Microsoft Windows Home Server 2011 (OEM) $32 After $10 rebate

nusyo

Member
Feb 27, 2011
106
0
0
Depends what you do on that pc... for example it doesn't have Media Center (which I run on my HTPC) and it only supports 8 GB ram (which is plenty anyway).

anyone runs WHS 2011 and W7 on the same pc? (HTPC)
 

ussfletcher

Platinum Member
Apr 16, 2005
2,569
2
81
WHS is pretty much only useful as a home server for automated backups, NAS that sort of thing. It does have a desktop environment, however it isn't like Windows 7 despite its appearance. It is essentially Windows server 2008 r2 with some UI mods.

In any case, it would be a better decision to pay for W7 Home Premium for $60 more, if you are planning on using it for desktop tasks.

Source: My experience.
 

VirtualLarry

No Lifer
Aug 25, 2001
56,397
10,079
126
If you need a cheap Windows 7 license, buy a Family Pack on amazon.com. If you only need one license, split it with a buddy you trust.

I wouldn't recommend running a WHS OS as a client OS. Too funky.
 

Nvidiaguy07

Platinum Member
Feb 22, 2008
2,844
4
81
thanks for the responses. I would be putting it on my HTPC/media server that is in the living room and is always on. Could possibly benefit from some of its features, but i think im going to stay away from this one. Thanks!
 

Stoneburner

Diamond Member
May 29, 2003
3,491
0
76
I still use home server 2007. It's been freakishly stable and reliable Any reason to try this new one?
 

bigi

Platinum Member
Aug 8, 2001
2,484
153
106
If you need a cheap Windows 7 license, buy a Family Pack on amazon.com. If you only need one license, split it with a buddy you trust.

This is piracy.

What is the problem here? You spend $500 for a GPU and don't wanna spend for OS?
 

tydas

Golden Member
Mar 10, 2000
1,284
0
76
This is piracy.

What is the problem here? You spend $500 for a GPU and don't wanna spend for OS?

Honestly, that splitting hairs...since the world is my family I don't see an issue with this...
 

ControlD

Diamond Member
Apr 25, 2005
5,440
44
91
I still use home server 2007. It's been freakishly stable and reliable Any reason to try this new one?

No reason at all. WHS2011 is much more resouce intensive and the removal of drive pooling takes away one of the killer features of the product. None of the existing problems seem to have been fixed either (client backups still get corrupted at the same rate for example). I'm sure there are plenty of features added in WHS2011 that might appeal to more network savy users, but for what I thought the target market was (home users) I didn't see any benefit at all from upgrading.
 

WT

Diamond Member
Sep 21, 2000
4,818
59
91
No drive pooling, no reason to upgrade for me. My MSS v1 is running well, so I think WHS2011 is a step back as far as its intended purpose.
 

Lark888

Golden Member
Oct 10, 1999
1,032
0
71
I purchased this from Tiger. However, the claim service popped up a message that All rebates were claimed and no more were available. I called in and Tiger canceled my order. Still good at $40 but not the deal I was willing to buy.
 

Binky

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
4,046
4
81
WHS 2011 can use 3TB+ drives. That alone is worth the upgrade for many people. WHS 2011 also supports things like server backups, and Acronis 2011 runs on it for cloning. I upgraded recently and I'm pretty happy to be rid of my last XP-based system in the house.

Stablebit drivepool is a very simple replacement for drive extender, but it will cost you another $20.
 
Last edited:

PokerGuy

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
13,650
201
101
Drive pooling was by far the best feature of WHS as far as I'm concerned. By yanking that out of the feature set, they've made the product much less useful and not worth buying IMO. I'll stick to the old WHS, it works like a champ, even with Win 7 machines.
 

kmmatney

Diamond Member
Jun 19, 2000
4,363
1
81
thanks for the responses. I would be putting it on my HTPC/media server that is in the living room and is always on. Could possibly benefit from some of its features, but i think im going to stay away from this one. Thanks!

