|
|
 |
|
|
|
Giga Group Report: Windows 2000: Deployment Best Practices
|
Posted: Tuesday, February 22, 2000
|
Giga Position
Windows 2000 (W2K) is finally here. Now that the spectacular launch party is history (and Patrick Stewart, aka Captain Jean Luc Picard, has presumably gone back to pilot the Starship Enterprise and Carlos Santana is on his way to collect an anticipated armful of Grammys), what can and should users expect as they begin testing and deploying the new platform?
First and foremost, Microsoft owes its customers a quality first release that delivers the promised high reliability and scalability. Reliability is the rock on which corporations will fail or succeed in building next-generation extranets and Web-hosting applications that are successfully able to perform business-to-business electronic commerce functions. That said, Windows 2000 reliability is not the sole responsibility of Microsoft. The other half of a successful Windows 2000 implementation is the preparedness of the corporation. In these early days when Windows 2000 is in its infancy, businesses owe it to themselves to properly configure their systems for optimal reliability and performance. Unfamiliarity breeds mistakes; therefore, it is absolutely crucial that corporate IT departments learn the technical vagaries of the Windows 2000 platform and follow best deployment practices to the letter.
Proof/Notes
Ease of Use/Degrees of Difficulty
Nowhere was the need to follow best deployment practices more apparent than in the user responses to a recent Windows 20000 reliability study conducted by Giga and Sunbelt Software Inc. We polled more than 1,000 IT professionals and Microsoft Certified Systems Engineers (MCSEs) in domestic and international accounts that spanned academic, commercial and government accounts. Overall, the respondents rated both Windows 2000 Professional and Windows 2000 Server an average of two times to three times more reliable than prior versions of the desktop and server operating systems (see Planning Assumption, Windows 2000 Scores High Marks for Reliability in Early Deployments, Laura DiDio).
A closer examination of other deployment questions, however, revealed potential trouble spots and underscored the need for businesses to get the proper training and adhere to best deployment practices. A large majority—80 percent of the respondents—revealed that they generally had a positive first deployment experience on pilot and early production networks. But only 13 percent of the IT managers and MCSEs polled characterized their Windows 2000 Server and Advanced Server installations as "extremely simple, with few problems." This is hardly surprising. At an estimated 30 million-plus lines of code and with far more functionality, Windows 2000 is complex, even for expert IT managers at leading-edge shops.
Table 1: In early usage on pilot or production networks, please describe the ease of use or degree of difficulty in the Windows 2000 Server installation process
Response |
Percentage of Respondents |
It was somewhat easy; we experienced some minor problems but got through it without major mishaps. |
40 percent |
It was challenging; we encountered a few problems (i.e., Microsoft Management Console, Security Configuration Manager, Active Directory…). |
27 percent |
We didn't even try; we're waiting until after the first Service Pack ships before deploying. |
15 percent |
It was extremely simple; we experienced few problems and had it up and running in less time than it took to install NT Server 4.0. |
13 percent |
It was extremely difficult and took longer than expected; we encountered serious problems. |
4 percent |
It was unfathomable and we gave up. |
1 percent |
Source: Giga Information Group and Sunbelt Software, Inc.
Particularly noteworthy, however, is that while only 5 percent of the customers weighed in with a negative upgrade experience, slightly over two-thirds (67 percent) acknowledged that they experienced some problems — 40 percent said there were minor glitches, and another 27 percent reported them "challenging." Not surprisingly, it was the major components and crucial features Giga has already outlined — the MMC, Security Configuration Manager/Toolkit and Active Directory — that proved to be the biggest stumbling blocks. Again, based on the anecdotal data obtained from the respondents, the majority of these problems stemmed from learning curve issues or incompatibilities that arose with certain earlier, noncurrent versions of software and peripherals.
The Potential Trouble Spots
Table 2: In early usage on pilot or production networks, which feature of Windows 2000 Server did you like least or find most problematic?
