There it is again.

They are trying to get you to use their cloud services.

solarmystic said:

Britton30 said:

One can still use a NAS and print server to do the job.

True enough Britton30, but what i meant was it seems like with MS herding users towards the cloud, the future of computing may be headed to dumb/thin clients without much user control and time sharing from some super computer like they once were once upon a time when mainframes were used in the industry...

Like what Google is doing with the their own Chromebooks.. no user control...

*shudders*

No user control = no interest.

The way we're being pushed is not my idea of computing.

If we continue to be pushed in this direction then, after over 25 years
as a hobbyist/enthusiast, I'll be looking for a new hobby (or going
totally open-source/freeware, and dumping the internet).

And that would be a shame.

But I will NOT allow myself to be pushed somewhere I have
neither the need nor the desire to go.

......... and then there is Amahi ...............

Amahi Home Server - Making Home Networking Simple

What the hell did Windows Home Server do that standard Windows couldn't, anyways?

I'm assuming by "standard Windows" you mean the consumer versions of Windows (Windows 7, Windows Vista, Windows XP, etc.).

The best way to think of Windows Home Server 2011 (WHS2011) is basically a cutdown version of the server Windows versions such as Windows Server 2008 (WS2008), which entails a few differences from both consumer and server versions alike.

The first difference right off the bat would be the price. You can get an OEM copy (no retail licenses available) of WHS2011 for $50~60 USD, that's almost half of what Windows 7 Home Premium retails for and is magnitudes cheaper than Windows Server 2008. You're probably going to just leave the server running in a closet or something once it's up and running and you probably don't need a full-blown enterprise server OS to drive it, so it's obviously better if you can run the budget lower without sacrificing reliability and usability.

The second difference would be WHS2011's built-in ability to centralize and manage backups and general upkeep for all the client Windows and Mac computers linked up to it via LAN and WHS2011's special software, which comes from WHS2011 being built-on and derived from WS2008. None of the consumer Windows versions, at least to my knowledge (please correct me if I'm wrong!), have any means of centralizing and managing your home network without additional software (assuming there are any).

The third and final difference is, WHS2011 being a cutdown version of WS2008, WHS2011 lacks certain features such as domains. I'm not privy to the specifics as I never researched too much into WS2008 or its older siblings, but WHS2011 is to XP Home as WS2008 is to XP Pro.

All in all, Windows Home Server was a great choice for driving servers running on and managing small home networks. It had the features most people needed and/or wanted and it was available at a price that didn't shoot buckshots at your wallet. I'm saddened that Microsoft doesn't see the potential for this market.