Link to home
Create AccountLog in
Avatar of Yashy
YashyFlag for United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

asked on

Do you ever use Windows Server Core rather than the GUI? If so, why?

hi guys

Do many of you ever install the Windows Server core version rather than the GUI?

If so, are you doing so to minimise the amount of resources taken up and reduce security risks?

Also, would you say most larger enterprises do that? I'm familiarising myself with the CLI.

Thanks for helping
Yash
SOLUTION
Avatar of Shaun Vermaak
Shaun Vermaak
Flag of Australia image

Link to home
membership
Create an account to see this answer
Signing up is free. No credit card required.
Create Account
SOLUTION
Link to home
membership
Create an account to see this answer
Signing up is free. No credit card required.
Create Account
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
Link to home
membership
Create an account to see this answer
Signing up is free. No credit card required.
Create Account
Avatar of Yashy

ASKER

thanks for the answers guys.
Avatar of Yashy

ASKER

Shaun - in reference to "You and majority of people misunderstand core/nano" I certainly hope this is a constructive criticism.
SOLUTION
Link to home
membership
Create an account to see this answer
Signing up is free. No credit card required.
Create Account
Shaun - in reference to "You and majority of people misunderstand core/nano" I certainly hope this is a constructive criticism.
Of course :). Not really even criticism
I use Core wherever possible. Hyper-V hosts are either Core or Hyper-V Server, both of which have the same UI. All of my file servers are Core, as are DCs wherever possible. Historically NPS required full GUI, so my full DCs with NPS run full GUI. It has taken Microsoft a long time to get all of their stuff running on Core. Exchange 2019 is the first version, and I am not sure when SQL supported Core.

I do Core for the smaller disk footprint (helps on my SAN and backups), and for reduced patching and attack surface.
Thanks for that.

A couple of additional thoughts ...

Server Core can run a lot longer in between reboots though as a rule that may not be a great idea as patches are important. The slimmer code does make for stability improvements over Desktop Experience in our own experience running 100% Server Core since Windows Server 2008 released the ability to do so (with very little PowerShell to boot!).

Nano was initially released as an ultra-slim OS to run either as a Hyper-V or Scale-Out File Server cluster node and that was all. We tried to get it going on bare-metal but it was such a pain that we dropped it and stuck with Server Core. Microsoft transitioned Nano from that idea to running it solely as a Container OS and that's where it resides today. In containers.
As for "less patches on core" - I don't see less patches coming in. Sure, there is no flash inside the browsers as there are no browsers, but the cumulative updates that server 2016 with GUI gets are the same that server 2016 without a GUI gets.
I don't think we can say that what Microsoft claims to be more secure ever proved to be true in this case.

Could anybody here name a few 2018 security problems that don't happen on the core edition?

Why I write: I would not make someone install core for security reasons but only for performance reasons.
..."less patches on core"...
Same patch, not doing as much patching on core as on GUI