Windows Home Server Advanced Edition?

As the Windows Home Server team look at planning future versions Todd Headrick (Windows Home Server Product Planner) on the Home Server Blog ask if there were two version of Windows Home Server basic and advanced what would be the user limits be on each edition? At the moment there is a 10 user limit on Windows Home Server and it looks like the team are investigating raising the limits.

So, now we are back in the product planning phase and culling through all of these suggestions.  What if we had 2 versions of Windows Home Server – one for the "basic" household and one for the more "advanced" household.  What should we think about using as limits for the number of users and computers for a "basic" version and for an "advanced" version?

This is the first time there has been talk of additional versions of Windows Home Server and as Terry Walsh says on WGS there is plenty of scope for a advanced version of WHS having improved Media Center integration, something we all want.

An advanced version of Windows Home Sever with better Media Center integration and services would be great and then the basic version price could be closer to the NAS prices.

Share

0 thoughts on “Windows Home Server Advanced Edition?

  1. Why just “integrated” with Media Center? At my home, I’ve only toyed with Home Server, but I’ve got my Media Center machine hosting my family photos, videos, etc. It’s already my repository for some pretty important information. I’d love to have a box (with tuners) that does it all. To me, a home server for the advanced user should be one box that manages media, stores docs, and does backup/recovery.

    And integrate the remote desktop access to include remove media service (ala something like WebGuide).

    Just my wishful thinking. Yes, I’m a MS employee, but I’m not on the Media Center or Home Server teams.
    -Kevin

  2. I would love to see a proper combined unit but I don’t think we will see it.
    A WHS box with TV tuner serving out Media Center to extenders is my ideal platform

  3. I agree that more WHS features would be great… As long as ALL new features/functionality are offered sans hardware to DIY as WHS is today.

    I would definately like to see seamless “out of the box” TV Manager like integration between WHS and Media Center, as well as seamless integration between WHS and MC Extenders. Extenders should automatically find and configure themselves with content hosted on WHS the same way they do with VMC. Also, there should be a simple VMC “Keep” menu option that allows one to “keep” a recording on the WHS (which would then move that recording to WHS, delete it from VMC, while still showing/managing it in VMC Recorded TV).

    Having the ability to turn WHS into a “tuner server” would also be interesting. This could negate any requirement for VMC and would allow a WHS in the “closet” with only WHS MC Extenders connected to TVs. However, given the current state of MC Extenders (not offering all the VMC functionality), this may not be a good solution.

    I am not clear on the comment “… the basic version price could be closer to the NAS prices.” Are you saying that the current $150 price point for WHS should go down? And the price point for a WHS Advanced version would be $150? Or that the WHS Advanced version would be more than $150 (i.e. in the $300 range)?

  4. I’d dearly love to get a WHS installation going in my home, but I need a PC for it first! LOL

    Actually I just need a HDD for the PC I have sitting here. With the add-ons that have been reviewed, don’t they provide a lot of the WHS and VMC integration that people are talking about other than the “tuner server” functionality?

  5. @Marty on the price I mean
    A basic version could be priced closed to the NAS devices, i don’t mean the license cost, i mean a built unit like the HP unit. A complete system for a price close to a NAS and a advanced version prices higher

  6. Ah ok, where the NAS is a WHS based hardware “retail” product.

    However, if one considers/includes “system builders” in this discussion (about the future of WHS), it changes things a bit. Mostly because system builders are all “advanced” users who will make available only those WHS features they are willing to support as part of their product(s). And in some cases, like HP did, will add features/functionality that are not part of WHS.

    My fear along these lines is that Microsoft would cater to these system builders and create a WHS SKU (i.e. tuner server) that is only available to system builders (similar to what they did with the TV Pack, and we all know how well that fiasco turned out 🙂 )

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *