| Author |
Message |
JohnNews
Guest
|
 Posted:
Wed May 26, 2004 9:11 pm Post subject:
Microsoft Storage |
|
|
Folks:
I have a few quick questions on STORAGE according to Microsoft.
* How well does Microsoft Storage (Hardware & Software) compare with
other companies offering storage solutions like: HP, EMC, Veritas, etc
* How different is Windows 2000 Storage from Windows 2003 Storage Server
* Is Windows 2003 Server different from Windows 2003 Storage Server ?
Are we dealing with same products with different names ?
*
Thanks,
John. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Joseph J. Hand
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu May 27, 2004 12:52 am Post subject:
Re: Microsoft Storage |
|
|
I work for VERITAS, so I am going to try to be as politically correct as
possible on question 1.... ;-) Answers are inline...
(also beware that the answers below are opinions of mine, not the company I
work for or Microsoft in any way.)
"JohnNews" <johncarryl@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:O3Ed2R0QEHA.3476@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
| Quote: | Folks:
I have a few quick questions on STORAGE according to Microsoft.
* How well does Microsoft Storage (Hardware & Software) compare with
other companies offering storage solutions like: HP, EMC, Veritas, etc
|
(jh) A lot of the new storage related technology within Windows is in the
form of APIs and Services, with a few exceptions. What MS tends to do best
is reign in the many different approaches ISVs and IHVs use and provide
these service level and API level entry points so the end user is assured of
the same quality and supportability across different vendors. In the case of
VSS for instance, MS allows us and other vendors to perform volume level
snapshots through an API now, which guarantee's the quality of data, so long
as the application also leverages the APIs (think Exchange 2003). From the
user's perspective, you can choose from the vendors that support VSS and get
the same level of comfort. In the old days, we all wrote our own different
solutions for snapshots... and they worked... Now, their supported. For
other
things like replication and virtualization, MS provides some tools and they
work well. Most times, in our case (I can't speak for EMC and others...), we
provide tools across multiple platforms allowing you to leverage in house
knowledge on our products from other platforms. For the shop that runs only
Windows, it may be a better fit to use the built in solutions. It all
depends on the environment and the user's level of comfort using a third
party. As the future unfolds, MS will undoubtedly play further into the
storage market because their model is to cover the users from the top to the
bottom. One Stop Shopping. The important thing to note is that for the
application at hand, you have more than one way to go and you will need to
get educated on the many different technologies available and make the right
choice for your company, based on need, features, and ROI.
| Quote: |
* How different is Windows 2000 Storage from Windows 2003 Storage
Server |
(jh) In my opinion, there have been significnt changes to say that it is a
huge difference, specifically in the manageability, availability, and
reliability of the products. The same reason you would upgrade a regular
server from 2000 to 2003 apply here. Just in the area of storage alone,
there are significant changes. Also, the IHVs offerering WSS are now able to
bundle quite a bit more value, like replication of the data from one to the
other and hooks into DFS to make the overall experience for the user easier
and richer. The Voluem Shadow Copy service alone is worth the price of
admission. You get the abiltiy to set up the periodic snapshots and the end
user can pull back prior versions with a few mouse clicks. Painless...
| Quote: |
* Is Windows 2003 Server different from Windows 2003 Storage Server ?
Are we dealing with same products with different names ?
*
(jh) Yes, they are different. WSS is all about simplicity. It can be
extended by the third party vendor to add value based on your need. The |
standard Windows 2003 is what you are able to buy and build your
applications, infrastructure, etc... on. WSS makes it easy to plug in a file
server(s) and forget about it. It is already tuned and optimized for the
task at hand. You may want to take a look at the Top Ten reasons to use WSS
on MS's website at the following link:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserversystem/wss2003/productinformation/topten/default.mspx
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mark [MSFT]
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu May 27, 2004 12:57 am Post subject:
Re: Microsoft Storage |
|
|
1- Companies like HP and EMC ship and support Windows Storage Server
products. The range of possible products for "storage" is massive - from $1k
1u IDE NAS devices to quite expensive clusters running HW RAID with
terabytes of storage. So, in those market where Storage Server competes, it
is the clear winner (OK, you had to expect some bias here.) This might give
you some insight into why Windows Storage Server was chosen in certain
cases:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserversystem/wss2003/productinformation/casestudies/default.mspx
2- A primary difference is in license - Storage Servers are meant to be just
that: file and print servers. Thus, Storage Servers are not intended to be
application servers, Exchange servers, SQL Servers, domain controllers or
"productivity suite" type servers. Storage Servers can come with some
additional features and configurations that are not part of Windows Server.
Features like Directory Quotas, File Screening, Storage Reports, "out of
box" multi-protocol share support, Web Administration, etc.
3- Think of Storage Server as Windows Server tooled to be specifically a
Storage Server.
