Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!


Windows 2008 R2 or Windows 2012
New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.

All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.

Windows 2008 R2 or Windows 2012

/me

Windows 2008 R2 or Windows 2012
  1. Which one would you prefer?84 votes
    1. Windows 2008 R2
      52.38%
    2. Windows 2012
      47.62%
«1

Comments

  • Windows Server 2008 R2 :)

  • AnthonySmithAnthonySmith Member, Patron Provider

    2012

  • prometeusprometeus Member, Host Rep

    2016

    What are we auctioning for?

  • LOL :)

  • Honestly, 2012 R2, unless I can't use it due to Hardware/Software non-support. Why? If I'm setting up something using Windows Server, it's probably going to be running for a while, and 2012 R2 has the longest support lifetime, being the newest. Plus, the UI isn't that bad on a Server, and it works quite nicely.

  • 1 (one) Windows 2008 R2 license.

    I don't think someone will offer 2020

  • RDP seems to work better in 2012..

  • I still prefer 2008 R2 interface, but 2012 R2 has brought back the start menu!

  • Have had quite a few BSODs on 2012 R2 (was a test server we had running).

  • ZigaraZigara Member
    edited November 2013

    2012 R2.

    I've been running a heavy MSSQL server on it with 97+ days uptime now. Rock solid.

    If you're having BSOD's you might have a bigger problem. Perhaps a piece of your hardware does not play well with 2012.

    I'll admit the UI is pretty lame, but with R2 it's slightly better. Try right clicking the start menu button, you'll see some very nice shortcuts that make it a lot better than R1.

  • NeoonNeoon Community Contributor, Veteran

    2008 R2 its better. 2012 takes a lot of memory.

  • @Zigara said:
    2012 R2.

    I've been running a heavy MSSQL server on it with 97+ days uptime now. Rock solid.

    If you're having BSOD's you might have a bigger problem. Perhaps a piece of your hardware does not play well with 2012.

    I'll admit the UI is pretty lame, but with R2 it's slightly better. Try right clicking the start menu button, you'll see some very nice shortcuts that make it a lot better than R1.

    It could be. It's a test system - on KVM. The host node is smartos :)

  • @Infinity580 said:
    2008 R2 its better. 2012 takes a lot of memory.

    It'd be useful if you shed some more light on why it's better. There are many improvements to the core of windows server in 2012 and MANY big improvements to hyper-v in 2012 r2.

    @concerto49 said:
    It could be. It's a test system - on KVM. The host node is smartos :)

    Perhaps it's the drivers. I am running R2 in KVM with virtio drivers smooth as butter. I recall running R1 in smartos too, it'd be real sad if they broke smartos compatibility somehow.

    I think the real issue with 2012 for everyone is the UI. That's about the only reason to want to stick to 2008 besides supporting some old application that doesn't support 2012.

  • @concerto49 said:
    It could be. It's a test system - on KVM. The host node is smartos :)

    I normally install 2012 in a KVM guest in proxmox.. never had a BSOD, even when I install it on pure ramdisk never had a BSOD..

  • @earl said:
    I normally install 2012 in a KVM guest in proxmox.. never had a BSOD, even when I install it on pure ramdisk never had a BSOD..

    Was 2012 R2.

    @earl said:
    Perhaps it's the drivers. I am running R2 in KVM with virtio drivers smooth as butter. I recall running R1 in smartos too, it'd be real sad if they broke smartos compatibility somehow.

    Could be or the particular smartos build. We're waiting to see. Testing new platform for KVM :)

  • 4 months ago i would have said windows 2008 R2 100% but ever since discovering the data deduplication feature in Server 2012. i am sold on 2012 :)

  • mikhomikho Member, Host Rep

    2012
    And why are you using the gui with 2012? Install it without, remove unneeded but still installed services and you have a windows leb.

  • mikhomikho Member, Host Rep

    @earl said:
    RDP seems to work better in 2012..

    Or RDS as it is named now.
    It should, thats one of the things Microsoft worked on improving.
    http://blogs.technet.com/b/windowsserver/archive/2012/05/09/windows-server-2012-remote-desktop-services-rds.aspx

    Thanked by 1earl
  • @MikHo said:

    I did not notice that.. thanks. yeah I noticed streaming is smoother on RDS vs RDP but 2008 is definitely lighter on resources..

  • smansman Member
    edited November 2013

    You gotta give MS at least 2-3 years before using their Server OS's. I broke that rule with 2008 R2 because I couldn't do what I wanted with 2003 and 2008 and it caused me all sorts of grief. Seems pretty stable now though.

    If not for anything else it's better to wait that long so the amount of troubleshooting info on the internet builds up. It sucks when you have a problem and cannot find solutions by googling.

  • windows 2012 r2

  • linux

  • mikhomikho Member, Host Rep

    @earl said:
    I did not notice that.. thanks. yeah I noticed streaming is smoother on RDS vs RDP but 2008 is definitely lighter on resources..

    I would say, it depends. :) if you are anly interested in running, say a webserver that doesn't need a GUI then 2012 R2 is much better because of the option to remove GUI and improved remote management.

    Thanked by 1earl
  • kyakykyaky Member
    edited November 2013

    win 2008 R1 & win 2008 R2 and 2012 are all good. what about 2012 R2?
    I don't know why sometimes I find R1 has less problem than R2 when I run a certain software which eats CPU usage a bit. 2012 is good too. guess what, Chinese market prefer Win2003 xD

  • @MikHo said:
    I would say, it depends. :) if you are anly interested in running, say a webserver that doesn't need a GUI then 2012 R2 is much better because of the option to remove GUI and improved remote management.

    thats true.. wonder how much overhead you save for not installing the gui in 2012..

    I dont usually use windows for a webserver, more like connecting to ipmi for my other servers cause my home dsl upload is slow.

  • mikhomikho Member, Host Rep

    On a customers server it came down to 300 mb on a clean install.
    Then some services and its now running at around 500 mb.

  • DewlanceVPSDewlanceVPS Member, Patron Provider

    Windows 2008 r2, easy to use, no need lot of RAM/HDD like Windows 2012.

  • @MikHo said:
    2012
    And why are you using the gui with 2012? Install it without, remove unneeded but still installed services and you have a windows leb.

    have lowendguide for that?

  • mikhomikho Member, Host Rep

    @uchihakun said:
    have lowendguide for that?

    When installing from iso select the core option.
    When loggednin, start powershell and execute "uninstall-windowsfeature server-gui-mgmt-infra -restart"

    After reboot you will be on your way. Now shutdown and/or uninstall features you don't need.

    Thanked by 1uchihakun
  • smansman Member
    edited November 2013

    @MikHo said:
    After reboot you will be on your way. Now shutdown and/or uninstall features you don't need.

    Or just use Linux. Seriously why would someone pay for a WinBloz license only to use it without the GUI? That is pretty much the ONLY reason people so inclined prefer WinBloz over Linux. The GUI. Second reason is probably the wizards. I'm guessing a lot of those won't work without the GUI either.

Sign In or Register to comment.