Windows 8.1 and Server 2012 R2: Quick start guide for sysadmins Windows 8.1 and Windows Server 2012 R2 are now officially available. New shiny toys for the kids, but how does a sysadmin license these new products? This post assumes you're already up and running with Windows 8 and Server 2012, but I'll quickly go over the basic requirements: You'll need to obtain your Server Key Management …
Another good tip to know: the KMS host can run on just about anything: dedicated server, park it with one of your AD servers, or even the admin's own workstation.
Just be absolutely certain that there's only *one* KMS host in the organization- if a second one appears, it'l mess things up something fierce. (Don't ask me how I know this.)
Microsoft seems to have forgotten that lax use of VL keys, and dare I say piracy have helped get them get where they are.
If they had KMS and MAK activation back in the 1990s, we'd all be running Linux on our desktops today.
I used to have a TechNet subscription but they just shitcanned that and are forcing everyone to get an MSDN sub for ten times the cost. Sometimes I wonder if they want us to use their products at all.
After reading a report, taken from the Snowden revelations that the US NSA was spying on "friendly, Democratic" nations, even e-mail of the President of Mexico, it would be incredulous that any government, business or organization in other countries who have any common sense and/or technological competence would implement "shiny new toys" Microsoft Windows 2012 R2 and Windows 8.1 desktop software, not only because these software applications are considerably less reliable, less robust/powerful and less secure (and a lot more costly) when compared to enterprise Linux or BSD solutions like RedHat Enterprise Linux, Suse Enterprise Linux or FreeBSD Enterprise Server solutions, but that Microsoft can still provide the NSA access to their Operating Systems' "back doors" directly, or notify the NSA of OS bugs and vulnerabilities - by which the NSA can surreptitiously' obtain client data.
As the article author noted, "nice toys" and nothing more.
"these software applications are considerably less reliable, less robust/powerful and less secure (and a lot more costly) when compared to enterprise Linux or BSD solutions like RedHat Enterprise Linux, Suse Enterprise Linux or FreeBSD Enterprise Server solutions"
Which is all demonstrably false - except I would agree FreeBSD is more secure (in terms of security vulnerabilities) than the others. Free BSD is however subject to the same inherent security capability limitations as Redhat and Suse though - for instance having to run a process as root (SUDO) to get elevated rights unlike the proper constrained delegation in Windows, and an insecure monolithic kernel model as compared to the proper separation of drivers and kernel in Windows....
Windows performs better on the same hardware, costs less to license and run and is more reliable, and has far fewer security vulnerabilities that are on average fixed faster than SUE and RedHat though....
Those vulnerabilities you indicate on FreeBSD and Linux do not exist in mre modern, later than maybe releases from 2005.
Just recently" Netflix chose FreeBSD over Windows 2012 for securely and efficiently streaming millions of movies to subscribers each week. Their comprehensive Microsoft evaluations failed in every respect of reliability, scalability, flexibility and especially robust security. Verisign, one of the largest Domain Certificate authorities beefed up it's FreeBSD and core infrastructure Linux infrastructure to cope with substantially increased demand and Internet security concerns.
Both of these technology companies, as well as IBM, Yahoo, Fujitsu as well as all the Financial Stock exchanges and many more of the Fortune 1000 have specifically determined that these FOSS Enterprise OS were superior in functions indicated. Two industry respected companies - Juniper Networks and New york Internet have conducted comprehensive evaluations to report to the superiority of FreeBSD and Enterprise Linux over latest Windows in security, reliability and performance.
Your "opinion" compared to the technological experience and expertise of these companies is therefore of no consequence, and particularly without any 'verified, documented technical' supporting and independent reports
@W Anderson - You write as if the only direction of traffic is from MS to "anything except MS", you also represent companies like IBM as if they no longer have any staff or software running on Windows, which is as near totally wrong as you can get.
I've been puzzled recently that there are many companies moving TO Windows and particularly Exchange and that these companies have been some of the ones you would expect to be classic non-MS users. Fasthosts by default run Windows/Exchange as your mail provider, as do Demon/Thus/Vodafone, Reading Uni and Oxford Unis are doing the same. These are classic places where you'd expect Linux/FreeBSD, but they're moving away. Does this mean that everyone uses MS? No, but it equally suggests that you're trying to make the choices of a few companies fit your pre-judged ideas about Windows.
Anonymous Coward - I did not say that "every company" is moving away from Microsoft. I did indicate what Netflix, Verisign, IBM Oracle, Yahoo, Google, Facebook,Amazon, NASA, most of the 27 governments of the European union - representing approximately 4000 million people, Twitter, Linked-In, Every, repeat Every, repeat Every financial Stock Exchange on this earth. most of the Banking systems internationally - meaning the world globe have decided in choosing Linux/FreeBSD overwhelmingly, and in most exclusively versus Microsoft Windows, even 2012 R2 release. Windows Desktop PCs do not count in this topic of Server OS software.
Exactly how many more of the top 10,000 largest corporations, organizations, governments and other planets in the solar system do you need to know about who prefer and chose FreeBSD or Linux, before you stop pulling a few small ISP and other entities out of your head in senseless denial of facts.
No one is talking about absolutes, and asinine, convoluted excuses and arguments just don't cut it.
I'll use Server 2008 R2 until I can push my employer to switch to a Linux based solution. 2012 is a joke.
Microsoft has basically taken themselves out of the computer operating system business by forcing their phone's stupid GUI on traditional computer users, hopefully they have something else to fall back on.
No one likes their phone, their newest tablet OS bricks the hardware of their own overpriced tablets, the draconian DRM of their newest console will be driving customers to their direct competitors, and they can't even give away their newest OS to computer users. Is there anything they have done lately that hasn't been a huge failure?
Are you using a MAK or KMS key? I'm guessing MAK - but either way I can see both under the VLSC I have access to, under Windows Server 2012 R2 Datacenter.
Maybe your agreement has expired, or you have no datacenter license currently? Either way I'd take the webistes advice and contact an account manager.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
