.technet.com/b/joscon/

    Let me ask that in reverse. What do we need Windows 8 for that we can't do in Windows 7 (other than run RSAT of course)? Why, as an admin, do I need to upgrade my workstation computer that matches the standard user client deployment in 99.999% of all companies just to manage my servers? Or are you expecting us all to buy another another Windows 8 computer (as long as it's not RT) or run another VM instance? It's all just kludgy and confusing to work around not having a native Windows 7 RSAT client.

    Running RDP against a computer with Metro becomes a frustrating experience because the Charms bar and other options are too hard to hit. It becomes an exercise in "hit the 2 pixels and hopefully drag down without the menus disappearing". In a windowed RDP session I am constantly going over the session boundaries and canceling the Charms request. If we're running full screen it is also difficult to determine what will affect the local client and what will affect the remote RDP session. We now have to memorize 10+ Windows keys - or become PowerShell experts and do everything from a command prompt. Metro has made RDP sessions suck. I suppose we could remove-windowsfeature server-gui-shell on all our Windows 2012 servers - but doesn't that defeat the whole purpose of running "Windows"? Might as well call them "Semi-Windows Server 2012" if we did that.

    • Edited by ABCFED Monday, November 12, 2012 4:32 AM
    Monday, November 12, 2012 4:29 AM
  • Very odd question to ask - surely that has been asked and answered already in the design phase for RSAT in the first place. If other methods such as RDP were good enough then RSAT would not exist at all..

    Perhaps you or the development team could answer the question of what is it that exists in Windows 8 and not Windows 7 that means you cannot update RSAT for Windows 7 so that it supports all features. Other than a desire to sell Windows 8.

    Even if I had made a decision to roll out Windows 8 at the earliest opportunity to "my corporate", the preparation and testing and user education involved. Making sure all my business critical apps will work and my users are not going to get confused - that takes time. And so a roll out itself will take time.

    Simply repeating the mantra of "it's how we've always done it" seems not only ridiculous, but more evidence that in fact the mantra is "we don;t particularly care about your needs - you must operate how we dictate you operate". How about acknowledging that how you've always done it is convenient for Microsoft and difficult for the customer, and considering a change in your practices. I notice that I can quite happily install the VMware client on Windows 8 and use all he available features...

    Monday, November 12, 2012 7:41 AM
  •  I don't understand the perspective that Win8 isn't an enterprise ready OS. 


    --Joseph [MSFT] http://blogs.technet.com/b/joscon/

    It doesn't add anything significant that enterprises need. All the changes are around making it work on a tablet but most of these compromise its usability on the desktops and laptops that make up the vast majority of the machines that enterprises use. The benefits (SMB 3.0, Windows to go) are marginal and outweighed by the negatives. Enterprises don't need tiles, Facebook apps, app stores, Angry Birds, stock tickers, photo galleries and all that junk. User acceptance issues will be massive, people don't like change. Windows RT doesn't support group policy which would be the "killer app" for enterprises considering deploying tablets. Enterprises aren't going to benefit from a unified user experience between their tablets and desktops/laptops because they aren't going to deploy 8 on the latter.

    To deploy 8 I'd have to develop group policies to block all the extraneous / time wasting / security compromising guff that metro adds, then cope with the screams of anguish from my users who can't figure where the start menu has gone or how to shut down their computers. For what benefit?? The ability to pause file copy operations. Not worth it.

    I'd love to like it - I'm not in the "Windows NT does everything we need, why change" camp. I've always been an early adopter of new Windows and every one has bought clear improvements (even Vista). But not this time. Sorry!

    • Proposed as answer by szlevi Monday, November 12, 2012 4:05 PM
    Monday, November 12, 2012 11:41 AM
  • Fair enough.  But what are you trying to do in Win7 that you cant do via another means (RDP, SCVMM, etc) is what I am asking.  RSAT releases, as previously stated, have always been tied to the OS release.  There are specific technical reasons for this but I am interested in the scenarios you're lacking now so that we can get that feedback to the development teams.


    --Joseph [MSFT] http://blogs.technet.com/b/joscon/

    Let me ask that in reverse. What do we need Windows 8 for that we can't do in Windows 7 (other than run RSAT of course)? Why, as an admin, do I need to upgrade my workstation computer that matches the standard user client deployment in 99.999% of all companies just to manage my servers? Or are you expecting us all to buy another another Windows 8 computer (as long as it's not RT) or run another VM instance? It's all just kludgy and confusing to work around not having a native Windows 7 RSAT client.

    Running RDP against a computer with Metro becomes a frustrating experience because the Charms bar and other options are too hard to hit. It becomes an exercise in "hit the 2 pixels and hopefully drag down without the menus disappearing". In a windowed RDP session I am constantly going over the session boundaries and canceling the Charms request. If we're running full screen it is also difficult to determine what will affect the local client and what will affect the remote RDP session. We now have to memorize 10+ Windows keys - or become PowerShell experts and do everything from a command prompt. Metro has made RDP sessions suck. I suppose we could remove-windowsfeature server-gui-shell on all our Windows 2012 servers - but doesn't that defeat the whole purpose of running "Windows"? Might as well call them "Semi-Windows Server 2012" if we did that.