Response |
Percentage of Respondents |
Too many Wizards |
44 percent |
The complexity of the setup and installation process |
19 percent |
Lack of embedded management capabilities |
17 percent |
Active Directory |
10 percent |
Too buggy |
9 percent |
Source: Giga Information Group and Sunbelt Software, Inc.
Caveat emptor: Giga has long held the belief that Microsoft's decision to include more than two dozen Help Wizards was unwise. The responses validated our conclusions. On a positive note: only 19 percent found the setup and installation extremely complex and, despite recent reports in the trade press of the rumored "63,000 bugs in the Windows 2000 code," only 9 percent of those polled found the Windows 2000 Server platform too buggy. Though no one can accurately predict which bugs may arise in production networks, this statistic is extremely encouraging.
Best Practices: What Corporations Should Do to Ensure Windows 2000 Reliability
Overall, the survey results add up to a very respectable showing for Windows 2000 in pilot networks and early deployments. But Windows 2000 Server is not perfect (no software is). Therefore, corporations are well advised to thoroughly prepare for the migration and familiarize themselves with all aspects and components of the Windows 2000 platform before deploying.
That said, when your organization is ready to proceed with the upgrade, Giga strongly reiterates its recommendation to follow best practices to the letter. Though Windows 2000 Professional and Server have thus far exhibited a high degree of reliability, any deviations from best practices and procedures — particularly on the server side — will almost certainly jeopardize the reliability of your Windows 2000 installation. The potential damage ranges from system freezes and corrupted disks to Blue Screens of Death. Giga and Sunbelt have compiled some installation and configuration pratfalls to avoid. They are based on feedback from Microsoft reliability product managers as well as first-hand experience from our survey respondents. They include the following:
 | Disable all file system filter drivers, including antivirus, backup and quota software: All the W2K documentation tells users to disable these types of software and do clean installs. Pay attention and do it. First, uninstall your current version, install Windows 2000 Professional and/or Server and then re-install Windows 2000-compliant versions of these utilities. Do not count on W2K to do it for you. Ignoring this very basic best-practice recommendation will result in consistent Blue Screens of Death, according to Microsoft reliability product managers. |
| Use only Windows 2000-compliant memory: Several IT managers reported Blue Screens of Death based on configuration errors, after they added memory to a system following the installation of Windows 2000 Professional. Other IT managers said their system would no longer boot! |
| All internal corporate applications should utilize the Windows Installer mechanism, which will provide automated self-healing capabilities. |
| Do NOT over-clock machines: This is a common mistake and one that will compromise system reliability. Administrators and end users that over-clock machines should be aware that it will render even Microsoft-approved hardware devices non-HCL compatible. This is a known issue; Intel Corp. also recommends against over-clocking. And Giga agrees that, outside of labs or personal home use, the practice should be avoided at all costs. It contributes to outages that are difficult to diagnose and, therefore, time consuming when they do occur. One IT manager who made this mistake recounted what happened when he over-clocked an Intel Pentium III 450MHz to 547MHz. Each time, W2K Professional got to the point where it checked the hard disks, the user got a message saying the C: drive was corrupted. In hindsight, the IT manager realized the problem was the over-clocked bus speed. The fix: do not over-clock. But if you do, reset the motherboard back to the default. |
| DNS (Domain Name Server): To use Active Directory, you must have DNS. Active Directory is based on DNS addressing. If you choose to retain NT 4.0 domains, then DNS is optional. You will get an error message during install, but it will not affect non-AD functionality. DNS must recognize SRV resource records. Take your time and familiarize yourself thoroughly with W2K Server's DNS facility. Proper DNS configuration was one of the most daunting challenges reported by IT managers. By all means, enlist the aid of any of your in-house Unix system administrators who are experienced with DNS. Also, be prepared to get Microsoft technical support involved if you do run into problems, and insist that they help you successfully implement DNS. |
