I am trying to decide which to install - Hyper-V standalone or the Windows
2008 "Full" version (not sure if is should be differentiated this way). I
have purchased the 2008 datacenter so I can install either. I just don't
know the difference in the two. Any info you can provide is much
appreciated.

thanks,
Clay

The Hyper-V Server standalone is essentially Windows Server 2008 Standard
with ONLY the Hyper-V role enabled, and only a Core install possible. It is
limited to 32 Gb of RAM, and 4 physical processors. (the limits of Standard
Edition).

Datacenter Server limits are MUCH higher. You have no licensing limitations,
and you can install in GUI install if you choose. This one's a no brainer -
there's no benefit at all to installing the standalone.

--
Charlie.
http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel

"Clay" <clay@xxxxxx> wrote in message
news:%23zHkrxeYJHA.256@xxxxxx

>I am trying to decide which to install - Hyper-V standalone or the Windows
>2008 "Full" version (not sure if is should be differentiated this way). I
>have purchased the 2008 datacenter so I can install either. I just don't
>know the difference in the two. Any info you can provide is much
>appreciated.
>
> thanks,
> Clay
>

....particularly since you've already purchased Datacenter. The last (big)
benefit is that you can use Failover Clustering with your Datacenter
installation. Hyper-V Server (standalone product) is not cluster-capable.

--
Ryan Sokolowski
MVP - Clustering
MCT, MCITP x3, MCTS x7, MCSE x2, CCNA, CCDA, BCFP


"Charlie Russel - MVP" <charlie@xxxxxx> wrote in message
news:eZFzGPfYJHA.2280@xxxxxx

> The Hyper-V Server standalone is essentially Windows Server 2008 Standard
> with ONLY the Hyper-V role enabled, and only a Core install possible. It
> is limited to 32 Gb of RAM, and 4 physical processors. (the limits of
> Standard Edition).
>
> Datacenter Server limits are MUCH higher. You have no licensing
> limitations, and you can install in GUI install if you choose. This one's
> a no brainer - there's no benefit at all to installing the standalone.
>
> --
> Charlie.
> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
>
> "Clay" <clay@xxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:%23zHkrxeYJHA.256@xxxxxx

>>I am trying to decide which to install - Hyper-V standalone or the Windows
>>2008 "Full" version (not sure if is should be differentiated this way). I
>>have purchased the 2008 datacenter so I can install either. I just don't
>>know the difference in the two. Any info you can provide is much
>>appreciated.
>>
>> thanks,
>> Clay
>>

>

However, if you have <32Gb of RAM and licenses for each O/S you're
planning on hosting within Hyper-V or the audacity to run Linux under it
you can return DC and get your $3,000 back in your pocket. So it's a
question of how you plan on setting up your machine.

If you want to elaborate on the machine specifications, and don't mind
sharing what kind of guest O/S install you're planning on doing then we
can help you with a better decision. However, you should be aware that
you get next to nothing with Hyper-V server. I can't actually tell why
MS released it.

Since you already have DC edition you'll probably want to install that
as the Guest OS seeing as how the virtualization licensing scheme makes
it favorabe to do so. I recommend that option. Let us know what you choose!

Sincerely,

Anthony N Malczanek

Charlie Russel - MVP wrote:

> The Hyper-V Server standalone is essentially Windows Server 2008
> Standard with ONLY the Hyper-V role enabled, and only a Core install
> possible. It is limited to 32 Gb of RAM, and 4 physical processors. (the
> limits of Standard Edition).
>
> Datacenter Server limits are MUCH higher. You have no licensing
> limitations, and you can install in GUI install if you choose. This
> one's a no brainer - there's no benefit at all to installing the
> standalone.
>

I know the limitation of hyper-v standalone. But for a very small site with
3 servers and if they wish to consolidate, hyper-v standalone works fine.

And for the management of hyper-v standalone, can i use OLD machine that
runs 32bit windows 2008 with hyper-v management to manage tje 64bit hyper-v
standalone ?

yes.

--
Charlie.
http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel

"IT Staff" <jkklim@xxxxxx> wrote in message
news:u5mx0IhcJHA.1528@xxxxxx

>I know the limitation of hyper-v standalone. But for a very small site with
>3 servers and if they wish to consolidate, hyper-v standalone works fine.
>
> And for the management of hyper-v standalone, can i use OLD machine that
> runs 32bit windows 2008 with hyper-v management to manage tje 64bit
> hyper-v standalone ?
>
>
>