Slashdot Mirror
Windows 2000 - Nine Months to Live
HeUnique writes "According the this story at The Register, Microsoft is planning to retire Windows 2000 as far as OEMs concerned. MS has asked OEMs to stop immediately the shipment dual-boot systems running Win2k/WinXP, so your choice now is either to upgrade to XP or else." Only if you're ordering systems running Microsoft Windows, though.
MS has asked OEMs to stop immediately the shipment dual-boot systems running Win2k/WinXP
--What you say?
Here where I work, we've still not completed the rollover from NT to 2000, and I have yet to see a single XP system installed, even in a development lab. Even in the UNIX world, we're just now getting rid of the last of our Solaris 2.6 (*perhaps* by the end of the calendar year...)
Does anyone else see massive fragmentation of Windows like this, just due to the extreme upgrade lag of production shops? If it is widely spread, what do people think this mean for Windows in the corporate world?
In addition, is this just a product being retired, or is this a move by Microsoft to start boostrapping Palladium?
They haven't released any sort of XP server have they?
The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. - Benjamin Franklin
Once you've accepted the EULA that allows them to install/uninstall software at will and disable software you installed, you're caught.
Lots of people at work have been asking me about desktop unices since the latest crap from MSFT. I just hope that open source software is legal in most countries in a couple of years when MSFT springs enforced DRM on the populace.
Since M$ doesn't even have a replacement server product one can assume this is either false, or the reporter is talking about Windows 2000 Pro only (not Server) and failed to get his facts straight.
MS has asked OEM to stop immediately the shipment dual-boot systems running Win2k/WinXP Could someone point out why in the world would anyone order such a dreadful combination ? As if Win2K or WinXP don't cause enough headaches on their own...
Actually Win2K was forced into early retirement. The boss kept catching him crashing at his desk and leaving the backdoor open.
my last sig was too controversial... now, a new and improved useless sig!
No way I'm going to run XP within my company. It's an OS that I don't trust, and haven't had the chance to learn well (and don't want to).
So either I'm going to buy a couple dozen licenses of win2k soon,
OR
I'm going to use the existing licenses and don't care at all about licensing (call it non-violent resistance, whatever)
OR
I'm going to start spreading linux on desktop OSes.
Plus, I don't want to upgrade to the Software Assurance thing, 'cause it's going to cost much more and it's not worthed (office 2000 is WAY better than office XP, and I don't want to upgrade - same for win2k/winXP) if you don't want to upgrade.
In any way, Microsoft will lose one of its customers. And I think I won't be the only one.
Anyone else taking care of a network of more than a couple dozen PCs does think like me?
-- There are two kind of sysadmins: Paranoids and Losers. (adapted from D. Bach)
I bet the can't make my company upgrade. I'm still trying to get them to upgrade to 95.
Business News and Resources: www.usasource.net
Microsoft knows how to make money, so they'll just force all Win2000 users to upgrade to XP, and at the same time, have them replace all of their peripherals that are not XP compatible. My mom has a Canon printer (I forget the model number) that I tried to install on XP Pro. After researching the web, I found a statement at Canon's website stating that this particular printer is not supported in WinXP. Oh well, sucks to be a M$ user.
As a Microsoft developer I find this very disturbing. I think Windows 2000 is a very capable operating system for desktop use and small servers. My brief experiences with XP are that it is a little flakey(er?) than 2K, and all that WPA-invasion-of-privacy Gestapo crap makes me feel sick in the pit of my stomach. I use both Win2K and Linux at home (primarily Win2K) but I can see the day where the devide between my "home" computing life and my "work" computing life (which is all M$) will become like night and day. What about Win2K server? .NET server hasn't even hit the shelves yet AFAIK (or if it has it is still VERY new and unproved). Time to learn Java.
It's been a long time coming, and quite frankly, those of us in the Windows world are pretty suprised it hasn't happened already. It's non-news.
But then, The Register never misses an opportunity to write an article that makes MS look corrupt and evil. A lot like some other websites I know.
It hurts when I pee.
We get a lot of compaq desktops where I work with a "dual boot" on startup, but its not a dual boot in the same way that a linux/win2k dual boot syustem works. What happens is that you choose which OS you want to run the first time you start the computer, and the system then deletes the other one. The computer comes with a license for XP that can be downgraded to use with 2000, but not licenses for both. I believe some other OEMS do a similar dual boot, which seems to be what this is referring to. Disallowing this practice would mean that the consumer would be forced to load 2k themselves, rather then having it come preconfigured.
- Or else they're going to give you some cement overshoes?
And ofcourse the winning answer:Or else they'll kill this puppy?
Or else the penguin on your tv will explode?
Or else you'll switch to Linux?
Don't read this!
Microsoft sets a 5-year lifetime on all their OS products. Windows 98 is just about up now. Windows 2000 will therefore officially die (on paper) sometime in late 2004/early 2005. We all know Bill would like to sell us another hojillion copies of WinXP, but the truth is that the support contracts for Win2K are still valid for another couple of years. They can't just pull the plug like this, it opens them up to an easy class-action lawsuit. Although that wouldn't hurt their 40? billion bank account much, it would surely throw around an imperial storm cruiser-load of bad press and maybe finally take CNN's eyes off Pakistan.
This isn't like some little free util going from freeware to cripple-ware or some other triviality. We're talking about hundreds of thousands of corporate users with long-winded paperwork to cover their asses against Microsoft. It's much more profound than the usual "This software has no warranties whatsoever" EULA trite.
