Windows
2000 Server "Standard Edition" sits at the bottom of a new
family of Windows 2000 servers. It supports two microprocessors
(four if you upgrade a Windows NT 4.0 Server box) and up to 4GB of
physical RAM. The next step up is
Windows 2000 Advanced Server,
which supports up to 64GB of physical RAM, four microprocessors (8
for upgraders), and comprehensive clustering. Advanced Server, which
will replace Windows NT 4.0 Server, Enterprise Edition when it is
released, is ideal for SQL Server 7.0 database servers and high-end
Web and file/application serving. At the top of the server food
chain is
Windows 2000 Datacenter Server, which supports up to
16 microprocessors (or up to 32 processors from select hardware
makers) and 64 GB of physical RAM. Datacenter server is ideal for
high-end clustering, load balancing, data warehousing, and the like.
Datacenter Server, incidentally, is optimized for over 10,000
simultaneous users and high transaction counts.
One of the most exciting new
features in Windows 2000, believe it or not, is the new file system, NTFS
5.0. This little wonder supports all of the features from NTFS
4.0--compression, per file security settings, and the like--while
adding performance gains and a host of new features. Perhaps most
important among these is disk quotas, which allow you to
manage storage usage on a per-user basis, similar to UNIX (Figure
2). You can set disk quotas, disk thresholds, and quota limits
for all users or separately for individual users. And Microsoft has
even added the capability to monitor and report disk space usage on
a per-user basis. This is a most welcome addition to NT/2000.
So given all of these additions to Windows 2000, does the system
achieve its goal of better reliability, availability, and
scalability? I think the answer is obviously yes. While Windows 2000
will still not scale quite to the upper levels of multi-processing
UNIX boxes, it is firmly entrenched in the rest of the market
Windows 2000's reliability and availability will need to be assessed
over time for a more accurate picture, but the initial analysis is
excellent. Microsoft clearly has a more stable and secure system on
their hands.
Easier Management
Another key goal for Windows 2000 is to simplify the management of
the system. In Windows NT 4.0, a variety of separate utilities were
made available through the Administrative Tools group that provided
access to user and group administration, disk administration, and
the like. But this was a confusing mess since each program did
things its own way and the shear number of administration programs
was confusing. I wish I could say that the situation is better in
Windows 2000, but it isn't. It's different, certainly, but it's
definitely not better.
What we're stuck with in Windows 2000 is a slightly smaller list of
Administrative Tools and a single monster tool, "Computer
Management," (Figure 3) that
simply gloms all of the most-often used tools into a single
Microsoft Management Console (MMC). The MMC is used in Windows 2000
as the central receptacle for administration "snap-ins,"
and while it's a good idea in theory, in practice you get confusing
groups of tools like Computer Management. This little monster (which
can also be quickly accessed by right-clicking My Computer and
choosing "Manage") contains about three dozen separate
tools in one hard-to-use console. Included are performance logs and
alerts, user and group managers, system information, Services,
shared folders, Components, three Event viewers, the Device Manager,
and much, much more. The good news, of course, is that you can make
your own custom MMC consoles if you'd like. So, for example, if you
need just Services and Device Manager on a regular basis for some
reason, it's easy to create a custom console with only those
snap-ins. But the single Computer Management console, which was
clearly created to simplify matters, does just the opposite: It
makes it hard to find the tools you really need. Quick: I want to
manage Internet Information Services 5.0 (IIS). Is this found in
Computer Management or a separate IIS tool? (Answer:
Both. Grrr...).
Of course, the MMC isn't without merits. Aside from the
previously-mentioned custom console ability, the MMC provides a
somewhat consistent interface between all of the various admin
tools. And you can administer remote Windows 2000 servers with this
tool as well; you're not limited to the local machine.