    I can think of a few things:

    • Client for Hyper-V
    • Secure Boot
    • BitLocker Network Unlock
    • Features on Demand

    --Joseph [MSFT] http://blogs.technet.com/b/joscon/

    Monday, November 12, 2012 3:06 PM
  • Very odd question to ask - surely that has been asked and answered already in the design phase for RSAT in the first place. If other methods such as RDP were good enough then RSAT would not exist at all..

    Perhaps you or the development team could answer the question of what is it that exists in Windows 8 and not Windows 7 that means you cannot update RSAT for Windows 7 so that it supports all features. Other than a desire to sell Windows 8.

    Even if I had made a decision to roll out Windows 8 at the earliest opportunity to "my corporate", the preparation and testing and user education involved. Making sure all my business critical apps will work and my users are not going to get confused - that takes time. And so a roll out itself will take time.

    Simply repeating the mantra of "it's how we've always done it" seems not only ridiculous, but more evidence that in fact the mantra is "we don;t particularly care about your needs - you must operate how we dictate you operate". How about acknowledging that how you've always done it is convenient for Microsoft and difficult for the customer, and considering a change in your practices. I notice that I can quite happily install the VMware client on Windows 8 and use all he available features...


    It depends on the component but there are changes that happen architecturally between releases that make some of these backports very difficult to do.  Rather than deliver a broken experience, we deliver an experience we know works.  Typically, this means that the releases are tied because the client and server development cycles are closely tied. 

    --Joseph [MSFT] http://blogs.technet.com/b/joscon/

    Monday, November 12, 2012 3:11 PM
  • Fair enough.  But what are you trying to do in Win7 that you cant do via another means (RDP, SCVMM, etc) is what I am asking.  RSAT releases, as previously stated, have always been tied to the OS release.  There are specific technical reasons for this but I am interested in the scenarios you're lacking now so that we can get that feedback to the development teams.


    --Joseph [MSFT] http://blogs.technet.com/b/joscon/

    Let me ask that in reverse. What do we need Windows 8 for that we can't do in Windows 7 (other than run RSAT of course)? Why, as an admin, do I need to upgrade my workstation computer that matches the standard user client deployment in 99.999% of all companies just to manage my servers? Or are you expecting us all to buy another another Windows 8 computer (as long as it's not RT) or run another VM instance? It's all just kludgy and confusing to work around not having a native Windows 7 RSAT client.

    Running RDP against a computer with Metro becomes a frustrating experience because the Charms bar and other options are too hard to hit. It becomes an exercise in "hit the 2 pixels and hopefully drag down without the menus disappearing". In a windowed RDP session I am constantly going over the session boundaries and canceling the Charms request. If we're running full screen it is also difficult to determine what will affect the local client and what will affect the remote RDP session. We now have to memorize 10+ Windows keys - or become PowerShell experts and do everything from a command prompt. Metro has made RDP sessions suck. I suppose we could remove-windowsfeature server-gui-shell on all our Windows 2012 servers - but doesn't that defeat the whole purpose of running "Windows"? Might as well call them "Semi-Windows Server 2012" if we did that.

    I can think of a few things:

    • Client for Hyper-V
    • Secure Boot
    • BitLocker Network Unlock
    • Features on Demand

    --Joseph [MSFT] http://blogs.technet.com/b/joscon/

    Not compelling enough reasons. There are a plethora of secure boot and drive encryption options in Windows 7. Our end users don't need hyper-v on the client. Features on demand isn't relevant either. Just give us the dang RSAT on Windows 7 - and that will solve all the problems.

    Monday, November 12, 2012 3:33 PM
  • we deliver an experience we know works.  

    Not buying it. Then why exactly did you release Metro on the server that doesn't work with the store?

    Monday, November 12, 2012 3:35 PM
  • Not compelling enough reasons. There are a plethora of secure boot and drive encryption options in Windows 7. Our end users don't need hyper-v on the client. Features on demand isn't relevant either. Just give us the dang RSAT on Windows 7 - and that will solve all the problems.

    There isnt a Secure Boot option for Windows 7, its a requirement for Win8 logo'd PCs however (and Surface).  I wasnt referring to the ability to boot a machine securely but the feature known as Secure Boot (http://communities.intel.com/community/vproexpert/blog/2012/06/26/microsoft-windows-8--enabling-secure-boot). Features on Demand and Client for  Hyper-V were two of the most requested features for Windows 7.  Just because your organization doesnt need them specifically, doesnt make them worthless.  FoD in particular is important for any organization that pays for storage by the GB. 

    Again, what scenario are you trying to manage on a Windows 7 client in your environment that isnt working for you right now.  Give me a problem to solve and I might be able to help you out.  Saying "just give us the RSAT" isnt enough information for me to fight your cause.


    --Joseph [MSFT] http://blogs.technet.com/b/joscon/

    Monday, November 12, 2012 3:48 PM
  • Not buying it. Then why exactly did you release Metro on the server that doesn't work with the store?

    The shell is removable on Server and actually isnt the default installation method on 2012.