-Billco, Fnarg.com
Windows 2000 has been given nine months to live, as far as OEMs are concerned, and Microsoft is pressuring the PC companies to stop offering dual install Win2k/WinXP systems immediately.
.NET Server is at beta 3.
There are 2 statements there: he says they are stopping OEM shipments altogether in 9 months, and pressuring PC companies to stop shipping dual-boot systems right now.
So hot to spit your comment out that you didn't read the article?
2k is still by far the superior 'service running' machine... and it's not going anywhere anytime soon...
Especially since they don't even have any other OS for server-use yet. But
I see no real need to go to XP. Win2K does everything I need and pretty well. If I want development I fire up Linux and if I want games I run a bare bones cut down version of Win95 (with latest directx) which runs like the clappers.
I can sort of understand why Microsoft want to do this, reduction of support costs, push to get people to move over to a largely unsucessfully taken up OS (saturation point has been reached where people have everything they want and don't see a need to upgrade) but at the same time I think that their 3 year support cycle is becoming more and more of an inconveniance - especially with this saturation.
Now I've not really fiddled with XP that much, but is there anything really in there that would make Win2k people go "oooh oooh gotta upgrade now"? I was having a hard time finding anything.
Avantslash - View Slashdot cleanly on your mobile phone.
Thank you for your interest in Windows Update
Windows Update is the online extension of Windows that helps you get the most out of your computer.
The latest version of Windows Update is only available on computers that are running Microsoft Windows 2000 or Windows XP.
I'm running Win98 and IE6 at work (web dev for clients that mainly use IE).
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Really.
Our shop is about 30% into our Active Directory Migration, Windows 2000 server based with XP clients logging in. (Say what you will, XP's security isn't AS BIG a deal if you've got a properly designed -- and segmented -- network)
Migrating off Windows 2000 workstation should be something you're already doing - not keeping a proactive upgrade policy is just ASKING for trouble. (How is this any different from cycling your hardware out every three years for desktops and every two years for laptops? That's been a standard business practice for a very long time.)
In any event, the forced continual upgrade path for Microsoft products and OS's keeps me employed and keeps me learning new stuff. It also makes those residual Windows 9x boxes in our department look even more prime for replacement. Management has dictated that those machines stay in place for political reasons...Our being able to say 'look, _Microsoft_ hasn't supported 9X for X years' helps us move those boxes forward.
"Draco dormiens nunquam titillandus."
Where I work, we are still on NT4 and (thankfully) Office97 so there is no WPA in the system yet.
The thing is, even if I went to my supervisor (which I already have) about such issues, the highest brass don't want advice even from their more technically oriented underlings. They just don't care or know enough to realise that they are getting hosed.
Only in 5 years they will feel the noose tightening around their neck and by that point, it will be VERY hard to switch to other platforms, even though I expect that Linux will be very advanced by that time in comparison to today.
They are doing this because most businesses, including ours, have not standardized windows XP yet. Many of us are concerned about the effects of XP's DRM software and draconian EULAs.
I can only hope that stuff like this has the opposite effect, pushing management away from microsoft altogether instead of towards it (like M% hopes).
My $0.02 will always be worth more than your â0.02, so
How is that OEMs have so completely become Microsoft's whipping post? They are nothing more than MS's distribution channel. It would seem that OEMs would have some say in what they ship would it not? Unless MS declares that Win2K is no longer available for purchase, why can't vendors ship what their customers want? Ugh, no more MS posts today please, they are ruining my coffee.
It used to be, when my [non-geek] friends asked me what kind of computer to buy, I told them to play around with Windows 95/98/2k and MacOS, and go with whatever they feel more comfortable with. (Yeah, I know this post will get modded down because I don't push *n?x, but they wouldn't be able to or want to use it.) If the only Microsoft option is Windows XP I'll just tell them to go buy and iMac or iBook. Microsoft isn't going to change its practices unless people STOP BUYING THEIR PRODUCTS.
The masses are the crack whores of religion.
Ahhh...yes. The proper verb tense is "shat." God cares no more about the E-Coli you shat this morning.
Shat. A wonderful word falling into disuse. THAT's the true pity.
That? That was a pigeon.
Yes Insightful, Interesting, Informative, and not to mention totally false. According to the article ALL OEM shipments stop in 9 months. That effects everybody.
In addition to that they are "pressuring the PC companies to stop offering dual install Win2k/WinXP systems immediately."
force me to? Im still running win 98, they didnt force me to go to ME, 2000, or XP (though I do have a few 2k boxes). They cant "Force" me to do anything, If I wanted to I coule load DOS 6.22 and win 3.11 on my PIII and they couldnt stop me!
Thanks to file sharing, I purchase more CDs
Thanks to the RIAA, I buy them used...
Good Lord, man, WHY!?
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
What?! You haven't had to reload it yet?? :)
-brain
This has very little to do with the death of w2k.
This has everything to do with MS's scheduled death of Win2k. They've realized that it is a great operating system and could likely support most businesses for the next decade or even more. What happens when everyone on the planet gets a Win2k license? No more money for Microsoft.
With WinXP, they've got this shifty licensing program that will likely confuse consumers into purchasing multiple copies when they don't need to. Steady revenue for Microsoft.
The gov't needs to intervene here - MS had better not drop support for the OS as long as it is viable, damnit. We bought it so we will use it for as long as we need to. We *had to* upgrade from Win95 when they played that card (they offered to support it but each incident was going to be $150k up front).
