Microsoft Storage - Storage

This is a discussion on Microsoft Storage - Storage ; Folks: I have a few quick questions on STORAGE according to Microsoft. * How well does Microsoft Storage (Hardware & Software) compare with other companies offering storage solutions like: HP, EMC, Veritas, etc * How different is Windows 2000 Storage ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Microsoft Storage

  1. Microsoft Storage

    Folks:


    I have a few quick questions on STORAGE according to Microsoft.


    * How well does Microsoft Storage (Hardware & Software) compare with
    other companies offering storage solutions like: HP, EMC, Veritas, etc

    * How different is Windows 2000 Storage from Windows 2003 Storage Server

    * Is Windows 2003 Server different from Windows 2003 Storage Server ?
    Are we dealing with same products with different names ?

    *




    Thanks,
    John.



  2. Re: Microsoft Storage

    I work for VERITAS, so I am going to try to be as politically correct as
    possible on question 1.... ;-) Answers are inline...

    (also beware that the answers below are opinions of mine, not the company I
    work for or Microsoft in any way.)


    "JohnNews" wrote in message
    news:O3Ed2R0QEHA.3476@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
    > Folks:
    >
    >
    > I have a few quick questions on STORAGE according to Microsoft.
    >
    >
    > * How well does Microsoft Storage (Hardware & Software) compare with
    > other companies offering storage solutions like: HP, EMC, Veritas, etc


    (jh) A lot of the new storage related technology within Windows is in the
    form of APIs and Services, with a few exceptions. What MS tends to do best
    is reign in the many different approaches ISVs and IHVs use and provide
    these service level and API level entry points so the end user is assured of
    the same quality and supportability across different vendors. In the case of
    VSS for instance, MS allows us and other vendors to perform volume level
    snapshots through an API now, which guarantee's the quality of data, so long
    as the application also leverages the APIs (think Exchange 2003). From the
    user's perspective, you can choose from the vendors that support VSS and get
    the same level of comfort. In the old days, we all wrote our own different
    solutions for snapshots... and they worked... Now, their supported. For
    other
    things like replication and virtualization, MS provides some tools and they
    work well. Most times, in our case (I can't speak for EMC and others...), we
    provide tools across multiple platforms allowing you to leverage in house
    knowledge on our products from other platforms. For the shop that runs only
    Windows, it may be a better fit to use the built in solutions. It all
    depends on the environment and the user's level of comfort using a third
    party. As the future unfolds, MS will undoubtedly play further into the
    storage market because their model is to cover the users from the top to the
    bottom. One Stop Shopping. The important thing to note is that for the
    application at hand, you have more than one way to go and you will need to
    get educated on the many different technologies available and make the right
    choice for your company, based on need, features, and ROI.

    >
    > * How different is Windows 2000 Storage from Windows 2003 Storage

    Server

    (jh) In my opinion, there have been significnt changes to say that it is a
    huge difference, specifically in the manageability, availability, and
    reliability of the products. The same reason you would upgrade a regular
    server from 2000 to 2003 apply here. Just in the area of storage alone,
    there are significant changes. Also, the IHVs offerering WSS are now able to
    bundle quite a bit more value, like replication of the data from one to the
    other and hooks into DFS to make the overall experience for the user easier
    and richer. The Voluem Shadow Copy service alone is worth the price of
    admission. You get the abiltiy to set up the periodic snapshots and the end
    user can pull back prior versions with a few mouse clicks. Painless...
    >
    > * Is Windows 2003 Server different from Windows 2003 Storage Server ?
    > Are we dealing with same products with different names ?
    >
    > *
    > (jh) Yes, they are different. WSS is all about simplicity. It can be

    extended by the third party vendor to add value based on your need. The
    standard Windows 2003 is what you are able to buy and build your
    applications, infrastructure, etc... on. WSS makes it easy to plug in a file
    server(s) and forget about it. It is already tuned and optimized for the
    task at hand. You may want to take a look at the Top Ten reasons to use WSS
    on MS's website at the following link:
    http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserv...n/default.mspx




    >
    >
    >
    > Thanks,
    > John.
    >
    >





  3. Re: Microsoft Storage

    1- Companies like HP and EMC ship and support Windows Storage Server
    products. The range of possible products for "storage" is massive - from $1k
    1u IDE NAS devices to quite expensive clusters running HW RAID with
    terabytes of storage. So, in those market where Storage Server competes, it
    is the clear winner (OK, you had to expect some bias here.) This might give
    you some insight into why Windows Storage Server was chosen in certain
    cases:
    http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserv...s/default.mspx

    2- A primary difference is in license - Storage Servers are meant to be just
    that: file and print servers. Thus, Storage Servers are not intended to be
    application servers, Exchange servers, SQL Servers, domain controllers or
    "productivity suite" type servers. Storage Servers can come with some
    additional features and configurations that are not part of Windows Server.
    Features like Directory Quotas, File Screening, Storage Reports, "out of
    box" multi-protocol share support, Web Administration, etc.

    3- Think of Storage Server as Windows Server tooled to be specifically a
    Storage Server.

    --
    Mark St. John
    This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.


