This is not entirely true. You are in a GUI from the screenshots I've seen, there is just no Explorer shell as well as a lot of other absent graphical elements. The console is cmd.exe and in a window. You also have some programs such as notepad, regedit, the task manager, and some control panel applets. From what I can tell it's more of a stripped version of Windows. Some good info and screenshots on it here:
http://www.tomshardware.com/2008/03/11/windows_server_2008_core_installation /page5.html Actually it's a bit disappointing as it seems some tasks are incredibly convoluted doing them from the command line. I think if you're going to allow some graphical elements, then I think you should just go ahead and include some more useful items like the ability to install and uninstall programs. And the memory footprint sure isn't what I expected. -- Mike Gill From: Sauvigne, Craig M [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2008 12:34 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Microsoft Hyper-V Server Core is 2008 only. It is a non-gui version of Server 2008. Everything is done from the command line or remotely. Craig From: Anthony [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2008 11:55 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: Microsoft Hyper-V I've not seen an install of Server Core before. Is this new to Windows 2008 or part of the Hyper-V install? Ken, can you email me your presentation? Sounds like a good introduction. Anthony ----- Original Message ----- From: Steve Ens <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 8:57 AM Subject: Re: Microsoft Hyper-V However when considering patching a Core vs full OS install of the host OS, the core will probably have to be rebooted far less. On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 9:47 AM, Ken Schaefer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: To be honest, in my experience you might get a few hundred MB of RAM back by running Core rather than a full install. Unless you have a few VM hosts, it's not worth worrying about either way. Performance is good - very good compared to Virtual Server 2005 However there are a few drawbacks: - No real management tools yet (SCVMM vNext is required for managing Hyper-v) - A few bugs (e.g. with TCP Offload and the new NICs) - No ability to build VMs using PXE booting and using the new synthetic NICs ( you need to use a legacy NIC) If you want a drill-down into Hyper-V architecture, I did a presentation for my local user group on it that I can send to you direct. Cheers Ken From: Tim Vander Kooi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, 31 March 2008 7:24 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Microsoft Hyper-V It is light-years ahead of where Microsoft's VM technology has been. You want to use it on top of Server Core as opposed to the standard server install to keep your parent OS from using all your resources. I'm sure you'll have many longs days of fun with it. Tim From: Sauvigne, Craig M [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 31, 2008 8:00 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Microsoft Hyper-V Has anyone been playing with Hyper-V from Microsoft? If so, what are your impressions? Since it is rolled into our licensing for Server 2008 anyway, we are looking at it for virtualization. It seems like it has a lot of the same features and functions as VMWare and ESX. I am just now setting up a test box for it. Any hints, tips or tricks to it would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! ==================== Craig M. Sauvigne System Administrator Winthrop University Rock Hill, SC 29733 [EMAIL PROTECTED] SC143 ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm> ~
