Because each server version is based on the workstation OS. It'd be more work to leave it the same as they'd have to re-design the workstation OS each time it's updated.
On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 12:40 PM Todd Hemsell <hems...@gmail.com> wrote: > I agree. > > They added a ton of crap to the servers that add no business value, and > they keep moving things around for no reason at all. > If they want to get rid of the gui, why do they keep redesigning it? > > Why not just leave it alone? > > On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 9:52 AM, Mote, Todd <mo...@austin.utexas.edu> > wrote: > > Eh, it’s mostly about delivering a “clean product” I guess. It started in > server 2012, I couldn’t stand to deliver a teal taskbar to customers, the > same tricks I used on that don’t work anymore, they seem to change every > time windows changes. In Server 2016, there’s a desktop picture. I don’t, > nor do my customers need a desktop picture, it’s hard to even set just a > color and no desktop anymore. It doesn’t have to be pretty to look at, > because nobody is looking at it. Transparency is on by default. Why? > There’s a desktop image. Why? I guess my first email wasn’t super clear. > Why is the color of every window, active or not, the same? I may not want > to set everything, but it’s so hard to set anything these days in a build > and capture or deployment scenario. The same registry keys you watch > change when you change something don’t actually work when you change them > in the registry rather than in the GUI. > > > > And before anybody says, “but Jeff Snover calls it SAAD (server as a > desktop) for a reason, because it’s sad, use core! Use nano!”, etc. Could > you really make your Windows users switch from using Windows with a GUI to > Windows without? Honestly? I don’t run any of the servers that I deploy, > other admins do with varying skills and abilities, and a GUI is what they > are used to, taking out the GUI makes them less productive in a time when > we don’t have any resources to devote to using core or nano. > > > > I guess I should care less? Teal task bars, transparency, and fancy > desktop pictures on a server? Tough @$#%! I don’t by a cargo van with a > pearl coat paint job and leather interior. > > > > I don’t know, this has been going on for years, the internet is full of > “how do I customize the default profile” or similar searches, going back a > looooong way. People are obviously doing it, want to do it, or need to do > it. I’m just asking why is it so hard and obfuscated to actually do it? > > > > > > *From:* listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto: > listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] *On Behalf Of *Jason Sandys > *Sent:* Thursday, October 20, 2016 9:08 AM > *To:* mssms@lists.myitforum.com > *Subject:* Re: [mssms] default profile customization > > > > Why do you care about colors? To be blunt, are you really paid to change > the color of something? > > > > J > > > > *From: *<listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> on behalf of "Mote, Todd" < > mo...@austin.utexas.edu> > *Reply-To: *"mssms@lists.myitforum.com" <mssms@lists.myitforum.com> > *Date: *Thursday, October 20, 2016 at 8:40 AM > *To: *"mssms@lists.myitforum.com" <mssms@lists.myitforum.com> > *Subject: *[mssms] default profile customization > > > > What’s the “best” way to customize the default profile in the windows 10 > era since copyprofile is defunct? I can set the desktop with unattend.xml > during either build and capture or deployment, but how do I control the > colors and just about everything in the “Personalization” space? Lock > screen image?, transparency?, color?, color on the title bar and start > menu? So many registry keys that are called the same thing in 6 different > places and a blog on the web for each saying that one worked for one, but > didn’t for another. Themes don’t cover everything. I can prevent changing > all of this stuff in group policy, but it doesn’t seem that I can set > easily in the first place? Why is this so hard and so scattered? > > > > > > > >
