Server 2012 r2 and Exchange 2013

[anything I don't mind]

Good or bad? *WARNING RANT BELOW*

My initial impression is that it is the worse piece of software that i have ever seen. I have it installed on a 2012 r2 which is terrible in its own right. But 2013, its like they went out of their way to make everything worse. I dare touch DAG as i imagine that to be even worse than it was in 2010 and that says a lot as 2010 DAG was poorly designed to the say the least.

Moving public folders required days of work and loads of scripts and would have been impossible if it was not for some poor expert on the internet who had made a blog explaining what to do.

Then the ECP, where to begin UHH. The design is terrible, this flat white with these ugly fonts, there is no structure to it, you can't get any information that you need without going in to these ugly popup windows. The fonts, oh wait i moaned about the fonts already, but WHY?

Then features, mailbox moves now need to be named? yea that makes sense and now with 20 extra clicks. Then we have the ECP which keeps failing with

Server Error in '/ecp' Application.

Apparently a common problem, *sigh*

Then server 2012? oh no, they didn't just make a full screen start menu on a server OS? why? Did they even test this in terminal services, did they even see how slow a full screen start menu is on terminal services before they rolled it out on a server OS? I hope they didn't test it because if they did test it and rolled it out anyway they are worse than i thought.

They took everything annoying about server 2008 and did nothing with it, they then took everything that worked and made it as annoying as they could and then they added a whole new load of annoyances.

Things that needed some work like the MSC snapins, did nothing with it, things that worked fine, server manager, they redesigned it so that it was more annoying than they could possibly make it. Did i mention the fonts? the flatness is just disgusting and yep they added an annoying action center flag to not only the server manager but the ECP. Yep, every time you do anything on the ecp you get a notification on the action center flag that you just did what you just did. Brilliant.

I only just started using it so i am sure i will fine more annoyances.

What do i like it about.... not seen any improvements yet. Maybe someone can point out what they have improved or what is now easier? i would be happy to hear it?

 

[leigh_boy]

i like 2012 been using it since release, exchange 2013 i would have preferred not for it to be browser based and be more like 2010 but this is moving forwards, i did find it easier to setup in general though and maintain.
i do feel your pain though.

 

[anything I don't mind]

I realy liked the 2008 server manager from the first time i used it, it was way better than 2003 in my opinion and that is why i liked it. So i am not just hating stuff because its new.

Initially i thought 2010 admin console was a step backwards and in some ways it was, but i never hated it as much as this 2013. The 2013 design makes me want to vomit, i think its all that white and ugly fonts and constant refreshing. So we both agree that 2013 ecp is rubbish. The only positive i can think of with the ecp is that the ugly design is going to force me to use the shell for basic tasks.


What are some things you like about the 2012 r2 and were you a fan of windows 8 as well? I am just looking for reasons to like it at this point rather than to try and disagree with you about it.

 

[Ploppy2k3]

I had the initial same hatred for Exchange 2013 but now I love it. its rock solid and the full web admin console comes in very handy.

we only run 8 DAGs across 12 servers and it just works. no more ruddy CAS arrays either. Just bang in your load balancers and off it goes all o port 25 and 443 no more messing about there either.

what 2013 does do is force you to use powershell which is man's mortal enemy.

Oh andI will agree that 2013 RTM

 

[Ploppy2k3]

Exchange 2013 IMHO is great.

we run 8 DAG's over 12 servers without issue and the only complaint about DAG's is that they dont and cant be made to fail back.

I will however say that Ex2013 RTM was ****. and I mean ******* ****!

but now its solid as a rock.

 

[El Pew]

what 2013 does do is force you to use powershell which is man's mortal enemy.

If you think this then you need to get out of the Windows server game. Everything MS develop going forward is going to use PowerShell extensively, that's why every new Windows server OS has the non-gui mode prominent in the install options. The idea is you should be comfortable using PowerShell or should be using things like the RSAT tools which have a gui overlay on top of the remote PowerShell service. Guis on servers are pretty much a waste of time given that 99% of administration these days is done remotely.

 

[Ploppy2k3]

If you think this then you need to get out of the Windows server game. Everything MS develop going forward is going to use PowerShell extensively, that's why every new Windows server OS has the non-gui mode prominent in the install options. The idea is you should be comfortable using PowerShell or should be using things like the RSAT tools which have a gui overlay on top of the remote PowerShell service. Guis on servers are pretty much a waste of time given that 99% of administration these days is done remotely.

i don't think after 20+ years in the game i will throw my current 28 M$ MCSE, MCITP & MCTS qualifications in the bin over powershell most windows admin's seem to prefer a GUI for most day to day things and use powershell to accomplish repetitive tasks. Its just a shame the M$ are inconsistent on what they want in the GUI and what they want only in powershell.