    --Joseph [MSFT] http://blogs.technet.com/b/joscon/

    Monday, November 12, 2012 3:49 PM
  • Not compelling enough reasons. There are a plethora of secure boot and drive encryption options in Windows 7. Our end users don't need hyper-v on the client. Features on demand isn't relevant either. Just give us the dang RSAT on Windows 7 - and that will solve all the problems.

    There isnt a Secure Boot option for Windows 7, its a requirement for Win8 logo'd PCs however (and Surface).  I wasnt referring to the ability to boot a machine securely but the feature known as Secure Boot (http://communities.intel.com/community/vproexpert/blog/2012/06/26/microsoft-windows-8--enabling-secure-boot). Features on Demand and Client for  Hyper-V were two of the most requested features for Windows 7.  Just because your organization doesnt need them specifically, doesnt make them worthless.  FoD in particular is important for any organization that pays for storage by the GB. 

    Again, what scenario are you trying to manage on a Windows 7 client in your environment that isnt working for you right now.  Give me a problem to solve and I might be able to help you out.  Saying "just give us the RSAT" isnt enough information for me to fight your cause.


    --Joseph [MSFT] http://blogs.technet.com/b/joscon/

    Sounds like a true, full-of-sh!t, worthless MSFT drone's reply - thank you for confirming our point about MSFT and its ilks being arrogant and worthless, along with Windows 8 et al.
    Monday, November 12, 2012 4:04 PM
  • Not buying it. Then why exactly did you release Metro on the server that doesn't work with the store?

    The shell is removable on Server and actually isnt the default installation method on 2012.

    --Joseph [MSFT] http://blogs.technet.com/b/joscon/

    What a load of BS - so if it's broken you still leave it in the OS, telling us not to install it?

    Hahaha, priceless nonsense.

    Monday, November 12, 2012 4:06 PM
  • I'm not sure I follow you here.  I don't understand the perspective that Win8 isn't an enterprise ready OS.  I run multi-mon with pretty much every Office app, our internal tools, Lync, etc and I don't have any productivity issues.  I should also mention that I am not on a touch interface on my PC at work.  To say I am a heavy multi-tasker would be putting it mildly :)


    --Joseph [MSFT] http://blogs.technet.com/b/joscon/

    FWIW this is my favorite BS part from this topic - anyone claims using this junk called Windows 8 in an enterprise, multitasking environment without being pissed every day is really full of sh!t or the Kool-Aid Ballmer is mixing at the door every morning... the entire design with its retarded double-desktop-hopping mechanism, the lack of a start menu etc is just HILARIOUSLY broken, absolutely clueless, an utter piece of junk.
    Monday, November 12, 2012 4:10 PM
  • RSAT has always followed the operating system release:

    I'd never really noticed this before and I got thinking why not? With Vista and 7, I'd looked at the new features list and decided they were worthwhile updates long before RTM. I'd tested out betas and decided they were stable enough that I'd upgraded my work desktop to the beta so I could start learning the new systems prior to rolling them out soon after RTM. So my desktop OS was always ahead of any server deployments and I never noticed that RSAT wouldn't run on older versions.

    This time round it's been different. I tried out the developer preview of 8 when that came out. Initial thoughts were - interesting, confusing, ambitious, unstable, they forgot the start button - but hey, early days, let's see how it develops. By the final preview release the stability had improved but the confusing interface was still there and it was clear the start button wasn't coming back and there was no option to get rid of metro. So by this stage I'd pretty much decided we wouldn't be deploying it. 

    Unfortunately as others have noted the experience of running 8 as a windowed VM is particularly poor - but with virtualisation everywhere these days this will be how most admins first experience it. I did think - well maybe I'm not trying hard enough to like it. So I put it on my personal laptop and used it daily. After a couple of weeks I just couldn't stand it any longer and went back to 7.

    Server 2012 on the other hand has some lovely features and I couldn't wait to get it into production. Then I wen't looking for RSAT for my dekstop and found this thread.

    Most of the people saying positive things about 8 seem to MS staff and bloggers who've been given a Surface etc. to review. Reception is a lot more negative form corporate users. Unfortunately admins are very influential in the choice to deploy or not and they don't like it. I can accept that the process of porting RSAT to 7 might be difficult but with admins not installing 8 even on their own machines lack of RSAT then becomes a barrier to adoption of Server 2012.

    To me there are three ways Microsoft can go with this:-

    1) Continue telling everyone 8 is great and not listening to feedback.
    2) Release RSAT for 7 (even if it is hard to do). Release SP2 for 7 adding SMB3.0 and other functionality from 8 that can be ported back. This at least will drive sales of 2012.
    3) Fix 8 - release an enterise ready version by adding the options to turn on or off metro and the start button. Give us the choice to boot to a familiar 7 style interface without a hint of metro. Do that and I'll deploy it the next day and stop complaining!

    Unfortunately currently my money is on 1. 

    Perhaps the'll sell a few Surfaces, but there is a lot of catching up to do compared to iPad and Android. Particularly  with prices at the top end of the market - comparable with iPads. Amazon and Google are putting out very cool, capable devices that they are selling at cost - hard for MS to compete with this. It feels like they are gambling the entire future of Windows on cracking this market even if it alienates their business users.

