Windows Server: the verdict

Microsoft’s recent launch of its Windows Server 2008 operating system, which was made available for UK customers to purchase last month, has drawn mixed reactions from IT managers, the majority of whom see no compelling reason to rush into upgrading from Windows Server 2003.

Longhorn, as the operating system (OS) was codenamed prior to deciding on its release date, originally promised to deliver a stack of innovative features. But the fact that it has taken so long to get the system ready for market, combined with the continued absence of Microsoft’s much-vaunted Hyper-V virtualisation technology, means Windows Server 2008 is more a collection of low-level enhancements alongside a few “killer” features.

These include support for Internet Information Server (IIS) 7.0, read-only domain controllers (RODCs) and improved remote terminal services.

“If you go back to when Microsoft first started to whip up interest in Longhorn, the thing that got us excited was 64-bit support and that has already been around for a while,” says Martin Hingley, chief research officer at analyst IDC.

“Microsoft has tied three things together at launch: Visual Studio, SQL Server and Windows Server 2008, but we are really talking about things that have already been announced.”

Of the notable features that Windows Server 2008 does provide, RODC appears to improve security and offers the potential for server consolidation in some environments.

The integration of IIS 7.0 is a bonus for many companies, particularly those with a large web presence, as this version of the internet platform was not supported by Windows Server 2003.

IT departments can provision different versions of the OS optimised for role-based servers, which may also ease deployment, allowing more customised tuning, optimisation and workload management.

And the thousands of small tweaks and refinements also appear to have delivered significant performance benefits over Windows Server 2003, though such benefits remain to be qualified by proper, independent testing.

Virtualisation demand

But whether Microsoft is kicking itself for failing to ship the final code for its Hyper-V server virtualisation technology with the release version of Windows Server 2008 might be immaterial.

The company made the final test release for the software upgrade available on 19 March, and said no feature changes to the final version, due in autumn 2008, are expected.

But performance, stability and reliability tweaks designed to make sure the hypervisor works well with different third-party operating systems and hardware platforms are still being worked out.

At the Windows Server 2008 launch, Microsoft appeared keen to play down the significance of server virtualisation, citing recent IDC figures which estimate only four per cent of new servers shipped have virtualisation capabilities installed.

Andy Hopkirk, head of research and development at the National Computing Centre (NCC), believes the IDC figure is disingenuous, based on a quote that came out of VMware’s initial public offering documentation when the company was keen to stress the size of the available market to potential investors.

According to NCC estimates, the number of organisations that describe themselves as fully implemented on virtualisation technologies works out to about seven to nine per cent, says Hopkirk.

“About 55 per cent of NCC members have partially implemented or are developing server virtualisation. These are mainly pragmatic and sceptical people who are getting on with IT tasks on a day-to-day basis. If they are turning their attention to server virtualisation, there has to be some positive value to be had there,” he says.

“I also suspect the number of people interested in virtualisation is large, but those who have the ability to experiment with it is quite small. Our surveys among IT managers suggest virtualisation adoption is a lot higher than four per cent; something like 25 per cent.”

With VMware already widely installed by the large companies that are most likely to use server virtualisation in datacentres and server farms, Microsoft could face an uphill task in persuading IT departments that Hyper-V is worth the wait.

But the analysts say that Microsoft’s trump innovation with Hyper-V comes not in the software itself, but in the virtual machines (VMs) that can be integrated with Microsoft’s Systems Centre management platform to provide administrators with much closer control over the virtual servers in their environment.

“The heart of it is the management piece ­ – virtualisation can be used in all sorts of places but if you want to get the most out of it, you have to be able to manage it properly,” says Hopkirk.

“In a way, VMware markets virtualisation but sells systems management. Hypervisors are just little things that are stuck into operating systems and there is no reason to get excited about them, but there is a mass of equipment out there and problems about managing it.”

Upgrade cycles

Even when Hyper-V is finally ready for commercial release and fully integrated with Windows Server 2008, few firms are likely to migrate existing hardware to the new OS ­ – most will wait until they buy new servers before deploying.

Microsoft would argue that such implementation patterns are by far the most common route for new OS introductions into the business environment. The time and manpower required to take down mission-critical systems to run upgrades can be counted in thousands of pounds, leaving IT managers reluctant to migrate unless absolutely necessary.

All the major server manufacturers, including HP, IBM and Dell, have committed to shipping Windows Server 2008 on new systems this year. Most companies operate on a three to five-year server upgrade cycle, though in some environments this can stretch to seven years.

But Hingley says the regular cycle could be altered by the economic downturn that threatens to engulf the US as a result of the sub-prime mortgage crisis.

“When there is economic uncertainty, there is some elasticity in server replacement cycles and organisations often adjust them. I would put the growth rate for 2008 below the growth rate for 2007, for example. There will be a lengthening of purchase decisions in the US,” he says.

Kiyomi Yamada, principal research analyst at Gartner, confirms that the credit crunch had a negative impact on the US financial services sector’s server spending toward the end of 2007.

He says large projects were delayed or reduced to smaller projects because of financial institutions’ weak performances and concern over the economic outlook.

The situation is not yet guaranteed to affect sales of Windows Server 2008 licences in Europe. But Microsoft will nevertheless be keeping its fingers crossed that the thousands of companies worldwide still using Windows Server 2000, as well as Windows Server 2003, will find enough reason to refresh their server software during the next few years.

What the experts say about Windows Server 2008

We started using VMware at the end of last year when we bought new IBM servers, and have now started to use it much more seriously. If a Microsoft product is fit for purpose and fits our needs, we will migrate to that product – it is simply a question of whether the new Microsoft server virtualisation product is a match for VMware, and whether it makes it easier to manage things when solely on Microsoft products from a services point of view.
Paul Curtis, head of application architecture, EasyJet

The concept of utility computing requires things such as virtualisation and grids, and that new architecture allows you to do more things more flexibly. Virtualisation can help you to be more effective and more economic with existing resources. The sophisticated management comes further down the line – you do not get that on day one unless you are lucky enough to be a greenfield site.
Andy Hopkirk, head of research and development, National Computing Centre

We are very interested in running Microsoft’s Softgrid application virtualisation system alongside Windows Server 2008, but the only way we can buy it is by buying desktop software assurance, and we do not want everything in that package. Microsoft has been very flexible on the licensing of Windows Server 2008, and we would look to see how flexible it can be on packaging application virtualisation as well. It has to be the right technical solution and the right commercial solution – it cannot be one or the other.
Crispin Hobbs, PC infrastructure and systems manager, John Lewis Partnership

Like this story? Spread the news by clicking below:

 del.icio.us     Digg this     reddit!