yeah, you have to fight and show the business that what you are doing will have an huge impact down the road. It is all dollars and ROI to them, if you can show that testing now, will save you tons in troubleshooting, incedents, and lost productivity time. You should be able to convince them that you should be able to get the parts you need

Well the parts were taken to build a new more compatible 2008 server, except that this project is being transferred to someone else too. I think I'll still get to manage WDS on it once it is up and running but who knows.

For those of you who are running Windows Server 2008 now, I noticed in the 'help' files regarding enabling shadow copies, that you are now able to store them on a different volume. This was not possible in Server 2003. Has anyone tried this?

Might as well be running it on eeePC

So far I am still waiting to get my hands on the 8GB EEE PC. I've only gotten the 4GBs so far... They work with XP Pro and can only be imaged with ImageX and not the GHost we use. They are cool little things for sure.

I've got Vista SP1 , VS2008 Team Edition and Photoshop CS3 on my 4GB 701 and it works satisfactory. Server 2008 did just as well.

Yes, i have the similar problem.

Actually, I am a small business consultant, and one of our clients is a small architect firm. One of their servers is a Windows Server 2003 x64 box with 8 GB of RAM and 2 TB of storage. Their data usage is NUTS! Another server is SBS 2003 primarily for Exchange and a few other things. They have an FTP server and they also have a server dedicated to ISA 2006 and their plotters.

I've been doing a bit of work with our new 2k8 server, as the guy it was assigned to doesnt know how to use WDS.

Anyways, we just upgraded it to 16GB of RAM so it runs real nice. We also are running a 1.7TB RAID 10 for storage, and some smaller capacity mirror for the OS.

Right now we are battling this issue:
http://www.msfn.org/board/System-Error-123...ve-t120006.html

Also, right now we are experiencing a lag issue but can't seem to trace it. The server is operating with 2 teamed (Team 0) gigabit NICs using Cat 6 cable on a gigabit switch. When we are deploying an image, network utilization is average 95%. When capturing an image, util is 2% or less, with spikes up to 40%.

Doing a comparitive study, this means on a capture the 2008 is getting an average of 87Mbps from a client on a gigabit network. Compared to my 2003 server which gets an average of 58Mbps on a capture on a 100Mbps network. While 2008 network util is 0.40% to 2%, the 2003 gets 43% to 76%. But these numbers lie. Both servers are experiencing approximately the same capture speed, but experience different deploy speeds.

What could be causing this limit on the capture (aka data-in) speed?

I've seen the same problem too, I'm guessing that the RWMs used by the WDS are still using the previous (6.0.6000) version of the wimgapi internally. Capturing manually with latest ImageX doesn't cause this problem, or at least not to the extent you're describing.

AFAIK, when Mr. Bangalore Guruprakash (brGuru) first implemented the WIM algorithms they were not designed to handle UNC paths so there's some ugly hack involved that does the dirty work of remapping something into something else digestible by the WDS data-in operation.

Try to do a capture manually to see what speeds.