    Monday, November 12, 2012 7:06 PM
  • Not buying it. Then why exactly did you release Metro on the server that doesn't work with the store?

    The shell is removable on Server and actually isnt the default installation method on 2012.

    --Joseph [MSFT] http://blogs.technet.com/b/joscon/

    Joseph,

    I guess I'm missing your point. Yes, the shell is removable via esoteric PowerShell commands, but why did you include Metro in the server interface at all? It serves no purpose whatsoever to run Metro on a server, and in fact, causes havoc when trying to RDP. You can't use the store on server, so it's not like it's there to support additional MS revenue either. The default install methods are PowerShell (aka Windows wants to be Linux mode) or Full GUI (including Metro). It any case, it most certainly does not deliver an experience that anyone would say "works". How does Metro on a server deliver an experience "we know works"?

    Monday, November 12, 2012 7:10 PM
  • Joseph,

    I guess I'm missing your point. Yes, the shell is removable via esoteric PowerShell commands, but why did you include Metro in the server interface at all? It serves no purpose whatsoever to run Metro on a server, and in fact, causes havoc when trying to RDP. You can't use the store on server, so it's not like it's there to support additional MS revenue either. The default install methods are PowerShell (aka Windows wants to be Linux mode) or Full GUI (including Metro). It any case, it most certainly does not deliver an experience that anyone would say "works". How does Metro on a server deliver an experience "we know works"?

    Couple of things here, you can use the Store on Server (if you wanted to), just install Desktop-Experience.  The user interface portions are there if you want them and removable if you dont.  I wont argue for or against the interface on server.  I use it daily and it doesnt bother me, but I can understand your point(s) about not wanting to use it as well.  That decision was made way above my pay grade I'm afraid.

    --Joseph [MSFT] http://blogs.technet.com/b/joscon/

    Monday, November 12, 2012 7:19 PM
  • Not compelling enough reasons. There are a plethora of secure boot and drive encryption options in Windows 7. Our end users don't need hyper-v on the client. Features on demand isn't relevant either. Just give us the dang RSAT on Windows 7 - and that will solve all the problems.

    There isnt a Secure Boot option for Windows 7, its a requirement for Win8 logo'd PCs however (and Surface).  I wasnt referring to the ability to boot a machine securely but the feature known as Secure Boot (http://communities.intel.com/community/vproexpert/blog/2012/06/26/microsoft-windows-8--enabling-secure-boot). Features on Demand and Client for  Hyper-V were two of the most requested features for Windows 7.  Just because your organization doesnt need them specifically, doesnt make them worthless.  FoD in particular is important for any organization that pays for storage by the GB. 

    Again, what scenario are you trying to manage on a Windows 7 client in your environment that isnt working for you right now.  Give me a problem to solve and I might be able to help you out.  Saying "just give us the RSAT" isnt enough information for me to fight your cause.


    --Joseph [MSFT] http://blogs.technet.com/b/joscon/

    These are not compelling reasons for most companies. For example...

    Me - "Hey Mr CEO, we need to upgrade our computers to Windows 8"

    CIO - " Why?"

    Me - "Well, we can then run Hyper-V on the clients and secure boot! "

    CIO - "That's meaningless information to me. What does that mean?"

    Me - "Well, hyper-V means that if we don't like the new Windows 8, we can then run another OS to compensate for compatibility. We can also use it for testing purposes"

    CIO - "So, why don't we just keep what we have then if we need to buy multiple OS licenses or deal with feature loss. Also, the vast majority of our users aren't testing OS's. For those that do, we can implement the VMWare client for ~$50/machine"

    Me - "Okay then, well we need Windows 8 so we can have secure boot"

    CIO - "But that means we'd have to replace the hardware and that would be too costly. You remember we're coming out of a recession, right? We already have drive encryption software that works great under Windows 7 and creates hidden partitions as well. Who cares about secure boot."

    Me - "Okay, but then we'll get Features on Demand if we upgrade too"

    CIO - "But we have plenty of disk space. In fact, most users don't even use 20GB of disk space on their 500GB drives. From what I understand we'd end up saving, maybe 2GB of drive space on each machine if we implement FOD. We don't run a VDI and have to pay for storage. Also we'd have to re-do everything we've already successfully set up in Windows 7 in order to do this. It doesn't seem worth it. We'd be better off upgrading everyone to SSD drives."

    Me - "But Windows 8 is the latest and greatest!"

    CIO - "But that has NO ROI to the business. You're telling me to upgrade to get zero ROI. Are you crazy? We'll lose money, spend lots of time we don't have re-setting things up, and upset our users in the process. We already know that Office integrated search has been removed in Windows 8, so we'd be losing features our end-users rely on. Listen, I've got a business to run here, not a fun factory for you play with."

    So, yeah. Not compelling. Most companies are just BARELY finishing their upgrade to Windows 7. Very little (if no) ROI for the majority of customers currently running Windows 7. The vast, VAST majority of companies are currently not running Windows 8, and are not planning to do so far at least another year, so that alone should warrant a Windows 7 RSAT option - so we can manage our servers in the interim.