| Known issue with Adaptec Easy CD Creator with versions earlier than the current 3.5c: You must use version 3.5c or later of Adaptec Easy CD Creator with Windows 2000. Microsoft product managers told Giga just recently that Adaptec does not intend to provide Windows 2000 compatibility with versions of Easy CD Creator earlier than 3.5c. However, if you install an earlier version, do not let the system reboot install the update patch before rebooting. Otherwise, prepare to stare at a blue screen. Many customers experienced this problem on Hewlett-Packard (HP) systems. In all fairness to HP, the company does not support Easy CD Creator on NT Server 4.0, and it still works fine. Easy CD Creator is mainly used as a desktop application, though some customers do elect to install it on a server in order to read and write CDs as though they were hard drives. However, Giga strongly urges customers not to install desktop applications on the server; it is contrary to the rules of best practices and could result in trouble if end users begin toying with it. For more information, check out Adaptec's support page, which provides detailed instructions for installation of Easy CD Creator on Windows 2000, http://webcheckup.adaptec.com/ecdc-win2k/. |
| Security Configuration Manager/Toolkit: This is one of the foundation cornerstones of a successful W2K Server implementation. In the hands of experienced, knowledgeable administrators, it is a wonderful tool. Attempt to do a W2K Server upgrade before you are fully up to speed on this facility, and you are courting danger. Misconfiguring your security will abrogate all the security you thought you had. The result: you are potentially leaving your network wide open to hackers. |
| Active Directory: The story here is much the same as with the Security Configuration Toolkit: do your homework. Learn the ins and outs of Active Directory, including replication and synchronization, or be prepared to suffer the consequences. Giga strongly recommends that IT departments purchase Microsoft Press' newly published book, Inside Active Directory. It is an invaluable learning aid that will save you from making many common set-up and installation errors. One IT manager reported that "I would have saved myself four to six weeks of trouble, trial and error if I had read Inside Active Directory before setting up my Windows 2000 Server pilot network." |
Assuming that IT managers are getting the necessary Windows 2000 MCSE certification and assistance from Microsoft technical support and third-party system integrators, where necessary, you should still avail yourselves of Microsoft's own published research and white papers. A primary source for information on planning and deploying Windows 2000 is located on the Microsoft Web site at www.microsoft.com/windows2000/library/planning/default.asp. The Windows 2000 Deployment Planning Guide contains more than 500 pages of information and best practices for planning and deploying Windows 2000. Much of the content for this guide comes directly from Microsoft Consulting Services fieldwork with early adopter corporations.
One caveat: While this guide is an extensive source of information, it is focused primarily on the technical aspect of Windows 2000 deployment planning. This guide only briefly mentions items such as training plans, support and help desk plans, operational guidelines and disaster recovery plans. Giga recommends that a successful component of any desktop or server operating system deployment includes the development of a complete analysis and end-to-end solution. This solution will often require the expertise of vendors, partners and in-house resources working in conjunction across a master plan. Microsoft has been lax in providing detailed examples of best practices outside the technically focused arena that Microsoft's Consulting Services is comfortable operating within. In order to properly assess the Total Economic Impact (TEI) of a Windows 2000 migration, the items left uncovered in this guide must also be addressed.
The components and processes that define an end-to-end solution will certainly vary by organization, sometimes widely. In Microsoft's Windows 2000 Deployment Planning Guide, the recommendation is made for one customer to deploy Windows 2000 Server prior to deploying Windows 2000 Professional on the desktop. In Giga's experience, companies are better equipped to deploy Windows 2000 to the desktop first, while continuing to plan a Windows 2000 Server implementation and the components and services that accompany the server product. By deploying the desktop first, corporate customers are able to recognize productivity gains faster and for lower cost, thus, grabbing the low hanging fruit. The potential negative impact, to the entire organization, of a failed server implementation or flawed Active Directory design is decreased with a desktop-first strategy. However, training and support planning increases with a desktop-first strategy. Once all options have been weighed, each organization must take the end-to-end solution approach that aligns with the organization's desired goals and that can be accomplished with the resources available. Be wary of those promising a quick and painless migration plan or who focus primarily on the technical aspect of deployment.