But recently with M$ consistency is not their strong point now is it.

 

[anything I don't mind]

Powershell is annoying. Most of the very useful features require additional addon packs and you can't just guess those, you have to look them up. It also require some extensive coding for a shell to be able to do basic functions. The command reference is quite lazy in my opinion. You can tell it is made by microsoft. Should be called the powerless shell by microsoft trademark.

Even then the amount of times i have had to connect directly to a server to solve a problem because the RDP services decided throw a wobbly. In ideal world i would be sitting on a beach somewhere with a tablet using teh fullscreen start menu to monitor and manage my servers. In reality i am in a dirty server room with a keyboard in my hand and a monitor balancing on chair in some cases. The people that design windows server 2012, do not actually use windows server. They used it in testing but i bet most of them never realy use it.

 

[mrbios]

I'm not a fan of server 2012, 2012R2 improved it but it's still not great (plain 2012 is a complete PITA in RDP)

Exchange 2013 though i really like, it takes some getting used to but once you've used it for a while it's far quicker and easier than the exchange 2007 or 2010 were. The only thing that bugs me is the lack of functionality to create multiple accounts within the web front end. I've got a couple of powershell scripts saved to the desktop that i just run depending on which AD OU the multiple users i need to create accounts for are. I really like powershell too

 

[d_brennen]

I am a fan of Server 2012 and Exchange 2013. Usually find it much easier to get stuff done in a timely manner compared to 2008 and 2010 and have never had even the slightest RDP issue that wasn't me being a doughnut. I really resent the price Microsoft makes you pay for the privilege though, an I am not even paying for it personally. Office 365, don't get me started

 

[Ploppy2k3]

exchange is what £600. that is good for what it does and server 2012 is the same £600 mark and comes with 2 full virtual licenses so you can install the host and then have 2 copies of 2012 on top as guests. thats pretty reasonable i thnk.

 

[LizardKing]

2012 is awesome, rdp?, pah thats last week, its all about remote management now
I've yet to use Exchange 2013 with any anger yet but it seemed easy enough when i did test it a bit. Thankfully if i need to use powershell more often than not someone has kindly blogged about what i've needed, i dread the day i have to really use it. linux has a degree of intuition about how it works, ms's love of almost spoken like commands blur the lines to much imo

exchange is what £600. that is good for what it does and server 2012 is the same £600 mark and comes with 2 full virtual licenses so you can install the host and then have 2 copies of 2012 on top as guests. thats pretty reasonable i thnk.

Server licenses have always been relatively cheap, cals however are a different kettle of fish.
not to mention you need a degree just to get your head around the new sql licensing!

 

[Caged]

If you're RDPing into servers regularly then I feel bad for you. Get your PoweShell on, or at least use the RSATs.

Oh no I'm stuck and get-command *thingiwanttodo* or get-help are things I don't know about.

Powershell is annoying. Most of the very useful features require additional addon packs and you can't just guess those, you have to look them up. It also require some extensive coding for a shell to be able to do basic functions. The command reference is quite lazy in my opinion. You can tell it is made by microsoft. Should be called the powerless shell by microsoft trademark.

Even then the amount of times i have had to connect directly to a server to solve a problem because the RDP services decided throw a wobbly. In ideal world i would be sitting on a beach somewhere with a tablet using teh fullscreen start menu to monitor and manage my servers. In reality i am in a dirty server room with a keyboard in my hand and a monitor balancing on chair in some cases. The people that design windows server 2012, do not actually use windows server. They used it in testing but i bet most of them never realy use it.

And here you're complaining that your company / clients are too tight to buy iLO or DRAC cards. This isn't Microsoft's fault.

 

[El Pew]

i don't think after 20+ years in the game i will throw my current 28 M$ MCSE, MCITP & MCTS qualifications in the bin over powershell most windows admin's seem to prefer a GUI for most day to day things and use powershell to accomplish repetitive tasks. Its just a shame the M$ are inconsistent on what they want in the GUI and what they want only in powershell.

But recently with M$ consistency is not their strong point now is it.

You need to get over yourself. The only constant in the IT business is change, and all the changes MS (not M$, are you 12?) are making are for the better with the way everything is moving from bare metal, on-premises to virtualised and cloud infrastructure. Sure PowerShell is transitional and is evolving rapidly but it is much better than the alternative for current and future needs.