    "JohnNews" wrote in message
    news:O3Ed2R0QEHA.3476@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
    > Folks:
    >
    >
    > I have a few quick questions on STORAGE according to Microsoft.
    >
    >
    > * How well does Microsoft Storage (Hardware & Software) compare with
    > other companies offering storage solutions like: HP, EMC, Veritas, etc
    >
    > * How different is Windows 2000 Storage from Windows 2003 Storage

    Server
    >
    > * Is Windows 2003 Server different from Windows 2003 Storage Server ?
    > Are we dealing with same products with different names ?
    >
    > *
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > Thanks,
    > John.
    >
    >




  4. Re: Microsoft Storage

    OK, I misread.

    Difference between Windows Storage 2000 and 2003 mainly involve features
    like VSS, MPIO, etc... This hits some highlights:
    http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserv...s/upgrade.mspx


    --
    Mark St. John
    This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.

    "Mark [MSFT]" wrote in message
    news:OnY6JQ2QEHA.3532@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
    > 1- Companies like HP and EMC ship and support Windows Storage Server
    > products. The range of possible products for "storage" is massive - from

    $1k
    > 1u IDE NAS devices to quite expensive clusters running HW RAID with
    > terabytes of storage. So, in those market where Storage Server competes,

    it
    > is the clear winner (OK, you had to expect some bias here.) This might

    give
    > you some insight into why Windows Storage Server was chosen in certain
    > cases:
    >

    http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserv...s/default.mspx
    >
    > 2- A primary difference is in license - Storage Servers are meant to be

    just
    > that: file and print servers. Thus, Storage Servers are not intended to be
    > application servers, Exchange servers, SQL Servers, domain controllers or
    > "productivity suite" type servers. Storage Servers can come with some
    > additional features and configurations that are not part of Windows

    Server.
    > Features like Directory Quotas, File Screening, Storage Reports, "out of
    > box" multi-protocol share support, Web Administration, etc.
    >
    > 3- Think of Storage Server as Windows Server tooled to be specifically a
    > Storage Server.
    >
    > --
    > Mark St. John
    > This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no

    rights.
    >
    >
    > "JohnNews" wrote in message
    > news:O3Ed2R0QEHA.3476@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
    > > Folks:
    > >
    > >
    > > I have a few quick questions on STORAGE according to Microsoft.
    > >
    > >
    > > * How well does Microsoft Storage (Hardware & Software) compare with
    > > other companies offering storage solutions like: HP, EMC, Veritas, etc
    > >
    > > * How different is Windows 2000 Storage from Windows 2003 Storage

    > Server
    > >
    > > * Is Windows 2003 Server different from Windows 2003 Storage Server

    ?
    > > Are we dealing with same products with different names ?
    > >
    > > *
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > > Thanks,
    > > John.
    > >
    > >

    >
    >




  5. Re: Microsoft Storage

    Keep in mind how strange it is to be at the "Microsoft Storage Page" and most
    of the users here at talking about Windows Storage Server (aka a Network
    Attached Storage Device), and not Windows Server 2003 - which I believe is a
    much more valid and credible storage solution (DAS or SAN). More about the
    real storage platform for Windows can be found here:

    Link:
    http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserv...e/default.mspx

    "Mark [MSFT]" wrote:

    > OK, I misread.
    >
    > Difference between Windows Storage 2000 and 2003 mainly involve features
    > like VSS, MPIO, etc... This hits some highlights:
    > http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserv...s/upgrade.mspx
    >
    >
    > --
    > Mark St. John
    > This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
    >
    > "Mark [MSFT]" wrote in message
    > news:OnY6JQ2QEHA.3532@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
    > > 1- Companies like HP and EMC ship and support Windows Storage Server
    > > products. The range of possible products for "storage" is massive - from

    > $1k
    > > 1u IDE NAS devices to quite expensive clusters running HW RAID with
    > > terabytes of storage. So, in those market where Storage Server competes,

    > it
    > > is the clear winner (OK, you had to expect some bias here.) This might

    > give
    > > you some insight into why Windows Storage Server was chosen in certain
    > > cases:
    > >

    > http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserv...s/default.mspx
    > >
    > > 2- A primary difference is in license - Storage Servers are meant to be

    > just
    > > that: file and print servers. Thus, Storage Servers are not intended to be
    > > application servers, Exchange servers, SQL Servers, domain controllers or
    > > "productivity suite" type servers. Storage Servers can come with some
    > > additional features and configurations that are not part of Windows

    > Server.
    > > Features like Directory Quotas, File Screening, Storage Reports, "out of
    > > box" multi-protocol share support, Web Administration, etc.
    > >
    > > 3- Think of Storage Server as Windows Server tooled to be specifically a
    > > Storage Server.
    > >
    > > --
    > > Mark St. John
    > > This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no

    > rights.
    > >
    > >
    > > "JohnNews" wrote in message
    > > news:O3Ed2R0QEHA.3476@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
    > > > Folks:
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > I have a few quick questions on STORAGE according to Microsoft.
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > * How well does Microsoft Storage (Hardware & Software) compare with
    > > > other companies offering storage solutions like: HP, EMC, Veritas, etc
    > > >
    > > > * How different is Windows 2000 Storage from Windows 2003 Storage

    > > Server
    > > >
    > > > * Is Windows 2003 Server different from Windows 2003 Storage Server

    > ?
    > > > Are we dealing with same products with different names ?
    > > >
    > > > *
    > > >
    > > >
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > Thanks,
    > > > John.
    > > >
    > > >

    > >
    > >

    >
    >
    >


+ Reply to Thread