    • Edited by ABCFED Monday, November 12, 2012 7:37 PM
    Monday, November 12, 2012 7:21 PM
  • Joseph,

    I guess I'm missing your point. Yes, the shell is removable via esoteric PowerShell commands, but why did you include Metro in the server interface at all? It serves no purpose whatsoever to run Metro on a server, and in fact, causes havoc when trying to RDP. You can't use the store on server, so it's not like it's there to support additional MS revenue either. The default install methods are PowerShell (aka Windows wants to be Linux mode) or Full GUI (including Metro). It any case, it most certainly does not deliver an experience that anyone would say "works". How does Metro on a server deliver an experience "we know works"?

    Couple of things here, you can use the Store on Server (if you wanted to), just install Desktop-Experience.  The user interface portions are there if you want them and removable if you dont.  I wont argue for or against the interface on server.  I use it daily and it doesnt bother me, but I can understand your point(s) about not wanting to use it as well.  That decision was made way above my pay grade I'm afraid.

    --Joseph [MSFT] http://blogs.technet.com/b/joscon/

    So, you can't help us then? For Windows 7 admins, we're stuck with either: a> running powershell remotely, or b> manually removing the shell interface and using RDP with Windows in a crippled GUI state. I'm failing to see how this is better solution than what was available in Windows Server 2008R2. This is why we need RSAT in Windows 7 - which would solve all the problems.


    • Edited by ABCFED Monday, November 12, 2012 7:38 PM
    Monday, November 12, 2012 7:36 PM
  • And luckily we work in an environment where you can keep what you have (Windows 7 in this case).  Despite what others on this thread would have you believe, I'm not a Microsoft Kool-Aid drinking drone and I am interested in helping you get what you want out of Windows products.  I'm also open to telling you that it cant/wont/shouldnt happen so you can find other solutions if that is indeed the answer.

    But, we're going in circles here.  Everyone is making the case for not buying Windows 8 but it has nothing to do with what I am asking of you.  What are some exact management scenarios you have now for using Windows 7 to manage Windows Server 2012 that you're currently unable to do because you dont have the ability to install Windows 8 RSAT on Windows 7.  Give me some of those and I might be able to give you a workaround or an explanation of why it doesnt work.


    --Joseph [MSFT] http://blogs.technet.com/b/joscon/

    Monday, November 12, 2012 7:37 PM
  • And luckily we work in an environment where you can keep what you have (Windows 7 in this case).  Despite what others on this thread would have you believe, I'm not a Microsoft Kool-Aid drinking drone and I am interested in helping you get what you want out of Windows products.  I'm also open to telling you that it cant/wont/shouldnt happen so you can find other solutions if that is indeed the answer.

    But, we're going in circles here.  Everyone is making the case for not buying Windows 8 but it has nothing to do with what I am asking of you.  What are some exact management scenarios you have now for using Windows 7 to manage Windows Server 2012 that you're currently unable to do because you dont have the ability to install Windows 8 RSAT on Windows 7.  Give me some of those and I might be able to give you a workaround or an explanation of why it doesnt work.


    --Joseph [MSFT] http://blogs.technet.com/b/joscon/

    So, it appears you can't help and all Microsoft can offer here is just consolation talk. We need to be able to manage our Server 2012 machines, but we don't want to have to upgrade our Windows 7 clients to Windows 8 just to run RSAT. Some companies have clear policies and requirements why we can't do this. It's that simple. What more "management scenarios" do you need from us? You can't tell me that you are not aware of these restrictions that many customers face.

    We don't want any more explanations of why it won't work. You are Microsoft - you CAN make it work - easily - if you wanted to do it. It would probably take no more than a week to code everything for Windows 7. We'd be HAPPY to beta-test it too. Apparently you just don't want to and would rather argue over semantics here in a forum and upset the hundreds of thousands of admins running Windows 7 - by trying to force them to upgrade to Windows 8. Or, are you in fact saying that the RSAT interface can't be backported to Windows 7 without a major re-write of the code - even though it already runs in the desktop mode just fine? That doesn't seem a reasonable explanation.

    in any case, you mention "workarounds". What are these "workarounds" that you would propose? Or will you only divulge that information if we pinky-swear first?

    :)

    Monday, November 12, 2012 8:31 PM
  • ABCFED,

    If you're asking me to backport all of the RSAT tools for Windows 8 to Windows 7, you're correct, I cant help you because that isnt something we have plans to do for reasons already mentioned here.  I also dont know another way to ask you for the information I need to actually attempt to help you or offer you a workaround.  Saying this: "We need to be able to manage our Server 2012 machines, but we don't want to have to upgrade our Windows 7 clients to Windows 8 just to run RSAT." is not a management scenario to me, thats the same request thats already been gone over time and again on this thread which is to have the RSAT tools install on Windows 7.

    I need specifics.  I need to know what you cant do that you have to be able to do.  Right now it sounds like you cant manage anything in your environment because you cant install Win8 RSAT on Win7, and to paraphrase someone else on this thread "I dont buy that" because I managed mixed workloads here at work.  So I need a problem statement that we can work from as a starting point. For example, are you having issues with remote user administration or maybe you're having issues managing a Hyper-V failover cluster or maybe you're not able to administer something that has a quantifiable problem statement.