Life is the leading cause of death in America.
Seriously. This doesn't mean they're forcing an upgrade upon you. It doesn't mean you even have to stick with XP for mass purchases. If you're an individual, you might actually be able to make requests to get a specific flavor installed.
I for one know that at my workplace, a hospital, we're just getting ready to switch to full on NT systems (that is, 2K). Sure, XP will work fine with that, but when we don't want to screw around with 2 different flavors of Windows, we won't have to. Besides that we don't exactly trust XP here. One of my team tried it on his laptop, for the hell of it. Ran great for about 4-5 months and then, very suddenly, screwed itself over. He put 2K back on.
Companies and corporations that will need larger numbers of machines, say 5+, the major manufacturers will accomodate to what OS you need. My local United Way was, a year or two ago, going to get 3 new systems from Gateway (IIRC) and they would've been forced to take ME. I called Gateway on their behalf and got them to put 98SE on the machines.
It's just a matter of knowing who to talk to.
A remember people, don't agree to your EULAs! Can someone post a link to the EULA avoider? That's the worst thing you can do to lose your 2K machine. I'm sure that, had I agreed to mine, I'd wake up one morning to be running XP. That would anger me.
damn dawg... don't playa hate... And anyway... as for your comments about .net server, here is what microsofts website has to say about the whole thing on their webpage Microsoft Servers and .NET
The Microsoft .NET Enterprise Servers, Windows 2000 Server family, and the upcoming Windows .NET Server family, with their built-in security, their support for XML and their ability to quickly scale-out to meet increased demands, provide the best solution to host and deploy XML Web services.
Doesn't sound to me like MS plans on putting the axe to 2k quite yet... The bottom line is that there will be demand for 2k, and that MS will allow downgrading liscense... I wouldn't even be surprised if MS didn't cut OEMs for 2k in 9 months...
Another article from the register that bashes MS, it's somethign their good at... "pressuring the PC companies to stop offering dual install Win2k/WinXP systems immediately." I'd like to know what pressuring means... I'd love the article to quote a source... but maybe that would be called real reporting, and not just old fashioned muck raking.
And on top of all that, how can you take an article seriously that is written by some guy who has a name so simular to Lettuce.
Your mammas flamebait.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
So will vendors be able to ship new dual boots with Linux/BSD/AmigaOS/MacOSX/BloatWareOS/DownTheStreet BehindTheWarehouseOS and WinXP? Or is it that M$ eventually wants all dual boots killed?
Would be interesting to see how they take this and how consumers favour it.
Human nature is the same everywhere; the modes only are different. -- Earl of Chesterfield
I don't think you realized, but other freeware programs come with servers installed. Because they all offer the same functionality (ie: remote administration) there is no real purpose to create a separate XP Server Edition.
; )
I'll need to dual boot since the latest Disney game (Lilo & Stitch) won't run on W2K. Crashes before it even changes the video mode. Instead of fixing the bug in their program, it was easier for them to document it and say that W2K is only for business use and not games and they recommend upgrading (read downgrading) to XP.
;)
It was my own fault though, since the box didn't have W2K listed on it. Of course I figured since any other game I've installed on my machine has worked just fine that there wasn't much the Disney programmers could do to completely fuck it up. Well they proved me wrong
Moderators: this is on topic but is definitely a flame, so when you mod me down choose the right moderation. Thanks.
They are not dropping support nor are they saying that support is being axed, as they have said for NT4/95. They are simply saying 9 months from now OEMs will have to ship XP and only XP. They are not forcing companies to migrate their infrastructure, they probably aren't even stopping the retail versions of XP. They are simply saying the OEM pricing of 2000 will go away. No biggie, and in this particular case their monopolistic crap is little more than a red herring. This is like any other company discontinuing production of a product, except their monopoly forces many more people to be impacted by such a decision. Even if there was a level playing ground, this would still happen.
This is objectional because XP is too intrusive and the licensing is going over the line versus 2k, and while we may lament the passing of 2k, it also is a MS product, not competition being driven out. Personally, I think wine is approaching being a valid solution for running most windows applications now when necessary, and running windows applications is becoming less and less necessary (except for games) as other viable options appear. For office applications, there is openoffice and koffice, multimedia playback and encoding has at least caught up with Windows, if not passed it (though authoring still has a way to go). For CAD apps ProE is on the way, for 3D rendering there is blender (if the engine goes open source, interfaces may be made that cater to users of other applications). Everything for getting work done is coming in one form or another.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
I can beat that. My old p200 runs win2k fine. Only 64M of ram too!
...it's to be gainfully employed.
I want to be alone with the sandwich
"Why don't we have Office XP?"
"I need the latest version of Windows and Office on my PC"
My answer is always the same. "If you can tell me three features that you need that the latest version of Windows or Office has then I'll get you that upgrade." No one has yet to tell me those features.
It seems that Microsoft wants us to not think of that least they slow their revenue. Ever notice that all those flashy Microsoft commercials never seem to mention any new or useful features? The commercials never state that Windows NEW is better than the previous version let alone why.
UNIX/Linux Consulting
Straight from the horses mouth.
% 2F directory%2Fdiscontinue%2Easp
"Each Microsoft product follows its own "Product Support Lifecycle", which begins when the product becomes available, and ends when the product records low or zero support questions for a significant period of time."