--
Mark St. John
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"JohnNews" <johncarryl@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:O3Ed2R0QEHA.3476@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
| Quote: | Folks:
I have a few quick questions on STORAGE according to Microsoft.
* How well does Microsoft Storage (Hardware & Software) compare with
other companies offering storage solutions like: HP, EMC, Veritas, etc
* How different is Windows 2000 Storage from Windows 2003 Storage
Server
* Is Windows 2003 Server different from Windows 2003 Storage Server ?
Are we dealing with same products with different names ?
*
Thanks,
John.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mark [MSFT]
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu May 27, 2004 1:00 am Post subject:
Re: Microsoft Storage |
|
|
OK, I misread.
Difference between Windows Storage 2000 and 2003 mainly involve features
like VSS, MPIO, etc... This hits some highlights:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserversystem/storage/products/upgradereasons/upgrade.mspx
--
Mark St. John
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Mark [MSFT]" <mstjohn@online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:OnY6JQ2QEHA.3532@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
| Quote: | 1- Companies like HP and EMC ship and support Windows Storage Server
products. The range of possible products for "storage" is massive - from
$1k
1u IDE NAS devices to quite expensive clusters running HW RAID with
terabytes of storage. So, in those market where Storage Server competes,
it
is the clear winner (OK, you had to expect some bias here.) This might
give
you some insight into why Windows Storage Server was chosen in certain
cases:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserversystem/wss2003/productinformation/casestudies/default.mspx
2- A primary difference is in license - Storage Servers are meant to be
just
that: file and print servers. Thus, Storage Servers are not intended to be
application servers, Exchange servers, SQL Servers, domain controllers or
"productivity suite" type servers. Storage Servers can come with some
additional features and configurations that are not part of Windows
Server.
Features like Directory Quotas, File Screening, Storage Reports, "out of
box" multi-protocol share support, Web Administration, etc.
3- Think of Storage Server as Windows Server tooled to be specifically a
Storage Server.
--
Mark St. John
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights.
"JohnNews" <johncarryl@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:O3Ed2R0QEHA.3476@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
Folks:
I have a few quick questions on STORAGE according to Microsoft.
* How well does Microsoft Storage (Hardware & Software) compare with
other companies offering storage solutions like: HP, EMC, Veritas, etc
* How different is Windows 2000 Storage from Windows 2003 Storage
Server
* Is Windows 2003 Server different from Windows 2003 Storage Server
?
Are we dealing with same products with different names ?
*
Thanks,
John.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Brian Henderson
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Aug 10, 2004 1:55 am Post subject:
Re: Microsoft Storage |
|
|
Keep in mind how strange it is to be at the "Microsoft Storage Page" and most
of the users here at talking about Windows Storage Server (aka a Network
Attached Storage Device), and not Windows Server 2003 - which I believe is a
much more valid and credible storage solution (DAS or SAN). More about the
real storage platform for Windows can be found here:
Link:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/technologies/storage/default.mspx
"Mark [MSFT]" wrote:
| Quote: | OK, I misread.
Difference between Windows Storage 2000 and 2003 mainly involve features
like VSS, MPIO, etc... This hits some highlights:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserversystem/storage/products/upgradereasons/upgrade.mspx
--
Mark St. John
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Mark [MSFT]" <mstjohn@online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:OnY6JQ2QEHA.3532@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
1- Companies like HP and EMC ship and support Windows Storage Server
products. The range of possible products for "storage" is massive - from
$1k
1u IDE NAS devices to quite expensive clusters running HW RAID with
terabytes of storage. So, in those market where Storage Server competes,
it
is the clear winner (OK, you had to expect some bias here.) This might
give
you some insight into why Windows Storage Server was chosen in certain
cases:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserversystem/wss2003/productinformation/casestudies/default.mspx
2- A primary difference is in license - Storage Servers are meant to be
just
that: file and print servers. Thus, Storage Servers are not intended to be
application servers, Exchange servers, SQL Servers, domain controllers or
"productivity suite" type servers. Storage Servers can come with some
additional features and configurations that are not part of Windows
Server.
Features like Directory Quotas, File Screening, Storage Reports, "out of
box" multi-protocol share support, Web Administration, etc.
3- Think of Storage Server as Windows Server tooled to be specifically a
Storage Server.
--
Mark St. John
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights.
"JohnNews" <johncarryl@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:O3Ed2R0QEHA.3476@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
Folks:
I have a few quick questions on STORAGE according to Microsoft.
* How well does Microsoft Storage (Hardware & Software) compare with
other companies offering storage solutions like: HP, EMC, Veritas, etc
* How different is Windows 2000 Storage from Windows 2003 Storage
Server
* Is Windows 2003 Server different from Windows 2003 Storage Server
?
Are we dealing with same products with different names ?
*
Thanks,
John.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in