 

[leigh_boy]

If you're RDPing into servers regularly then I feel bad for you. Get your PoweShell on, or at least use the RSATs.

Oh no I'm stuck and get-command *thingiwanttodo* or get-help are things I don't know about.



And here you're complaining that your company / clients are too tight to buy iLO or DRAC cards. This isn't Microsoft's fault.

download the server administration kit, you can then connect and adjust almost all server setting from you laptop / desktop.

 

[Ploppy2k3]

You need to get over yourself. The only constant in the IT business is change, and all the changes MS (not M$, are you 12?) are making are for the better with the way everything is moving from bare metal, on-premises to virtualised and cloud infrastructure. Sure PowerShell is transitional and is evolving rapidly but it is much better than the alternative for current and future needs.

all I can say to this is go and pass your Private cloud stuff and then come back and tell me you have a full knowledge of the powershell required to manage and implement a cloud! the amount of commands just for one of the products required is mind blowing but wait... there's 6 M$ products involved (yes I always use M$, live with it) so that's what ~20,000+ powershell commands!

it just gets silly. but as I said its the consistency that I don't understand. I can see why they leave user creation and transport rules etc in the GUI as these will be used by L1 support staff and its easier for them to use but then why put DAG's in there if these are advanced features?

there are examples like this across all of the product range which M$ are getting better at showing some uniformity are still not quite getting it right.
if they want to push full on powershell for advanced stuff then just do it but this 50/50 approach is making things more confusing for people.

I will also point out that at every training course I attend the love for powershell is just not there. we all see its benefits and purpose but would like to see it go all powershell or or GUI. the obvious winner of this for functionality will be powershell of course.

 

[El Pew]

the amount of commands just for one of the products required is mind blowing but wait... there's 6 M$ products involved (yes I always use M$, live with it) so that's what ~20,000+ powershell commands!

Well Linux and Unix admins have being doing this for years, so it's clearly not that difficult. Nor do you have to learn 20,000 commands, you learn the key ones in your primary subject area and then learn the process for discovering the rest - PowerShell does have good command discoverability.

There's also the fact that PowerShell allows a much better integration between systems. You shouldn't be creating users manually via your L1 helpdesk or whatever, you should be using an identity management solution that hooks into your HR department to have accounts provisioned and de-provisioned automatically - via PowerShell. If you're not big enough to have the budget for this sort of thing, then speaking frankly you're not big enough for Microsoft to really care too much about and they are not going to spend much time addressing your concerns when Fortune 500 companies are screaming for better integration and automation.

 

[Ploppy2k3]

so M$ aren't paying any attention to their SME user base and only paying attention to the requests of Fortune 500 company's.

OK you're right. I am totally mistaken.How silly of me.

 

[El Pew]

so M$ aren't paying any attention to their SME user base and only paying attention to the requests of Fortune 500 company's.

OK you're right. I am totally mistaken.How silly of me.

They really aren't. Microsoft's idea is that everyone at that sort of level should be looking at cloud services (which themselves heavily rely on PowerShell for management) and bigger business that can't make this transition are so large that they need to rely very heavily on automation. There's a reason why MS main focuses these days are pushing cloud, Hyper-V and System Center, and it's to back up this philosophy. Traditional Windows administration is gradually disappearing.

 

[anything I don't mind]

Would not call a 100 user multi million £ company insignificant enough to ignore. There are only 500 fortune 500 companies. is that right? there are millions of SME. Automation is not what I am against anyway. It is lazy development and poor design choices. Powershell could be so much better, MSC span ins could be so much better. Everything MS develops could be so much better, it is just their focus is wrong. They were so busy trying to push touch interfaces and continuity across operating systems (and the cloud lol) that they forgot about the desktop and server market.

I won't be upgrading to 2012 any time soon and will recommend to see what the next version has in store. MS have a unique position in the market where they have a monopoly on the server OS in enterprise, generally. There are not many enterprise willing to try anything else. So MS are in that position development wise where the users will be upgrading whether they like it or not and thus there is not the same economic incentive that you would find if they were just trying to develop the software and sell it. They don't have to supply support in the same way for their services as some application that you buy. No one gets support with exchange out the box. Try and imagine some third party enterprise mail system not supplying support. Wouldn't happen. This is why MS development is so poor. 2012 has no real improvements just cosmetic and some minor features here and then. We have to weary of them just milking that position and offering sub standard versions just to make more money.