"By the time product support ends, most of our customers are using newer versions. For customers still using legacy products, Microsoft normally provides a six-month notice before ending support. Microsoft continues to make Self Service Support Options available after support concludes."
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=
----- Whats wrong with this picture? http://www.revoh.org:1234/whatswrong
Most places I've worked won't install a Microsoft OS/Server product until service pack 3 comes out.
.NET
They usually wait for the 1st service pack for development software.
etc....
But as things stand, no one in the office where I work is using win2k, were all still NT.
SQL server 2000 hasn't been accepted for production systems yet.
An were all still using Office 97.
There are no plans for
and I'm still fixing software running on windows 95.
Even the microsoft freeks I've worked for before waited for a couple of service packs before installing anything (even if it came with MSDN).
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
I use XP as my main desktop, and one thing I really don't like is the way it automatically updates itself. Sure, it asks to you before doing it, but when it asks "Update Windows Media Player - security patch" I expect it to just patch the hole, not change the file setting of my machine so that files I previously opened in another application now open in Media Player (this happened to me the other day).
The day I move to Linux as my desktop machine is getting closer and closer.
And yet another "UNIX killer" falls off the end of the upgrade treadmill.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
For Linux to do that, we will need a Common Conventions Commission - someone to make Ctrl-Z/X/C/V/P/F Undo/Cut/Copy/Paste/Print/Find in every program that uses those commands. If this can be done, we will succeed at something that even Microsoft struggles with - consistancy. The ability for a person to learn highly-portable operations is key to adoption.
That what was all this school was for... to teach us how to solve our own problems. -- janeowit
I can see this move by Microsoft backfiring in a big way. With a tighter economy, in particular less revenue coming into a company, the emphasis is on cost cutting, not increased expenditure. It's clear Microsoft has set the path for higher operating costs this will annoy people from the CFO's who are pulling back the reins and saying, whoa there boy to the techies who are content and in some cases still doubtful over Windows XP's performance and stability.
This could be a golden decision for Linux.
Well click on the Task Bar - Properties and Remove the Group similar taskbar buttons check.
I should have said "upgrade 'from' 95." I guess thats what the preview button is for I
Business News and Resources: www.usasource.net
No really? I'm pretty sure this kind of thing has happened since the days of DOS. I mean I don't see OEM's bundling Windows 95 or 98 or NT 4. That would be ridiculous.
That said W2K Workstation and XP Pro are similar enough that just as a lot of folk see no advantage to upgrading, there is not a lot of downside to upgrading. If you want to have a homogenous IT shop in which everyone has exactly the same setup then you will be installing from a pre-mastered disk image anyway.
The slashdot blathering against XP from people who admit they have never used it is simple ignorance. The sae people can be found lambasting Microsoft for unreliable software and then proudly proclaiming that they never upgraded from Win95. Well Duuuuhhh!!!!
XP is a big improvement over w2k in a few areas. The big one being that you can run Win98 software on a system with an NT kernel. The nice to have feature is that my Vaio now reboots in 30 seconds instead of taking 4 minutes.
I think that the real reason that so many of the slashdot crowd are so anti-XP is that they are scared of it. It takes several releases for any O/S to become reliable. In the early days of Linux the main attraction was that it was more reliable than several of the commercial O/S. When Solaris 2 first came out it was a byword for flaky, people were running SunOs for reliability.
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
Seriously. Anyone still buying Microsoft today is doing so because they have to, because they're counting down the years until retirement and don't want to take a risk (nobody ever got sacked for buying Microsoft), or because they really are just too dumb to see that if they don't bail out before Palladium arrives, they'll never get out. I pity those people, but I don't expect any of them to suffer an attack of clue in the near future.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
Ok People I have a couple of comments and something to think about:
1. What about 3rd party applications? I work for an integrator that does IP telephony and traditional phone systems as well as networks.
We have not even been able to transition to Win2K from 98SE for our field techs because many of the 3rd party maintenance packages only run under 98. Add to that new "web interfaces" for IP based products that only run under IE 5.01 with a specific version of the JVM. Not to mention the legacy products we support that require DOS based maintenance access programs!
2. The main issue that many of the people posting here are missing is MONEY. I work on the pre-sales side of my firm and the number one issue with deploying ANY new technology into any client is always money. I have had $100,000 plus deals fall apart because they required a couple of $3000.00 routers to be added to the client's ageing network infrastructure.
So when people start talking about how the costs of upgrading to XP from the software side, and how we should all be on proper "product lifecycles" and such, I have one question, do you realize the state most businesses are in right now? Many of my clients are canceling all IT upgrades and initaves for the remainder of the year.
Comment #2
Now I may be trolled out for this one, but I due to the reasons above the IT guys in my firm can't move to Linux on the desktop even if we wanted to. Why? Legacy 3rd party applications, tools supplied by vendors built on Microsoft technology.
Ok so even if I got all the issues with ease-of-use, support, document compatibility and user training. I still can't move to linux because we have major line-of-business applications that only run on windows. For example, our accounting package (>$100000 invested in the last 3 years, so don't even talk about scraping it), our customer service ACD monitoring package ( a whole market that has next to no presence on Linux) and our remote monitoring and alarming system for client sites. All run on windows back-ends and have only windows clients. Even the newer ACD package which can be setup totally web based requires IE. So we're stuck.
What I (and I am sure many others also) need to move to Linux is an inexspensive and 100% compatible Windows API Layer for Linux, then I could slowly move my clients to Linux.