    Lastly, I'll address this other statement:

    "We don't want any more explanations of why it won't work. You are Microsoft - you CAN make it work - easily - if you wanted to do it. It would probably take no more than a week to code everything for Windows 7. We'd be HAPPY to beta-test it too. Apparently you just don't want to and would rather argue over semantics here in a forum and upset the hundreds of thousands of admins running Windows 7 - by trying to force them to upgrade to Windows 8. Or, are you in fact saying that the RSAT interface can't be backported to Windows 7 without a major re-write of the code - even though it already runs in the desktop mode just fine?"

    This work is non-trivial and would take major re-writes to accomplish in certain cases.

    Again, I'd love to help here.


    --Joseph [MSFT] http://blogs.technet.com/b/joscon/

    Monday, November 12, 2012 8:55 PM
  • ABCFED,

    If you're asking me to backport all of the RSAT tools for Windows 8 to Windows 7, you're correct, I cant help you because that isnt something we have plans to do for reasons already mentioned here.  I also dont know another way to ask you for the information I need to actually attempt to help you or offer you a workaround.  Saying this: "We need to be able to manage our Server 2012 machines, but we don't want to have to upgrade our Windows 7 clients to Windows 8 just to run RSAT." is not a management scenario to me, thats the same request thats already been gone over time and again on this thread which is to have the RSAT tools install on Windows 7.

    I need specifics.  I need to know what you cant do that you have to be able to do.  Right now it sounds like you cant manage anything in your environment because you cant install Win8 RSAT on Win7, and to paraphrase someone else on this thread "I dont buy that" because I managed mixed workloads here at work.  So I need a problem statement that we can work from as a starting point. For example, are you having issues with remote user administration or maybe you're having issues managing a Hyper-V failover cluster or maybe you're not able to administer something that has a quantifiable problem statement.

    Lastly, I'll address this other statement:

    "We don't want any more explanations of why it won't work. You are Microsoft - you CAN make it work - easily - if you wanted to do it. It would probably take no more than a week to code everything for Windows 7. We'd be HAPPY to beta-test it too. Apparently you just don't want to and would rather argue over semantics here in a forum and upset the hundreds of thousands of admins running Windows 7 - by trying to force them to upgrade to Windows 8. Or, are you in fact saying that the RSAT interface can't be backported to Windows 7 without a major re-write of the code - even though it already runs in the desktop mode just fine?"

    This work is non-trivial and would take major re-writes to accomplish in certain cases.

    Again, I'd love to help here.


    --Joseph [MSFT] http://blogs.technet.com/b/joscon/

    Jocson,

    1. It sounds like the decision has already been made not to port it back....in addition, you can't help anyway, regardless. So, what exactly are we discussing here? What amazing piece of information would you like ABCFED to supply you with that hasn't already been discussed? He said it perfectly well. That being...we don't want to upgrade to Windows 8, but we still want to be able to fully manage our Windows 2012 server deployments. The fact that YOU manage mixed workloads at YOUR work using Windows 8 is irrelevant to the rest of us who do not want to do that. Some of us have constraints that make it currently impossible to do so.

    2. You say the work would take major re-writes to port to Windows 7? That seems very hard to believe...seeing as the RSAT runs perfectly fine in the desktop...which is compatible with Windows 7 and 2008R2. Can you please enlighten us as to why, exactly, the coding model of Windows 8-based desktops make .NET recompiling for Windows 7 an impossible task.

    Not trying to add more fuel to this fire, but not considering RSAT for Windows 7 would be a need...and assuming we'd all just happily jump on the Windows 8 bandwagon seems very shortsighted.

    Monday, November 12, 2012 10:10 PM
  • I guess for me the concern is not around whether or not Windows 8 is "Enterprise" ready or not - that's pretty irrelevant. Companies will adopt it at some point. It's a matter of when (ie when they are confident that the business critical apps they use can work on it, and when they are confident it can be implemented with minimum fuss for users). More concerning is that Microsoft just don;t seem to get the real world where we can;t all play with new stuff (actually - I can.. but that's not the point ;^)

    In the real world there are obstacles to just rolling out a desktop. RSAT is not in itself a justification for moving admins to Windows 8. You can use Windows 7 and the Windows 7 RSAT to do most of the job. But not all of it. An example? I can use Windows 7 and the Hyper-V client to manage Hyper-V on a Windows 2012 server. Fine. But I can't "Enable Replication" - for that I have to have Windows 8 or RDP to the 2012 server.

    It isn;t going to cause me a mental breakdown that I can;t do this - or have to find some clumsy way around it. But it is a pain. And the fact that the stock answer is pretty much "deploy a Windows 8 desktop, you'll be fine" is disappointing and shows no understanding of the fact that the world of I.T. (even where everything is Microsoft based) is heterogeneous. And I want to move at MY pace, and not one dictated to me by someone who does not understand nor care about my business. Hell - I can;t even use VMM on Windows 2012 Hyper-V (Ok.. there is a SP1 in beta). That's not a very coordinated approach

    A good "Enterprise" approach would be one where the client tools support the latest desktop and the next most recent (ie Windows 8 and 7) as well as the latest and next most recent server (2012 and 2008 R2). On the server side, having new features in "the latest" that are not available on the previous version is fine - but forcing you to have to have the most recent desktop in order to gain access to those features isn't quite so acceptable.

