When Microsoft released Windows Server 2003 R2 it was patched up version of Windows Server 2003; basically the same version, but with post initial release updates applied. You installed the same SP2 regardless of whether you installed 2003 or 2003 R2.

Recently Microsoft released Windows Server 2008 R2. All of our Windows servers at work are running Server 2003, with a mix of 2003 and 2003 R2. The R2 release caused me to begin looking into deploying Server 2008 R2 to replace/upgrade our Server 2003 install base. What I found is truly puzzling to me.

Way back when Microsoft had common version naming between client and server products on the NT branch: Windows NT 4.0 Workstation and Server, Windows 2000 Professional and Server (editions). With Windows XP they broke that. Windows Server 2003 is the server variant of Windows XP. When Server 2003 R2 was released, it was still the server variant of Windows XP.

Continuing the path, Windows Server 2008 is the server variant of Windows Vista. Using the same logic applied to 2003/2003 R2, one would expect 2008 R2 to be a server variant of Vista as well. However, 2008 R2 is the server variant of Windows 7. Say what?

The kernels for 2003 and 2003 R2 are the same kernel. The kernels for 2008 and 2008 R2 are different. For me the fact that it’s a different kernel implies that 2008 R2 should be not called 2008 R2, but something without “2008” attached to it. Call it Windows Server 2009, Windows Server 2010, or Windows 7 Server. I actually prefer Win7 Server because that reconnects the client and server variants that share a common kernel.

Now, this issue will go away some if 2008 SP3 and the first SP for 2008 R2 bring them in line with the same kernel. I don’t expect that to happen, though. Which begs another question. Will the first SP for 2008 R2 be called 2008 R2 SP3, keeping it in line with 2008’s SP releases, or will it be called 2008 R2 SP1 since it’s a different kernel, keeping it in line with Win7?