Now don't get me wrong, I am using Linux as our web proxy, I use sendmail for our marketing newsletter mail-outs. I am going to place an e-smith server in front of our exchange servers for the virus scanning service offered and to help filter SPAM. (Plus I can toss Mcafee and ITS high fees) I am even looking to replace our old Access97 based service database with a Linux/Apache/PHP/MySQL based web app. And THAT one is solely to avoid having to upgrade my Access licences.
So I put it back to the community of Slashdotters, how can one cut the ties to windows, when so much of thier business processes are tied to it and with shrinking IT bugets?
Obi-Wan
According to the Microsoft MCSE FAQ, they are planning to retire the MCSE 2000 concurrently with the retirement of MSCE XP/.NET and not before.
This makes sense because they haven't even gotten some of their own study materials out for MCSA 2000 until recently, let alone MCSA/MCSE XP/.NET exams are still being introduced. God I hope so, I've just started investing into a MCSA cert (which I hope to have this month) that I plan to upgrade to a full MCSE within a month after that.
But you never know when a vendor moves to "push product." And that's the #1 motivation behind for-profit vendor certifications.
-- Bryan "TheBS" Smith
Independent Author, Consultant and Trainer
Oh, it's a blast, but it's not really capitalism. Microsoft can, and does, coerce its customers into buying what it wants to sell, when it wants to sell it. That's hardly a free market at work, so I'm not sure it qualifies as capitalism.
Now that they've discontinued non-XP products, everything requires product activation. This means, no cloning, which means, lots and lots of set-up time. Currently, it takes me about 10 minutes to roll out a new desktop wih all the software, because I keep one up-to-date master clone image, with all the latest patches, drivers, etc. on it. This makes my life easy. We still pay for licenses for everything. With "XP," I can't clone. This means about 4-6 hours per machine to get the Company Standard Software set up. Installation costs go way up.
"Open License" products bypass the product activation, which helps, but it means that I have to buy TWO licenses for each machine, because PC makers (in our case, Dell), will not sell PCs without software, and have no provision for wirking with Open Licensees. This is retarded. Plus, Microsoft says that (according to the sales lackey I just spoke with) cloning is illegal unless we have a "Select" or "Enterprise" agreement, which requires 250+ desktops.
MSFT is not selling Office 2000 anymore, so I have to buy XP and downgrade, because I don't want to go through the expense and hassle of upgrading every machine to Office XP, just because Microsoft wants me to.
I'll get to repeat the experience with Windows 2000 in the near future, it seems.
So my choices are:
1) Pay more and suffer more hassle
2) Suffer mroe hassle and pay more
Oh, I'm LOVING this. Macs are looking better and better for the corporate desktop... except that we require certain Windows software, like our accounting system, some data processing software, etc.
GRrrrrr
Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
That's been a standard business practice for a very long time.)
What do you call a "long" time? Seems to me that in the world of big servers, upgrades have *never* been done unless there's a goddamn good reason too. I don't know about you, but my small business is staying with W2K until there's a very, very, very good reason to upgrade. It costs a lot of money, time, and effort to upgrade. Upgrading just for the sake of upgrading is truly stupid.
mine it's more than "I don't like it and don't even want to try it". I had enough bad times trying to make all our win2k work together and I was lucky because I didn't have to tweak EVERY SINGLE installation of win2k I did. ...like regular win2k boxen. So why bother? win2k is more than enough.
.xls spreadsheet. Works perfectly in office2000. Doesn't work AT ALL in office XP. Office XP is not fully compatible with office 2000.
:)
I know that I can manage something by using active directory to tweak at a registry-level every machine that logs into the domain, BUT
- doing that requires a lot of time to plan, try, test and develop the tweaking
- after the tweaking, basically all the xp machines will
1. look
2. be more ore less
PLUS: office XP is REALLY bad. I mean, we have an application (SAP) that is CERTIFIED to give back some results as an
So why bother, again? I'm more than happy with win2k. I don't have time, resource AND enough interest to TRY to LEARN windows XP, not even for myself. I've had enough of that crap, and I realized that if I had spent that same much time that I've wasted on microsoft product on Linux instead, we all in our company would have linux desktops with openoffice working smoothly. And I wouldn't be writing those angry slashdot posts
-- There are two kind of sysadmins: Paranoids and Losers. (adapted from D. Bach)
Someone said that Windows 2K and Windows XP are "Microsoft killers". They have finally come up with an operating system that works reasonably well. Sure, these latest Windows flavors have their problems, but nothing that would make one want to upgrade.
And that is the nub. In the past, people snapped the latest Windows version like they were hotcakes, in hopes that this would finally be the Windows version that would solve all their problems. This is Microsofts problem: not the fact that there is something in XP that people would want, but the fact that Win2K is already doing a fine job.
The only reason people will buy newer versions of Windows would be Microsoft forcing them to. Witness this move, and the recent "upgrade or pay triple for your licenses" extortion.
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
I don't trust XP because I'm not confident on what it's going to do, what is it doing, and HOW. Win2k is pretty settled down - with the microsoft's kb, websites, tweaks and some experience with microsoft operating systems you know more or less what's happening inside the machine. Plus, win2k has been around for enough time to let people develop some useful applications that runs on it.
Now, XP has a fairly new approach to the concept of "operating system"; users, even users who wants to, have little chances to understand what's happening. I'm not talking about those "errors" that can be fixed by XP itself - I'm talking about strange behaviors that let the system usable, sure, but MAY give complications later on.
