The point of 2-factor auth is someone (like a criminal) can have one factor in their possession without it being any good. So with the SMS just being a form of "what you have" (it goes to your cell phone, and in theory only yours, and is time-limited to prevent re-use), an outside attacker would still have to gain the "what you know" or "what you are" factor (either your password/passcode or biometrics of some sort).

True, I wouldn't use SMS for highly classified document protection, but for most things SMS is just fine as a second factor.

I think that's changed in newer versions of Windows Server.

Think of Server 2008 as Vista for Servers: Lots of good ideas, but kicked out the door long before it was ready.
Server 2008 R2 is basically Windows 7 for Servers: Most of the things that were cut to get Vista out the door were finished, so it's actually a pretty good, solid OS. As part of that, many management things that were done through CMD in Server 2008 were moved into PowerShell. I *think* it was at this point that Server Core started supporting PowerShell, but in my world Server Core was always more of an "oh, that's kind of interesting" side note.

In the interest of completing my Server OS list above:
Server 2012 is like Windows 8: It had a few decent improvements under the hood, but with a UI designed by, but not fit for use by, a chimp on acid.

Anything newer than that I haven't used, but I have to believe after the debacle of Server 2012/Win 8, it can only get better again.

Look up "Server Core." I'm not certain if it has an SSH server by default, but MSFT has done an incredible amount of work in recent years to allow everything to be managed through PowerShell.

Thankfully, we have people like the Arabs and the Russians helping us keep the human population under control. All in the name of saving the animals, I'm sure.

Too much fiber, and you'll help keep the open sewer running.

I think/hope you misunderstand. Where Ballmer really wanted to have one Windows to rule them all, with one crappy UI on all of them, I'm hopeful Nadella is talking more of a unified base with UI adjustments/differences as needed for each device type. You can have a unified release of the base OS with one style interface for tablets, another for desktops, and possibly another for servers. Windows Server has been doing this for a while, with some versions coming with full UI and others with just the CLI. They're a unified release - they come out at the same time and use the same base, but there are different UIs available, similar to one release of Slackware coming with multiple window managers and it being the user's choice which one to use (if any).

So, to give people their "bad car analogy" it's like selling an International DT466 engine in a school bus, a semi tractor, a very large pickup truck, a combine, and a tractor. It's the same engine ("unified release"), but the user picks the chassis/body appropriate for their need. If Microsoft can successfully pull that off, it will be a big win for both the company and consumers.

Also, your car analogy fails, because a computer is nothing like a car.

It depends on the device. Most manufacturers don't drastically over-spec their PSUs for a purpose-built server, because to do so is highly inefficient. In practice, most enterprise-class devices will use somewhere between 65-80% of their max PSU rating under load. In this case, that's somewhere between 302 and 372 Watts, so I settled on a nice even number sort of in the middle. Since the spec sheet I found only listed max power draw and not typical, I used a reasonable estimate based on typical enterprise equipment that I've dealt with. These numbers don't have to be exact, and in fact aren't meant to be - the point is the same; even if the server only used 200W, you'd be looking at somewhere around $13k for power and cooling in a typical datacenter environment over the 8-year lifespan cited. For that much, you can EASILY get a more capable server which will use substantially less power/cooling.

I worked there (as an FTE) for 4 years, and my only degree is an AA (2-year degree in Nothing of Value) from the local community college. Like most at MSFT, I started as an agency temp, showed them I knew my stuff, and then got hired full-time when they had a spot open up. Thankfully I got out of there and moved to a company that treats employees like people instead of cattle, but the lack of a 4-year or higher degree hasn't held back my career one bit.

Sunfire v20 has a 465w PSU, so figure about 350w under typical usage. Once you figure power and cooling in a typical datacenter environment, cost hits somewhere around $2,900/year (at $25/watt over a 3-year lifespan). So, over 8 years, you're looking at $23,200 for that old Sunfire. I find it hard to believe your new more efficient machine of equivalent capability will cost you nearly $23,000.

Or, you're running it in your mother's basement where things like power and cooling aren't an issue.

If you're saying HP doesn't produce quality gear, you have apparently not used their servers. There's a reason they're one of very few top-tier server vendors, and it's because they do produce some great gear. I came from an all-HP shop, and I'm currently in an all-Dell shop. Both manufacturers have their strengths and weaknesses, but all things considered they're approximately equivalent.

Dammit Jim, BRAKE!!! It's a BRAKE, not a BREAK. BREAKS keep your car from working, BRAKES keep it from BREAKING.

This is actually false. In some countries it's substantially cheaper; in many of those, it's subsidized by the government (instead of taxed) because they understand that it keeps their economy moving.

Also, in many countries where gasoline is expensive, they've switched to LPG and/or CNG for most cars, which in those countries is FAR cheaper than gasoline (in either their country or the US).

If you're adding aftermarket RAM to a server, why the hell would you use anything other than Crucial or maybe Samsung? Crucial will tell you exactly which RAM is best for your system (including timings and such), and will guarantee compatibility. Prices aren't the absolute lowest but are competitive, warranty is top-notch, and the one time they accidentally shipped the wrong product to me they shipped a replacement overnight.

Since I work with more mature businesses that buy major name-brand servers, we buy our RAM through the same channels. If we were running white-box and didn't care about overall support for the server though, I'd go Crucial as an easy single-source for RAM without hesitation.

This may be a reasonable as a negotiating tactic, but one of the things that has lead Amazon to a position of prominence is that it seemed like just about anything a person wanted was available for purchase. If this ceases to be true, Amazon risks alienating customers. There may not be a good online one-stop-shop alternative now, but the more they distance their customers the more they open up the possibility for others to come in and fill the void.