    If you cannot get that - then there isn't much point explaining it. You either understand business critical environments, or you don't. And if you focus on one or two named examples of things that are missing, then again - you don;t understand. It's the approach that leads to those specifics that is the concern, not the individual examples.

    Monday, November 12, 2012 10:56 PM
  • ABCFED,

    If you're asking me to backport all of the RSAT tools for Windows 8 to Windows 7, you're correct, I cant help you because that isnt something we have plans to do for reasons already mentioned here.  I also dont know another way to ask you for the information I need to actually attempt to help you or offer you a workaround.  Saying this: "We need to be able to manage our Server 2012 machines, but we don't want to have to upgrade our Windows 7 clients to Windows 8 just to run RSAT." is not a management scenario to me, thats the same request thats already been gone over time and again on this thread which is to have the RSAT tools install on Windows 7.

    I need specifics.  I need to know what you cant do that you have to be able to do.  Right now it sounds like you cant manage anything in your environment because you cant install Win8 RSAT on Win7, and to paraphrase someone else on this thread "I dont buy that" because I managed mixed workloads here at work.  So I need a problem statement that we can work from as a starting point. For example, are you having issues with remote user administration or maybe you're having issues managing a Hyper-V failover cluster or maybe you're not able to administer something that has a quantifiable problem statement.

    Lastly, I'll address this other statement:

    "We don't want any more explanations of why it won't work. You are Microsoft - you CAN make it work - easily - if you wanted to do it. It would probably take no more than a week to code everything for Windows 7. We'd be HAPPY to beta-test it too. Apparently you just don't want to and would rather argue over semantics here in a forum and upset the hundreds of thousands of admins running Windows 7 - by trying to force them to upgrade to Windows 8. Or, are you in fact saying that the RSAT interface can't be backported to Windows 7 without a major re-write of the code - even though it already runs in the desktop mode just fine?"

    This work is non-trivial and would take major re-writes to accomplish in certain cases.

    Again, I'd love to help here.


    --Joseph [MSFT] http://blogs.technet.com/b/joscon/

    Joseph - Let me get this straight - you want me to come up with a list of RSAT deficiencies that are present in Windows 7 - so that you can take this information back to a development team you have no control over - to somehow convince someone who is higher up than you - who needs to convince a development team who has made a desktop tool impossible to re-code - to port the current RSAT functionality we have in Windows 2012 and Windows 8 - fully to Windows 7. Is that correct?

    If so, then why don't you simply look up the current RSAT deficiencies (as AndyDoran pointed out the example with Hyper-V not enabling replication) in TechNet and/or Bing references. They are well documented. They are easy to find. This basically comes down to - we can't manage any of the new features in Windows Server 2012 and Microsoft already knows about the deficiencies in their own product.

    Is there something about this request that is so difficult as to not make that clear enough? What more do you want me to prove that hasn't already been proved - and how is this going to make any difference in the outcome of this thread?


    • Edited by ABCFED Monday, November 12, 2012 11:55 PM
    Monday, November 12, 2012 11:49 PM
  • I agree that this thread is going no where.  I've been trying to understand what problems we might be able to raise to our teams in an attempt to help you.  AndyDoran is the only person so far to give me an example of the type of feedback I was asking for, unfortunately, I'm aware of those issues already.  I was asking for additional information beyond what's already been documented in this thread. 

    I've influenced numerous changes in our products by ensuring that pain felt by our customers is properly reflected to the appropriate development teams and I was hoping to assist in a similar fashion here.  So yes, I can influence a development team I have no control over, by properly using your voice.  That doesn't appear to be happening at this point so I'll make the teams aware of this feedback and leave it at that.


    --Joseph [MSFT] http://blogs.technet.com/b/joscon/

    Tuesday, November 13, 2012 12:58 AM
  • I agree that this thread is going no where.  I've been trying to understand what problems we might be able to raise to our teams in an attempt to help you.  AndyDoran is the only person so far to give me an example of the type of feedback I was asking for, unfortunately, I'm aware of those issues already.  I was asking for additional information beyond what's already been documented in this thread. 

    I've influenced numerous changes in our products by ensuring that pain felt by our customers is properly reflected to the appropriate development teams and I was hoping to assist in a similar fashion here.  So yes, I can influence a development team I have no control over, by properly using your voice.  That doesn't appear to be happening at this point so I'll make the teams aware of this feedback and leave it at that.


    --Joseph [MSFT] http://blogs.technet.com/b/joscon/

    Jason,

    What you said doesn't make sense. You asked us for examples. AndyDoran replied with the Hyper-V example. You then now tell us that you were aware of those issues (even though they were NOT previously documented in this thread) already and are looking for additional issues beyond the ones we are posting. It's like you are finding any reason you can to blow us off.