IMHO, XP it's an OS that doesn't leave enough free space to the user to be considered "affordable" for business use.
Let me explain in another way: I have a quite big amount of machines and users under my Power. With such a quantity of machines, troubles are going to arise much more often than if I had only a couple of dUh-SERS. It's statistic: the more users you have, the more stupid problems that you almost never encountered before are going to arise.
Now, with XP the amount of time you have to spend to "hack" around and inside it to learn where the problem was and how to avoid it, well, it's just not affordable, given the amount of machines I have in my Kingdom. Unless I make my company hire other IT guys, either very well trained (and expensive) or I'd have to train them - and still waste part of my precious time, that I could use in better ways, say, reading their mail.
Using microsoft OS at work is not just like at home when you can click the 'ok' button and forget about what the problem was. in a business you NEED to know why the error did arise, and how to avoid it, and probably how not to make it happen again on another machine - unless you want to go and check each and every machine you have in your business and fix that thing before the CEO hits it. It's a matter of experience (ah! pun): if a window box is configured perfectly, it's not going to give you troubles at all. If you leave even some stupid thing back, well, sooner or later you'll have to spend a great bunch of time fixing it - and trying to understand where the problem is.
Dunno if I made myself clear about that, let me know. The topic here is much more a matter of "feelings": windows's behavior is not scientific, sometimes cannot be predicted.
-- There are two kind of sysadmins: Paranoids and Losers. (adapted from D. Bach)
I use NT 4.0 and Office 97 at work. The problem is that Microsoft is ending support for these products. What happens when the next critical security bug is discovered and no patch is available?
Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
In Belgium (Europe) for example, a telco company has succeeded in registering a COLOR as trademark.
Nothing new about that. Kodak Yellow has been a trademark for decades. As it should be. Trademark registration systems provide a valuable consumer service that prevents competing companies from copying packaging and names in a manner that would confuse the consumer into buying Modak Film, sold in yellow boxes. I am sure the Fuji green is similarly protected.
We already have tremendous problems with inferior goods in commerce sold under outright pirated trademarks. For example experts estimate 90% of Rolex watches sold today are fakes. Fake Viagra is another common problem. Imagine what would happen if the current system were weakened.
The site in question didn't exist before the registration was accepted and was created as a protest against it
So you guys deliberately copied the trademark, and are now outraged that the owner comoplained? Give me a break!
Trademark law is necessary and vital for consumer protection. Complaining about it is dumb.
"And she dressed like a slut, too."
-- Pig Hogger
Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
"I just hope that open source software is legal in most countries in a couple of years... "
I share your worries, brother. My guess is MS has been brewing DRM/Palladium in the X-labs ever since Linux was declared enemy number one: The Black Magic Anti-GPL.
"Once you've accepted the EULA..."
If I ever buy MS software (which I can't remember ever doing) I'll send a fax to MS support to tell them I don't accept the EULA, then click the shaded rectangle in order to install the software.
Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more, Or close the wall up with our American dead!
Ok I've got karma to burn...
Bullshit... NT4.0 and Office 97 can carry any business today and for the next 5-10 years. You dont need office 2000 or XP to make money, or make more money, or any of the other lies MCSE's and Microsoft shovel's down everyone's throats.
Dont get me wrong, I HATE NT4.0, it is the bane of my existance (Although I still support a fleet of NT3.5 servers...I have to as the pripetary(SP) software/hardware WILL NOT RUN ON 4.0 or higher) and I do love all my 2000 desktops compared to the NT4 destops I used to have here.
Microsoft started Dying back in 1997.. they have yet to release anything that is needed by businesses cince then... and you can run a very sucessful business with all 1997 software/hardware without suffering from any ill effects if your sysadmins and netadmins + IT/IS staff are competent (read as NON MCSE's)
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Why are you complaining ? Microsoft are constantly pulling stunts like these. There are plenty of decent alternatives these days. If you don't like what Microsoft are doing, just switch to something else.
e.g. Win 98 went bad in 1998, etc.
Very interesting comment, especially considering how Microsoft used home users to bootstrap business use. People had Windows and Windows applications at home, and carried them to work. Eventually Windows just got installed and supported at work, to increase productivity, "because that's what the employees are familiar with."
Now we're approaching a situation where home and work may well diverge, and Microsoft appears to be trying to "differentiate" Windows with the XP interface. The commonality is going away. Interestingly, *they* are splintering the market, and diffusing the meaning of "Windows Everywhere."
The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
Then you might want to look at getting out of the company.
After all, the highest brass are wasting money hiring technically oriented underlings. If they're wasting money on technical people, where else are they wasting it, and how soon will it catch up to them.
From a more conventional point of view...
Then you might want to look at getting out of the company.
After all, if the highest brass are not listening to the advice of technical people that they've hired, then they're missing some clues on management technique. What other clues are they missing, and how long will it take to catch up with them?
The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
In an (modest) effort to counter MS's Palladium coup, I've started convincing those around me who won't switch to Linux to stick to Windows 2000. I'm actually having a rather easy time doing this (much easier than converting Windows users to Linux, unfortunately): most people who have Windows 2000 are happy with it and don't see much incentive to move on, especially if you replace their icons with WinXP-like clones (ah, the power of icons...). The motto seems to be: "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" (something I must keep repeating myself every time I feel the urge to upgrade my Linux boxen).