I have WHS 2007, and it really not too bad when I use it occasioanlly as a normal computer. I use it for the automated backups, as a media server (I had to install Serviio for that), running a minecraft server, and for sharing a scanner (through RDC). it is a bit funky, but it serves as a decent overall OS. I did have to make a few changes to make it more user-friendly, but you can find all the settings online. It would think that 2011 would even be easier to use, and have a better interface. For $32, not a bad option, and since its alwys on, uyou can still use some of its server functions.
 

kmmatney

Diamond Member
Jun 19, 2000
4,363
1
81
I still use home server 2007. It's been freakishly stable and reliable Any reason to try this new one?

Same here - I've had zero issues with WHS 2007, and I look being able to pool up 5 random hard drives. For me, the loss of drive extender ruins it, but the next version of Home server should have an even better version of drive extender.
 

Binky

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
4,046
4
81
WHS v1 was $100 at retail, with DE
WHS 2011 is $40-$50 at retail, without DE
The various DE replacements are $20-$40, so the net cost is still less than v1.

I don't understand the problem with the loss of DE. WHS 2011 is better, and with DrivePool it's much better. You also have a choice now to buy a DE replacement, or just use WHS as it is. There are many options.
 

tigersty1e

Golden Member
Dec 13, 2004
1,963
0
76
What does this os have over just using windows 7 in a server and setting all the pc's connected in the same homegroup?

BTW, I use acronis for backups.
 

txlonghorn

Senior member
Jul 26, 2004
380
0
76
WHS v1 recovery CD is 32-bit. It will not recover 64-bit system. You have to either manually load 32-bit NIC driver and pray it will find your WHS, or yank the disk out and recover it via another WHS client using ClientRestoreWizard.exe. Can someone confirm that MS fixed this problem in WHS 2011? I'd love for once to just restore a PC without jumping through a bunch of hoops.
 

imaheadcase

Diamond Member
May 9, 2005
3,850
7
76
WHS v1 recovery CD is 32-bit. It will not recover 64-bit system. You have to either manually load 32-bit NIC driver and pray it will find your WHS, or yank the disk out and recover it via another WHS client using ClientRestoreWizard.exe. Can someone confirm that MS fixed this problem in WHS 2011? I'd love for once to just restore a PC without jumping through a bunch of hoops.


Mmm never had that issue with v1. I recover Win7 64bit all the time fine.

It does not matter if the CD is 32bits fyi.
 

ControlD

Diamond Member
Apr 25, 2005
5,440
44
91
WHS v1 recovery CD is 32-bit. It will not recover 64-bit system. You have to either manually load 32-bit NIC driver and pray it will find your WHS, or yank the disk out and recover it via another WHS client using ClientRestoreWizard.exe. Can someone confirm that MS fixed this problem in WHS 2011? I'd love for once to just restore a PC without jumping through a bunch of hoops.

The recovery is better for sure with WHS2011 in regards to 64 bit support which is the main reason I made the upgrade. I also had some major headaches restoring 64 bit machines in the past with WHS v1. The only problem I had with WHS2011 was that every time I needed to restore a machine I couldn't because the backup database had errors in it. Probably some type of user error I'm sure, but after two failed restores I tossed the disk and installed something better.
 

txlonghorn

Senior member
Jul 26, 2004
380
0
76
Mmm never had that issue with v1. I recover Win7 64bit all the time fine.

It does not matter if the CD is 32bits fyi.

You are one of the lucky ones. From http://www.mediasmarthome.com/artic...om-Windows-Home-Server-What-You-Need-to-Know/ :

"not everyone using a 64-bit OS will have restoration issues. Like a Windows installation disc, the Windows Home Server PC restore disc includes a wide variety of 32-bit drivers that supports a wide variety of PC hardware. If compatible drivers for your PCs essential hardware are included, you'll be just fine."

I was not so lucky. I had no problem restoring an old 32-bit Athlon era XP machine, but I had no luck restoring any modern dual-core 64-bit machines running Win7 pro.