    I guess I'm lost as to what to provide you other than ALL THE NEW FEATURES IN WINDOWS SERVER 2012 ARE NOT AVAILABLE IN THE WINDOWS 7 RSAT TOOLSET. Isn't that clear enough? Since you can't seem to figure this out on your own, let me assist with a few - this includes:

    Hyper-V management

    iSCSI target host configuration

    CSV configuration

    NIC Teaming

    Storage Pools

    DHCP failover

    Claims based authentication settings

    GUI management of AD deleted items

    Dashboard view

    Storage Spaces

    DirectAccess management

    DAC

    REFS manangement

    IPAM

    That's why we need a new RSAT for Windows 7.

    • Edited by ABCFED Tuesday, November 13, 2012 1:15 AM
    Tuesday, November 13, 2012 1:11 AM
  • I think this is the point. We are not the RSAT design team. In my case, I have a particular requirement right now to use Hyper-V. And so I can see that there are a handful of features that are new to 2012 and missing on Windows 7 RSAT. I have not used the other tools to any extent, but the fact that there is a shortfall in the Hyper-V client makes me believe that there will be similar shortfalls in those as well.

    It's obvious that a deliberate decision has been made to not update the tools on Windows 7. Given that this decision has been made, the people who made it are aware of all of the things that are missing in the RSAT for Windows 7 tools. So why are we having this circular discussion about identifying each individual feature that isn't there? It's pointless and distracting - it already started a discussion about who likes or does not like Windows 8 which is irrelevant. The original post asked if RSAT for Windows 7 would be updated to cover the new features made available in Server 2012. The answer to that is not "we have it for Windows 8", the answer is "no".

    Some of the suggested workarounds here are stupid. Building a VM with Windows 8 on it just to use the tools ... difficult to find words to describe how stupid an answer that was. I will just RDP to the box thanks all the same. It's inconvenient, but it works. And it's this kind of inconvenience that we all put up with that helps Microsoft continue as they do.

    The question has been asked several times as to whether or not Windows 8 is Enterprise ready. That's not the question. The question is whether Microsoft are Enterprise capable. And the answer is that no - they are not. Windows environments in business critical environments work because the professionals within those organisations make it work - despite the obstacles put in their path by Microsoft who still don;t understand the concept. And sadly, there are a growing number of people who grow up in that world who think that this is the way it has to be.

    /SAD_TIRED_RANT=OFF

    I think I have the answer I need from this thread. RSAT for Windows 7 is never going to be updated to support the new features for the existing applications that RSAT supports on Windows 7. Microsoft see no benefit to them for providing that functionality, and if it does not benefit them (despite being of benefit to their customers) then it will not happen.

    Tuesday, November 13, 2012 11:41 AM
  • There will be no Win 7 /WinServ2008/R2 RSAT that runs with WinServ2012 and Win8 but you can use Win8 or WinServ2012 to manage WinServer2008/R2.

    http://blogs.technet.com/b/keithmayer/archive/2012/10/02/managing-windows-server-2008-sp2-and-r2-from-windows-server-2012-server-manager.aspx#.UKJDCofAfp4

    Tuesday, November 13, 2012 12:54 PM
  • There will be no Win 7 /WinServ2008/R2 RSAT that runs with WinServ2012 and Win8 but you can use Win8 or WinServ2012 to manage WinServer2008/R2.

    http://blogs.technet.com/b/keithmayer/archive/2012/10/02/managing-windows-server-2008-sp2-and-r2-from-windows-server-2012-server-manager.aspx#.UKJDCofAfp4

    That is correct, but doesn't solve our problem. We need an RSAT for Windows 7 that will control Server 2012.
    Tuesday, November 13, 2012 2:59 PM
  • I think I have the answer I need from this thread. RSAT for Windows 7 is never going to be updated to support the new features for the existing applications that RSAT supports on Windows 7. Microsoft see no benefit to them for providing that functionality, and if it does not benefit them (despite being of benefit to their customers) then it will not happen.

    I'm afraid you are right. All Jason from Microsoft has done in this thread is find ways to not be helpful. It seems he can't help us anyway as the people who can are out of his "pay grade" and he's not on the development team that can influence anything. He just can't seem to see any reason why one would need the additional capabilities of the new RSAT - so he's lost as to any benefit we would see. He also can't seem to understand why anyone would be opposed to running Windows 8 - especially since he, himself, runs Windows 8 in all environments, multi-tasking everything in sight, with no problems whatsoever and no worries about budget or policies. I'm not sure which world Jason lives in, but it most certainly isn't mine.

    I think our answer here is crystal clear - an RSAT for Windows 7 is never going to happen and we'll have to RDP into our Windows 2012 servers with a crippled GUI in order to manage them successfully or slog through PowerShell scripts. This is certainly the best/economical course for Microsoft to take - even though it doesn't help their customers one bit. Microsoft has already decided they won't make an RSAT for Windows 7 - and they are going to be sticking to their guns.

    Hopefully with that attitude more than just Sinofsky will be fired from Microsoft.

    • Edited by ABCFED Tuesday, November 13, 2012 5:53 PM
    Tuesday, November 13, 2012 3:50 PM
  • I 'd like to thank everyone for your input on this thread, I do truly appreciate your honesty and empathize with your position.  The product teams have seen your feedback from this thread.  Given the thread is becoming unproductive, I am going to lock the thread.


    --Joseph [MSFT] http://blogs.technet.com/b/joscon/

    Tuesday, November 13, 2012 11:05 PM