I keep thinking this should be bigger though: we should all put MS in a tight spot and hail Win2k as their best offering so far...they can't say it sucks (after all it only came out, what, three years ago?), but at the same time their business plans hinge on the fact that people will naturally upgrade OS every two years or so. So we need to start a movement: I'd call it the Great Microsoft OS Freeze...basically, tell people to stick with their OS if it works (Win98 or Win2k) if they won't switch to Linux, *BSD or OS X...I think you'll find a lot of receptive ears...
Reminder: find a new sig
He is not retarded, he is wise. We tried your approach, and it didn't work - too many defective parts, too expensive. After that failure we ended up buying from Dell and never were sorry about that.
I also see that you don't comprehend the scale of the operation. If I were to propose to hand-assemble 1000 PCs, I'd be kicked out of the job before I even finish my speech ;-) Such assembly would require a whole team of people who have to be knowledgeable etc. Also, I'd have to worry about spare parts, compatibility, upgrades, repairs... this is insane. I can assemble two or three boxes for a mom'n'pop business, but not more than that.
Please stop considering the Register as some sort of legitimate news source. Slashdot ought to be more than just a way to funnel a fuckload of pageviews onto the registers banner ad trackers.
:/)
Next,
XP cannot replace Win2k. W2k is the server operating system, regardless of the existance of XP. It may be the case that MS doesn't want anyone else running W2k Pro as opposed to XP pro, but w2k server skus certainly aren't going away (the xp-generation server skus aren't ready yet, and even if they were available tomorrow w2k server skus will be supported for some time into the future)
Basically, everything that the register publishes is such a non-story its embarassing to get so worked up over it.
But i guess it generates lots of page views at both places. (yay
My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily represent those of my employer.
What a shame. XP is such a wretched, bloated mess that it really likes 512MB RAM and a 500MHz or better processor. It also can't stand ISA cards anywhere in the system. Picky, picky, picky.
;-)
Conversely I have seen 2K running contentedly on a 300MHz PII with 64MB RAM, and really zooming on a 300MHz K6-2 with 256MB. 2K can run with even less, the trick is to install as much RAM as you can. It's a lot like Linux in that regard.
Unfortunately what slows XP down is its garish, whiz-bang GUI. It mimics its model, OS X, very well in that regard. Luna is as much of a drag on the proceedings in XP as Quartz/Aqua is in OS X. I wouldn't install OS X on my Blue and White G3 350MHz, and I wouldn't install XP on a 350MHz PIII.
Unless Microsoft comes out with an XP "Lite", there will still be millions of users standing pat with 2K or even 98SE. And of course, that will happen when pigs fly. And I don't mean the next Pink Floyd tour either.
They can have my 2K when they pry it from my cold, dead fingers.
Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.
That hasn't even had a single service pack released yet. I have XP on but one machine and that's the way it's going to stay until it begins working correctly. Toolbars magically disappear and reappear, the speech reckognition keeps enabling itself and when it does it slows the machine down to a crawl, a Microsoft support person himself admitted to me that that IE6 (which XP forces you to use) is an unstable disaster that he won't even use on his machine, memory management is a joke....and on and on. Win 2K on the other and, is truly stable and has needed only two service packs as opposed to NT's six. Even NT properly patched is much more stable then XP too.
The school I work for recently purchased new 30 new windows XP workstations and found that many of our educational apps wouldn't run under XP. I called my vendor (Dell) and they verified that I can "downgrade" the OS license to windows 98 and "upgrade" to windows XP whenever I am ready...at no cost (assuming I have the installation media).
-ted
to get panicked MS sys-admins (who won't or can't upgrade to XP or linux) to stock up on some extra W2K licenses over the next couple quarters. This will boost MS's cash revenues to offset a suddenly more subtle use of "commonly accepted accounting practices" which make the earnings appear any way they want.
I have been telling everyone I know, and many people I don't, the ownership ramifications of using XP, or even downloading the latest Media Player patch.
It is the first time I've actually seen a glimmer of understanding from my non-computer-professional associates.
I'm also busy letting all my application vendors know that Win2K was the last Windows O/S I'm ever going to buy. For example, Avid (who makes high-end video editing software) just released an upgrade for their product. But it only runs on XP or OS X, not on Win2K. I told them they instantly lost the sale because of that policy.
All of you 'realists' who say that Microsoft has already won, and will keep on winning, are wrong in that we have to start really nagging consumers about Microsoft's continued software fascism. The situaion won't change any other way.
My guess is that now that they have a monopoly at home and at work, Microsoft can afford to differentiate, because they want to make it harder for people to take software home from work and use it on their home machines.
xp and 2k are not equivelent..XP really blows
Win2k is not bad...not great by any means but almost decent considering it is a M$ offering.
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
NT 4 was far less reliable, even SPed up the wazoo, than 2k. It also far less hardware support, and was/is nowhere near as good at running old apps (which is a concern for many a business).
W2K is a *heap* better than NT4. XP is not a heap better, and is an upgrade which is of value only to Microsoft, and has serious disadvantages for the rest of us.
So? That's your fault for contracting from shit builders.
;)
I agree, those are egregious errors, but if you had a clue you'd have seen what they do beforehand or built the systems yourself.
Don't slag the chinese geeks.
Hey Taco! Looks like you're using the "infinite monkeys and typewriters" scheme to generate Ask Slashdots again...
