David Berlind has posted a response to my post on Windows Home Server over on ZDNet. He also responded to me directly via e-mail on Friday. Unfortunately, in both cases, he failed to answer my question of whether or not he had used Windows Home Server.
Finally, when pressed by a member in the ZDNet discussion forum, David admitted:
He claims that, even though he didn't try WHS, we are all missing the point. He says that all he was trying to say is that the home server market is a tough sell to the general public. Unfortunately, he diluted that point by making claims about Windows Home Server that were just not accurate.
Now, instead of addressing the inaccuracies that I pointed out in his critique of WHS (the lack of online storage, photosharing, etc.) and admitting that he didn't use the product first, he is trying to turn the negative reaction that he received into an angry fanboy mob by claiming that the "Windows Home Server fan club" beat him up because he asked if WHS would flop.
What I (and others who responded in the TR and ZDNet forums) took issue with were the inaccuracies about what WHS can do. I think it is reasonable to expect someone to either use the product or do their homework about its features before declaring it a flop. I think that is reasonable whether you're a Microsoft fanboy (which I'm not) or not.
I actually agree with part of the point David says he was trying to make. Home servers definitely aren't for everyone. Microsoft *will* have to do a great job of raising awareness of the product and its benefits. However, I don't agree that it will fail simply because it is the first to market.
I'll leave such debates to David. I'm too busy enjoying what Windows Home Server can actually do for me. I guess I'll get to keep all of my long, luxurious hair, too :)