[cluberti]

Could be - file handle invalid means a process has a handle to a file that is either no longer there, or has moved and the handle table wasn't updated. I'd say replace the failed drive and reboot, but you probably will need to restore the data from a backup (or re-backup the data on the client machines to recreate the backup store).

[Yonah]

i am wondering, has anyone tried installing the whs msi packages in the whs folder (which is in the root of the cd/dvd) on a windows version other then the one it comes with?
i'm gonna try this tonight, to see if i can make it work with windows 2000

------------------

i have done the following,
i copied the INSTALL directory from the cd to the root of my hd, ran setup_cmd, and rebooted.
everything went ok untill it complained that it couldnt change the update redirector due to some classes error :S
i disabled my internet connection, rebooted again, and then it continued untill it wants to install the desktop search module, which fails because i am using the wrong windows version :S
does anyone know how to solve this?

------------------

i also think i solved this by downloading the xp version of WDS and renaming it, i have to recompl;ie the cd though, and since im not at home, i cant yet..
but ill post here if it worked

This post has been edited by Yonah: 12 May 2007 - 08:01 AM

[Nakatomi2010]

You can use Orca to edit the .msi file and let it install on any OS.... Someone got it to install on VistaX64, but it wont let them log in... Probably because x64 talks differently...

[Yonah]

Nakatomi2010, on May 15 2007, 08:34 PM, said:

You can use Orca to edit the .msi file and let it install on any OS.... Someone got it to install on VistaX64, but it wont let them log in... Probably because x64 talks differently...

do you know how he got it to install?
i seem to be unable to install it, it just refuses to run :S

[Bezalel]

Yonah, on May 10 2007, 06:14 AM, said:

i am wondering, has anyone tried installing the whs msi packages in the whs folder (which is in the root of the cd/dvd) on a windows version other then the one it comes with?
i'm gonna try this tonight, to see if i can make it work with windows 2000

I've had some success installing on 2003 server but It still needs the DVD. I'm still working on getting the installer to work completely from my hard drive so I can install WHS through RIS. My goal is to be able install WHS on a Dell PowerVault 715N.

[dexter.inside]

Bezalel, on May 30 2007, 04:55 AM, said:

I've had some success installing on 2003 server but It still needs the DVD. I'm still working on getting the installer to work completely from my hard drive so I can install WHS through RIS. My goal is to be able install WHS on a Dell PowerVault 715N.

Greetings,

I have documented in Part 2 of my guide how to perform a manual installation of WHS, how to use nLite on it, and how to generate new installation media. I believe it might help you reach your goals faster. http://nliteos.com/oemguide2.html and the forum topic is in my signature.

[XPerties]

I just recently started looking at this OS and it looks great especially in a house with 7 pcs and 2 laptops. I see the noted prices on the pre-built systems but what types of systems are you guys running your beta copies on? (CPU and Memory)

To bad it seems the beta doors are closed as I like to try a copy out prior to buying, guess I'll wait till end of Sept to grab a pre-built system. Anyone know when the retail copy of the OS is for sale and expected prices?

[ZaForD]

Hi XPerties,

I installed Beta2 on an old PIII 500 w/ 512mb RAM.
To test out MS's quoted specs, it ran just fine for almost a month.

Since then I've been using a 1.8GHz AMD64 w/ 512mb RAM on a ASUS A8V mATX mobo and 500GB Seagate HDD. Both CPT and RC installed and ran almost floorlessly.
[had to download the Win2K3 drivers for the Realtek NIC as the ones on the disk installed but didn't work]

I was intending it use this box with the OEM release, but with the look of the OEM prices in the UK. I might grab a cheap retail box instead.

[tjhart85]

Any ideas on a pricetag?

I've been using OpenSuse10.2 as my main server for quite some time, on a cheap PII, 300MHz machine no less.
Personally, I like it and don't think I'll change it for myself, but I do do computer work for many people & many of them believe FREE=UNRELIABLE, so I'd like to have an alternative ready for them.

WHS seems no better than any version of linux, but its automatic backup of new computers sounds like a definate plus. Also, video streaming to XBOX(360) is definately a selling point for people who want that feature.

I'm sure it'll look prettier & be easier for a noob to figure out than most linux distros as well.

For me, FREE=BETTER, but for others, who would like the features that WHS performs, that would obviously not be the case.

This post has been edited by tjhart85: 30 October 2007 - 06:44 PM

[cluberti]

I guess it's crazy some people will pay for ease of use and interoperability with their pre-existing components j/k

[tjhart85]

cluberti, on Oct 30 2007, 07:49 PM, said:

I guess it's crazy some people will pay for ease of use and interoperability with their pre-existing components j/k

LOL

Well, like I said, WHS is great if you'll use the extra features it gives you. But, if all your looking for is something to backup your files to and possibly stream media to another COMPUTER in your house, or your looking to set up a way for you to access your files from work or something, WHS is not needed.

Any version of Linux can do all of that, easily.

Now, if you want to stream to an XBOX(360), then its probably a must have for you.

If you have no use for the M$ specific functionality, then at least try the free alternative. If it don't work or you don't like it, you have justification for spending $(UNKNOWN) dollars on your server.

Just my $.02

[rendrag]

tjhart85, on Nov 2 2007, 11:33 AM, said:

cluberti, on Oct 30 2007, 07:49 PM, said:

I guess it's crazy some people will pay for ease of use and interoperability with their pre-existing components j/k

LOL

Well, like I said, WHS is great if you'll use the extra features it gives you. But, if all your looking for is something to backup your files to and possibly stream media to another COMPUTER in your house, or your looking to set up a way for you to access your files from work or something, WHS is not needed.

Any version of Linux can do all of that, easily.

Now, if you want to stream to an XBOX(360), then its probably a must have for you.

If you have no use for the M$ specific functionality, then at least try the free alternative. If it don't work or you don't like it, you have justification for spending $(UNKNOWN) dollars on your server.

Just my $.02

I was looking at WHS for the fact that you didn't need to know anything about RAID to set up file redundancy. The selective redundancy is really slick. I can make backups of my photos, but if I don't want to backup DVDs I've ripped to it, I don't need to. It increases the available storage because I don't really care if a HD goes down and I lose some DVD rips, but I do care if I lose a bunch of family photos.

I haven't seen selective RAID in any other product.

[valter]

Anyone has any comparison Windows Server 2003 vs WHS? More, how many web sites can be hosted on a WHS?

[bluescreens]

valter, on Feb 2 2008, 05:26 PM, said:

Anyone has any comparison Windows Server 2003 vs WHS? More, how many web sites can be hosted on a WHS?

Since it's the same engine, on the same hardware I'd expect the numbers to be the same or essentially similar.

[valter]

bluescreens, on Feb 2 2008, 08:56 PM, said:

valter, on Feb 2 2008, 05:26 PM, said:

Anyone has any comparison Windows Server 2003 vs WHS? More, how many web sites can be hosted on a WHS?

Since it's the same engine, on the same hardware I'd expect the numbers to be the same or essentially similar.

I would think the same, but then, you know MS, suddenly, when least expected, you find out that they have change the rules of engagement