"Real capitalism" has nothing to do with free markets. If anything, a good capitalist ought to destroy free markets, since they may detract from the generation of wealth from capital.
http://spacemoose.com/strips/shat_bed.gif
"If he thinks he can hide and run from the United States and our allies, he's sorely mistaken." Bush on bin Laden
All the things tying you to win98 and DOS indicate that M$ has yet to provide what you seek. The transition from win3.1 to 95 was evil, but most things worked some better. The transition from 95 to 98 lost more of the 3.1 stuff and the release to 98B was a nightmare. The transition from 98 to ME or any of the other lesser selling junk was an exercise to be avoided. The transition from office 97 to office 2000 was painful. The transition from office 2000 to XP is so bad that I don't want to even mention it. Do you see the trend? It only gets worse.
Quit throwing good money after bad and start moving now. Keep your legacy aps working and start looking for their replacements outside of M$ because you will NOT find them inside without much much more work and effort. Where I work, we have stuff that will only work under DOS/Win3.1. To accomodate it, we keep a couple of old laptops off the network and unmodified. Still, it's only a matter of time before the artificial M$ bit rot eats these things and we can't get parts or the last of our install disks flake out. Have you tried putting DOS on a machine lately? How are those floppies holding up? Mine are dying, don't work with newer hardware and the old stuff won't work forever.
So, how about your own custom software? I was happy when my own software, compiled with Watcom for Win95 transfered over to 98 and NT without many problems. The printing had never worked, due to changed print methods in 95, but that was not too big a deal. I was very careful to NOT use MSFC and keep as close as possible to the lowest level APIs, figuring that they would have to break everything to kill mine. The recent automigration program deleted my work for me when I was moved to w2k just a few months ago. Fortunatly, my job description had changed since I wrote my software and I have not had to use it. I can't tell you if it works on w2k, but I know it won't work in the world of Paladium and other toxic heavy metals from Redmond.
DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.
Why would someone with nine billion dollars work so hard? It's because some people prefer power to comfort. It's not to do the greatest good for the greatest number. It's purely for the sake of power, and only by persuing power for it's own sake can M$ hope to retain it. In the end, it's all the same.
You know how, but you don't know why. It's because:
SLAVERY IS FREEDOM
WAR IS PEACE
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH
DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.
Homer: "Look at these low, low prices on famous brand name electronics!"
Bart: "Don't be a sap, Dad. These are just crappy knock-offs."
Homer: "I know a genuine Panaphonics when I see it. And look, there's Magnetbox, and Sorny!"
Correct me if I am wrong, but does RedHat support 4.0? Does Apple support MacOs 9? No they don't.
The only serious issue here is the *price* and *new licensing scheme*.
- Price is (was) not a big issue, because they had many options for upgraders at the late 2001.
- User eXPerience may be a problem. But then you can costomize XP any way you want. (I currently have Aqua theme on my machine. And I can assure you it's way better than any other clone (kde, gnome, etc.) except for MacOS itself).
- Licensing is a problem. I accept it. But not for everyone.
- Stabiliy. My experience is XP is *much* more stable than any other windows. XP is what 2000 was meant to be. It's faster, more stable, and has a better interface.
Sorry, but anyone who used XP for more than a month will agree with me. Once being used to it, turning back is not so easy.It's the fist time Microsoft did a "nice" OS, and of course they want everyone upgrade to it.
Yes, you can do it that way too, sifting through two seperate windows... OR you could do it in one window via the system properties...
Just because you can mod me down, doesn't mean you're right. Shoes for industry!
real advantage of linux on desktop? :)
(in no particular order)
1. can be tweaked once to suit exactly your needs and then copied over and over again over different machines (even "old" and "slow" ones)
2. you know what's happening, where, and how to fix it
3. costs
4. it's tough for regular users to install their crappy applications and then ask YOU to fix them
5. viruses
6. happyness and joy over the entire universe
-- There are two kind of sysadmins: Paranoids and Losers. (adapted from D. Bach)
office XP itself runs "ok" on win2k. but it has severe compatibility issues with office2k.
more than enough for me to avoid it, thus avoiding winXP, and so on.
-- There are two kind of sysadmins: Paranoids and Losers. (adapted from D. Bach)
yes, that's exactly what I meant. thanks for clarifying, sometimes my english is not enough to translate all the ideas I got to tell.
cheers
[btw, I agree with what you said, completely]
-- There are two kind of sysadmins: Paranoids and Losers. (adapted from D. Bach)
agreed.. SAP is a huge, enormous database that tends to become alive sometimes... so you got to be able to control it and to use it ONLY for what you need. SAP people wants you to use it for e-mail, agenda, notebook, PDM, whatever. If you keep it tight it is really useful. If you let it blow, you're fucked up.
:)
it's fun
-- There are two kind of sysadmins: Paranoids and Losers. (adapted from D. Bach)
One can't blame lack of competence on MS...
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
And they were found to be in acourt of law.
As for evil, well, there is no blinder person than the one that does not want to open his eyes.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
please tell me one piece of hardware that is used in an office that is REQUIRED for the businesses operation that is only available as a USB device...
none...
so therefore... NT4.0 is still a perfect solution for businesses.... there is ZERO reason to switch from it. (dont even try the support angle.. Microsoft has never ever offer'd support other than a pay contract, and you can get that anywhere for NT4.0 and even NT3.51)
Microsoft has WORSE support than linux or BSD.... people need to start realizing that.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
I've been waffling whether to buy a PC laptop (speed, loads of software etc) or go for a Mac Powerbook with OSX. I'm going for OSX.