Drifting OT... I find myself often following behind those "perfect world"
folks, having to break the news that their wonderful product (I've seen no
monopoly by Microsoft (no pun intended); this seems an equal opportunity
offense by sales folks and certain types of consultants of all vendors).  I
think I get a much better response by customers when I don't simply read
them the marketing material but actually describe the pro's and con's in all
their gory detail.


  _____  

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of joe
Sent: Sunday, July 16, 2006 10:31 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Clean install VS Upgrade of Windows 2003


Oh I'm definitely not saying it isn't getting better. It truly is. But with
each release they tell you it is great and go ahead and do it and then the
next rev is when they tell you all the things that were done wrong that they
now do fine. While they don't tell you it is perfect, you certainly could
get that impression when dealing with them and the propaganda that is
released. 
 
It is the same with all of the MSFT products though, I had an OSS guy
chewing me out for it just this week how MSFT tells you how great the
product is until the next rev and then they tell you how horrible the last
was and how this one fixes everything. I really didn't debate the topic as I
have been onsite at MSFT for different events in a two week consecutive
period where the first week you are looking at the current product and they
are telling you how great it is and it doesn't have perf issues etc that you
may have heard about and then the next week you're there for a pre-release
NDA event and they are telling you how crappy the old (current that you just
saw the week before) product is and how all of these perf issues have been
corrected, etc. I am not even saying that people are lying because it was
completely different sets of people, had it been the same people I would
have called them out for it.
 
--
O'Reilly Active Directory Third Edition -
http://www.joeware.net/win/ad3e.htm 
 
 

  _____  

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Adner
Sent: Sunday, July 16, 2006 9:55 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Clean install VS Upgrade of Windows 2003


The statement that with each new OS the upgrade in place scenario has
improved, at least to date, has been true.  If they said it's perfected each
time then I could see your point.  I've been to many customers that have
done in-place upgrades of the OS with great success.  Is it the preferred
method assuming you have a choice?  I think everyone would agree a clean
install is always preferred.  But it's a very valid option given some of the
challenges that can crop up.
 



  _____  

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of joe
Sent: Sunday, July 16, 2006 6:28 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Clean install VS Upgrade of Windows 2003


I agree with Jorge on this. Every new OS MSFT comes out with they tell you
that it is much better at handling upgrades than the last and how bad the
last one actually did it. So if someone tells me K3 does it great I tell
them to say that when say LongHorn comes out. :)
 
Anyway, you will have legacy settings that stay around when you do an
upgrade say like the replication holdback reg settings, etc when you do an
upgrade and it could be confusing later when troubleshooting something.
 
Unless there is absolutely no way possible to do a fresh install then I
would recommend going that way. 
 
 
Going slightly OT, I even reinstall my personal home clients on a regular
basis (normally every 6 months but occasionally that slides depending on how
busy I am) to get away from Windows rot and clean off crap that I don't
currently use. I am also getting big into using virtual machines for most
desktop functions now so that makes things even easier as I can roll back to
a predetermined point or just pull the backup image off of a DVD that I made
when I first made the image. Of course make sure you update the image with
new patches first thing. :)  In fact right now, I am writing this email on a
virtual XP instance running with about 15 other virtuals on a machine that
is on the other side of my house.  Also all web surfing to untrusted sites
is done through a virtual I have with undo disks, after I finish surfing I
tell it to undo and it is ready for the next time. 
 
--
O'Reilly Active Directory Third Edition -
http://www.joeware.net/win/ad3e.htm 
 
 

  _____  

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Almeida Pinto,
Jorge de
Sent: Sunday, July 16, 2006 3:25 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Clean install VS Upgrade of Windows 2003


Personally I hate OS upgrades and try hard to avoid them and prefer to
choose a fresh clean install...
Although supported when upgrading an OS old stuff from the previous OS is
kept and besides that you might run into issues because of incompatibilities
with software, drivers, etc. A clean install in combination the migration of
the stuff hosted on the old server to the new server gives you a phased
approach. Upgrading directly impacts the server and if the upgrade fails you
might end up with a trouble server.
 
IMHO:
* avoid OS upgrades when possible and only use it when really necessary
(like for example NT4 PDC -> W2K3 DC, which is mandatory)
 
 

Met vriendelijke groeten / Kind regards,
Ing. Jorge de Almeida Pinto
Senior Infrastructure Consultant
MVP Windows Server - Directory Services
 
LogicaCMG Nederland B.V. (BU RTINC Eindhoven)
(   Tel     : +31-(0)40-29.57.777
(   Mobile : +31-(0)6-26.26.62.80
*   E-mail : <see sender address>

  _____  

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Bahta, Nathaniel V CTR
USAF NASIC/SCNA
Sent: Sun 2006-07-16 20:53
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: [ActiveDir] Clean install VS Upgrade of Windows 2003


Hey all,
 
Does anyone have any comments/articles, etc on the benefits or concerns of a
clean install of Windows 2003 Server VS an Upgrade?  My opinion is that
doing a clean install keeps system root clean.  It also pristinely adopts
the security best practices of 2003 Server.  Disk performance will improve
as well.  Does anyone have anything they can add to this?  I have migrated a
great portion of my network in a clean install path, and now it is coming
into question why did I not choose the upgrade path.
 
Any comments would be greatly appreciated,
 
Thanks,
Nate

<<attachment: winmail.dat>>

Reply via email to