Does Microsoft fear Windows .Net Web Server?
Several weeks ago I noted that Windows .Net Server will be available in a new edition with no analog to previous versions we've come to know and love. The big picture on this new edition, called Windows .Net Web Server, is that it pares down features in exchange for a lower price; what's left in the product is only what you need to set up a Web server (or Web services server).
Judging from what's included with beta 3 and what I've seen from other reviewers, everything you've read so far about Windows .Net Server has reflected testing of the Enterprise edition, which corresponds to Windows 2000 Advanced Server. Compared to .Net Web Server, Enterprise Server and the other editions of Windows .Net Server--Standard and Datacenter--start in a relatively minimal configuration. In beta 3, IIS (the Web server) is not enabled by default; instead, at startup you are presented with the option to turn on such services as IIS and DHCP. This initial minimal configuration should still block many potential avenues of attack, including the ones that made Code Red and Nimda far more successful than they should have been.
But since the Web Server edition is designed to be a Web server, it starts with IIS installed, and it boots into the new Web User Interface for Microsoft Windows Server administration. This is a Web-based administrative console--also available on the other editions once you install IIS--which runs on port 8099 of IIS. You can also manage more than IIS with this console, which is a vast improvement over the joke Web admin interface in previous versions of IIS (Microsoft has a great sense of humor about such software), but remember that the Web Server edition is not designed to do much more than be a Web server.
Among the features of Standard Server that are missing from Web Server are Terminal Server, Internet Authentication Service (basically RADIUS server support), Macintosh services, FAX services, Internet Connection Sharing, and Windows Media Services. And a Windows .Net Web Server cannot be a domain controller.
.Net Web Server supports a maximum of 2GB RAM and 2 CPUs per server. I'm not sure how problematic this restriction is; this is pretty beefy Web server software, but it's not all that it could be. Hosting services--which I would initially have thought would be a natural target market for this product--often put hundreds of sites on a single server, and it seems to me that the sites could make use of more than two CPUs. Plus, any Web server that runs heavy Web services on it will have a need for more CPU and memory.
And if one of the target markets for .Net Web Server is corporate intranets, why is SharePoint Team Services, Microsoft's corporate portal software, not available in this edition? My guess is either that .Net Web Server is not up to the task of SharePoint due to one or more of the above restrictions (unlikely) or that Microsoft wants to sell Standard or Enterprise Server to run SharePoint. These decisions are … complicated, I guess.
All things considered, the big question for whether Windows .Net Web Server makes sense for buyers is: How much? How big a discount over Standard Server will Microsoft give to those willing to take such a cut in features? Corporations would be stuck with a license that cannot be migrated to some other type of server (except perhaps through an upgrade), and hosting services may be stuck with an inadequate level of hardware support. Microsoft is on the right track with this product, but they seem a little too scared of it. It better be cheap or it just won't be worth the sacrifices.
What would you be willing to pay for Windows .Net Web Server? E-mail Larry or post your thoughts in our Talkback forum below.