Why so complicated? RRS feed

  • Question

  • Greetings.

    I may not be the first to ask this, but here's my concern: why is the installation process so complicated? Why is it that hard to create a tool for facilitating the process of creating bootable media - or to ship a wizard-style .iso, like it is with VMware ESXi? Having everything documented is fine, but installing Nano Server on a bare hardware is a living hell, I'll deploy ESXi on at least ten machines before I even finish reading the manuals to Nano Server.

    MS, please, would you be so kind as to rethink the concept of deploying Nano Server completely? The way it is now is counter-productive to say the least.

    ~ ShadowDweller

    Tuesday, October 18, 2016 8:10 AM


All replies

  • If you are comparing the installation experience of Nano to ESXi - why are you not installing Hyper-V Server?

    Which is already equivalent to ESXi and the ISO is built by MSFT for you....

    Building a Nano image is like building a Linux box from a minimal base image - a far difference from installing a hypervisor

    Brian Ehlert
    Learn. Apply. Repeat.

    Tuesday, October 18, 2016 3:45 PM
  • You see, Hyper-V Server is essentially a trimmed-down Server Core (role and feature restricted, but still fully functional OS). In that regard, it's more similar to ESX. While ESXi (mind the "i") is exactly a narrow-scoped hypervisor with extremely basic manual setup and without any means of managing it other than remotely. Convenience-wise, I can just use RUFUS to prep an ESXi-bootable flash drive and install it ANYWHERE, even on a VM, if that matters, without any sorts of complications whatsoever. Nano Server? Nope, you gotta be a God only knows what generation's shaman to do the same as efficiently. Convenience? Never heard of it. /trollM$

    As for "Building a Nano image is like building a Linux box from a minimal base image" line... Welp, nothing prevents me to build a Linux box instead. At least I won't waste my time that way.

    • Edited by doctorHOO Tuesday, October 18, 2016 5:07 PM
    Tuesday, October 18, 2016 4:25 PM
  • Actually, Hyper-V Server is less than Core.

    It is Role restricted.  It only allows those Role / Features to be installed that are required by Hyper-V.

    I don't want to form some debate here.  Simply clarifying the comparison.

    You obviously have some specific need / goal to use Nano.  In that, I cannot debate that building a Nano image is not painful.

    Though you might find this useful: https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/nanoserver/2016/10/15/introducing-the-nano-server-image-builder/

    Brian Ehlert
    Learn. Apply. Repeat.

    Tuesday, October 18, 2016 6:05 PM
  • I'm not trying to strike some debates here. My only request here is to make Nano Server's deployment process as convenient as possible. Meaning, just a few small steps: grab the iso - prep the bootable media - boot up - install. It's that easy with ESXi; I don't see any reason for it to be as insane as it is now with Nano. If anything, Nano should be a valid option in the general Setup screen, since it's a .wim as well. The problem is, M$ prefers doing everything the hard and twisted way, rather than using logic and general users' point of view. I'd love to be proven otherwise at least in this department. /shrug

    Thank you for a link. It's great that someone actually did what MS should provide out-of-box. A shame for such a big enterprise, lol.

    • Edited by doctorHOO Wednesday, October 19, 2016 8:10 AM
    Tuesday, October 18, 2016 8:30 PM
  • MS actually anticipated that and released an image builder 3 days before you post this message.

    Follow the official blog!

    • Proposed as answer by 26inches Thursday, October 20, 2016 9:21 AM
    • Marked as answer by doctorHOO Saturday, October 22, 2016 2:28 PM
    Thursday, October 20, 2016 9:21 AM