Alternative View
No one can be certain how reliable Windows 2000, especially the Server versions, will be in first release. The Giga/Sunbelt survey was completed in late January, nearly a month before the actual Windows 2000 rollout. By necessity, it dealt largely with pilot and early production Windows 2000 implementations. Giga is confident that the size of the survey population and the breadth of the responses (from a diverse cross section of horizontal and vertical accounts) are a true reflection of Windows 2000 platform reliability at this early juncture. It is equally true, however, that test networks do not always reflect and duplicate the wide range of stress factors that occur in production networks. It is too soon to predict either the number or severity of potential problems. A single incompatible driver, application or misconfigured system could significantly dilute the reliability gains or, in a worst-case scenario, turn it into a negative in individual organizations.
The initial and ultimate success or failure of a Windows 2000 deployment will depend on a series of interrelated and interdependent factors. They include: Microsoft's ability to deliver a quality 1.0 release and customers' ability to successfully consolidate and collapse their existing NT domains, their ability to fully grasp the intricacies of the new desktop and server operating system environment and correctly configure and manage the platform.
This is no trivial task. Newness by definition brings a degree of confusion, unfamiliarity and uncertainty. This is borne out by the Giga/Sunbelt survey in which nearly 20 percent of the respondents said the complexity of the Windows 2000 Server migration was an issue for them. Although the industry at large will not have a full, realistic report card on Windows 2000 for at least six months after it has been up and running in production networks, it is reasonable to assume that complexity will thwart the upgrades of those businesses that do not do their due diligence. That means proper training and applying the rules of best practice.
It is equally true that the best-laid deployment plans may be laid to waste and derailed by a pernicious bug that appears, unbidden, to wreak havoc. These are unforeseen and unpreventable events. Additionally, there will be a certain portion of leading- or bleeding-edge Windows 2000 shops whose custom applications and high-end business needs dictate that they take "the road less traveled." Hence, these classes of businesses will, by necessity, chart their own Windows 2000 deployment path. In these specific instances, there simply may not be any existing best deployment guidelines. These pioneer accounts that are ahead of the learning curve will be forced by trial and error to construct their own best deployment practices as they go along. Giga believes that this class of users will constitute only a small minority that are, by their nature, better equipped to deal with and recover from early mishaps. Hopefully, these pioneers will share their experience with Microsoft and the rest of the corporate user community, so that we can all profit from their mistakes.
Findings & Recommendations
Giga is confident that the Windows 2000 platform inherently offers a higher degree of reliability than previous versions of Windows. The testimonials from IT managers who responded to the Giga/Sunbelt survey showed:
| Nearly three-quarters, or 72 percent, encountered some problems. This is to be expected, and many of these problems can be attributed to the normal learning curve associated with a new platform. |
| Some 40 percent said they encountered minor mishaps. |
| Another 27 percent characterized their installation woes as challenging. |
| Four percent indicated they had serious Windows 2000 installation difficulties. |
| Only 1 percent of the customers said the difficulties were so serious that they gave up. |
In order to effect the smoothest, trouble-free migration and minimize downtime, customers are strongly urged to squelch any maverick impulses and strictly adhere to established best deployment practices. Overall, these findings are both an auspicious beginning and a clarion call to use common sense and stick to established best practices. Use only Microsoft Windows 2000-certified hardware, memory and applications. Though 80 percent of the survey respondents were generally pleased with what they considered a positive upgrade experience, a 5 percent minority said their experience was negative. At the end of the day, what matters is that your Windows 2000 networks are up and running smoothly and that your users are productive. Don't risk becoming a bad statistic. There are no guarantees that you won't have to work around some obstacles. However, if/when you do encounter trouble, the adherence to best deployment practices can minimize the upgrade issues and, at least, help you eliminate known issues as the source of your troubles.
