MS Drops Licensing Restrictions from Web Server 2008

Channel Guy writes "According to a report from CRN, Microsoft plans to allow users of the Web Server SKU in Windows Server 2008 to 'run any type of database software with no limit on the number of users, provided they deploy it as an Internet-facing front-end server.' The previous limit was 50 users. Microsoft's partners expect the changes to go a long way toward making Windows Web Server 2008 more competitive with the LAMP stack, against which Microsoft has been making headway in recent months."

Apache responds

[Stamen]

In response to today's Microsoft announcement the Apache Software Foundation announces that they will cut their price by 100% and increase the allowed number of users to googolplex + 1.

The downside...

[Junta]

Since 2008 will be based on the Vista core, you'll need a dedicated person to sit at the console to address the "Someone is trying to access your website, cancel or alaw?" dialogs.

Re:The downside...

[RuBLed]

yes, but now you could have more than 50 dedicated persons answering Allow or Cancel...

Re:Still have to pay for the OS

[a-zarkon!]

"Will install Apache and MySQL for beer and nachos" -Me

Re:Still have to pay for the OS

[Stamen]

"Linux is only free if your time has no value." -Jamie Zawinski

"Windows? Not in this dress!" - Jamie Farr

Re:For most of those hosting, the cost is negligab

[filbranden]

Only hobbyists and small-time outfits that run their own hosts would mind a measly $400

Last time I checked, Slashdot [slashdot.org] was still using Linux.

So... Is it a hobby? Or a small-time outfit? :-D

Re:The downside...

[explosivejared]

Didn't you read the article! The primary focus is not "to increase market share" against MySQL and Apache as the Netcraft fud would have you believe. The real reason is this is a surreptitious physical-user based fix to sending out too many cancel allow dialogs. Microsoft completely misjudged the boxes functionality and popularity, which resulted in masses of dialog boxes being excessively consumed. Microsoft was getting so many bug reports about exhausted screen space from all the boxes that they had to something. This is just another case of MS providing relief to customers who are unable to responsibly control their MS lust, in this case for cancel allow dialogs.

I swear it was in the article. Why are you all looking at me? What?!

Re:Still have to pay for the OS

[totally bogus dude]

Apple don't seam to get the server market

I hear they've got the sewing market all stitched up, though.

Re:Netcraft?

[multisync]

So I'm leaving FreeBSD.

Thank you for telling us without using profanity, or threatening to beat anybody up ;^)

Re:so what

[ScrewMaster]

It says "post", Mr. Dyslexic.

That's Mr. Lysdexic to you, buddy.

Re:so what

[flyingfsck]

No, as a mebmer of the ASD (Ameracin Lysdexic Soceity) I haev to cerroct yuor garmmar: It si 'an opst', not 'a opst'.

Re:Eight different versions of Windows Server

[mallardtheduck]

Actually, there are 4 (consumer) editions of XP: Home, Pro, MCE, Tablet.
That means there will be either 8 or 9 editions of Windows 7, depending on weather it is a geometric or arithmetic progression.

If we attempt to count Windows 2000 (1 desktop, 3 server editions, according to Wikipedia), then we get 1, 4, 6 for desktop versions and a resulting polynomial formula of 0.5(x^2)+4.5x-3 (where x is 1 for 2000, 2 for XP and 3 for Vista) meaning Windows 7 will have (if we take x as 4) 23 editions.
If we instead use x=version no. (5 for 2000, 5.1 for XP and 6 for Vista) then we get the formula -27.778(x^2)+310.56x-857.33 then Windows 7 would have -44.532 editions.

For servers, 1, 2, 3 numbering gives a formula of -2.5(x^2)+12.5x-7 with Sever 7 having 3 editions. With version numbering (and assuming that Server 2008 releases with a 6.0 version number), we get -25(x^2)+280x-772 and Server 7 having -37 editions (assuming it has 7.0 version number).

However, it is best to disregard formulas with negative x^2 coefficients, since they will all eventually result in negative values, therefore 23 versions of Windows 7 seems the most reasonable answer here, unless we take negative edition counts as complete Microsoft failure (CMF).

Re:Point seems have been missed here

[PatrickThomson]

Slashdot started in 1997. Back then MS Windows NT Server and IIS sucked worse than a $2 hooker. Apache was king and all the rest were expensive, or sucked or both. Linux and Apache could take a daily slashdotting...

So what you're saying is that slashdot was designed to withstand a slashdotting? Now that's forward thinking!

Re:Still have to pay for the OS

[Anonymous Coward]

A lot of people use MS Access and excel for *many applications* and find it acceptable too.