While we're on the subject, the Control Panel is another mess in
Windows 2000 (Figure 4). Though the
Control Panel has been ostensibly "cleaned up" in the name
of simplicity, it's not really any cleaner: In Windows NT 4.0, I had
27 icons in Control Panel. When this Server was upgraded to Windows
2000, there were 23. But this seemingly "simpler" Control
Panel isn't simple at all: "Telephony" and
"Modems" icons have been consolidated into "Phone and
Modem Properties" while the previously separate
"Sounds" and "Multimedia" icons have been made
one in, yup, you guessed it, "Sounds and Multimedia." This
isn't simpler, folks, it's just different. My understanding of the
Control Panel was that Microsoft was working to move most of that
functionality into MMC consoles, effectively leaving the Control
Panel as a shadow of its former self. Clearly, that's not happening.
On the other hand, Microsoft has made some fundamental and powerful
changes in the way networks are managed. In Windows NT 4.0, you
could choose between peer-to-peer ("workgroup") networking
and Microsoft domain networks, where logins and user information
would be centralized to a single Primary Domain Controller (PDC) and
one or Backup Domain Controllers (BDCs). The system was pretty
powerful, but suffered from three basic problems: It wasn't very
scalable, it wasn't very flexible (there was no way to demote a PDC
to a standalone server without completely wiping out the system and
reinstalling, for example), and it was based partly on an
out-of-date Microsoft-centric naming service (WINS) that bore no
relation at all to Internet standards.
Enter Active Directory (AD). This massive upgrade to
Microsoft networking builds on true Internet standards such as DNS
to provide the sort of integrated directory services that previously
would have required an expensive add-on such as Netware. Management
of Active Directory is completely policy-based, and users,
groups, computers, applications, and other network resources are
collected into a single management point. The AD is scalable,
hierarchical, and relatively simple, assuming you're up on such
Internet routing miscellany as DNS and BIND. But because it's based
on these Internet standards, AD is ready for the future. In an AD
network, the PDC/BDC concept is done away with in favor of straight
Domain Controllers that can be demoted to and promoted from
standalone servers at will, without reinstalling. I'll be writing up
at least one Technology Showcase on Active Directory in the near
future, but suffice to say it's easily the most important and
exciting new technology in Windows 2000 and it's a winner.
File, Print and Web services
Keeping with the tradition of the all-in-one solution of Windows NT,
Windows 2000 offers a slew of integrated services that really make
the OS complete. Heading up this list are Internet Information
Services (IIS, the Web and FTP server), COM+ for component services,
better printer services with Internet Printing Protocol (IPP) and
UniDrive 5 printing support, and Terminal Services for full GUI
terminal emulation. Terminal Services, especially, is a key feature
that will be covered in a separate review (Figure
5). The other features have been tweaked since Windows NT 4.0,
but they were good to begin with.
IIS in particular is a world-class product (Figure
6) and the new version offers a new Active Server Pages (ASP)
engine that speeds script-less ASP document loading. And with the
inclusion of COM+, we're one step closer to the future of Windows
computing, Windows DNA, where the user interface is a combination of
Dynamic HTML and the Win32 API and the file system becomes a
relational database. COM+ adds support the componentized distributed
applications that make today's monolithic applications look sick in
comparison. I'll be covering COM+ in a future Technology Showcase;
I'm also writing a COM+ book for IDG that will be published next
winter.
Conclusions
Windows 2000 Server
Beta 3 is clearly a worthy upgrade to Windows NT 4.0. Other than
Active Directory, there's nothing really earth-shattering about this
release, but a slew of small and obvious improvements--the disk
quota support in NTFS 5.0 springs instantly to mind--make it even
more compelling. And when Windows 2000 Server is used together with
Windows 2000 Professional on the desktop, things really come
together with IntelliMirror user settings and network installs of
new Windows Installer-based applications.
In many ways, Windows 2000 Server is less radical than Windows 2000
Professional, if only because Professional will be used more
directly by far more users. But Server's under-the-hood improvements
more than make up for any perceived lack of change. When you look
hard enough, you realize that this release is positively brimming
with improvements. And each of them, in their own way, contribute to
the greater good that is Windows 2000 Server.