References
Planning Assumption, Windows 2000 Scores High Marks for Reliability in Early Deployments, Laura DiDio
Planning Assumption, Windows 2000 Benefits Are Key to Upgrade Decision, Laura DiDio
Planning Assumption, Windows 2000 Deployment: Steady March but No Stampede, Laura DiDio
IdeaByte, Microsoft Releases First Security Patch for Windows 2000 Before Product Ships, Laura DiDio
IdeaByte, Business as Usual: Users Are Unconcerned About the Breakup of Microsoft by the DOJ, Laura DiDio
IdeaByte, Third-Party Security Vendors Lend Muscle to Windows 2000, Laura DiDio
IdeaByte, Mixing Windows 9x With Windows 2000 Server Causes No Problems, Laura DiDio
IdeaByte, Windows 2000, Unix Comparison Benchmarks Still Few and Far Between, Laura DiDio
IdeaByte, Tough Nut to Crack: Microsoft Hardens the Windows 2000 Kernel, Laura DiDio
IdeaByte, Before the Official Windows 2000 Debut, Customers Question the Product's Life Span, Laura DiDio
IdeaByte, Windows 2000: Feature and Performance Boosts Across the Board, Laura DiDio
IdeaByte, Practicing What It Preaches: Microsoft Converts Its Internal Domains to Windows 2000, Laura DiDio
IdeaByte, Windows 2000 vs. Windows 9x Millennium Upgrade, Rob Enderle
IdeaByte, Updated Minimum System Requirements for Windows 2000, Rob Enderle
IdeaByte, Top Benefits of Active Directory, Jonathan Penn
IdeaByte, Windows 2000 Professional Update, Rob Enderle
IdeaByte, Windows 2000 Certification Concerns Addressed, Rob Enderle
IdeaByte, Why Desktops PCs Need to Be Windows 2000 Certified, Rob Enderle
IdeaByte, Windows 2000 Applications Compatibility: Microsoft Lifts Veil and Gives Us a Preview, Laura DiDio
IdeaByte, Microsoft Steps Up to the Plate With Free Windows 2000 Training Initiatives, Laura DiDio
IdeaByte, Forecast: As Windows 2000 Server Ship Date Nears: Compatability, Confusion Issues Cloud Picture, Laura DiDio
IdeaByte, Windows 2000 Gearing Up for the Web, Laura DiDio
IdeaByte, Windows 2000 Data Center Version: Worthy High-End Contender to Unix? Laura DiDio
IdeaByte, Scaling the Enterprise: Windows 2000 Grows Up, Laura DiDio
IdeaByte, Windows 2000 Gets More Muscle: Microsoft Doubles Processor Support, Laura DiDio
IdeaByte, Windows 2000 Certification Concerns Addressed, Rob Enderle
Relevant Links and Other Sources
For a look at independent performance results of Windows 2000 on a variety of hardware platforms, a complete study can be found on Microsoft's Web site at: www.microsoft.com/windows2000/guide/platform/performance/default.asp.
Other performance benchmarks can be found on the following sites:
The Transaction Processing Performance Council,
www.tpc.org
The Standard Performance Evaluation Corporation,
www.spec.org
For information on MCSE certification exams and on which NT 4.0 exams have been retired, check out the following links:
Coriolis.com,
www.coriolis.com/cip/
Frequently asked questions about the Windows 2000 MCSE track,
www.microsoft.com/mcp/certstep/mcsefaq.htm
Microsoft information on the retirement of MCP exams,
www.microsoft.com/mcp/examinfo/retired.htm
ForeFront's MSCE NT 2000 certification program,
www.techcourses.com/get_mcse_nt_2000_certified.htm?article=esn
Microsoft Windows 2000 Learning Center,
www.microsoft.com/train_cert/learncenter/win2000/default.asp
© 2000 Giga Information Group
|
 |
Last Updated: Tuesday, May 16, 2000
© 2000 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. Terms of use.
|
|
