Yep. This becomes even more problematic when you outsource to low cost locations.
Thanks, Brian Desmond br...@briandesmond.com c - 312.731.3132 From: Andrew S. Baker [mailto:asbz...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 03, 2010 7:09 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: Server Core Your point is well made, Ben, but many environments that could use Server Core don't have the requisite scripting skills to manage it either. And companies are not trying to train people these days. And the economy hasn't been helpful of late. But I think that the lack of hotpatching played a role as well. -ASB: http://XeeSM.com/AndrewBaker Sent from my Motorola Droid On Jun 3, 2010 6:10 PM, "Ben Scott" <mailvor...@gmail.com<mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com>> wrote: On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 5:41 PM, Free, Bob <r...@pge.com<mailto:r...@pge.com>> wrote: > What is interesting is if you talk... Well, in the case of Server Core, I would guess that might be because of the limited usefulness of the product as delivered. As per that TechNet article you quoted, Microsoft doesn't support using Server Core for very much. Microsoft's party line is you're not supposed to use it for third-party software at all. The number of servers without *any* third-party software on them is practically zero. Why on Earth did Microsoft think that would see significant adoption? This is a classic case of a company hearing a request -- "we don't want to have to run a GUI on our servers" -- and delivering something which technically met the request, but totally missed the point. (And you still can't run it on a serial console.) -- Ben ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.co... ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
