Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft Pulls Plug for Support on NT4

seymansey writes "According to Neowin.net and News.com, Microsoft has apparently announced that as of the end of June, support for the now aging NT4 OS will be pulled. NT4 Server users have until the end of 2004 for support. Windows 98 users will be the next on the list for axed support too. Of course, Microsoft will still provide its knowledge base, but we wont see any more patches, etc. developed for the OS. After 7 years, it's kind of sad to see NT4 go."

37 of 611 comments (clear)

  1. After we finally got the thing stable.... by 5.11Climber · · Score: 5, Funny

    they're going to pull the plug! Damn!

    --
    Arf!
    1. Re:After we finally got the thing stable.... by infornogr · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "Linux has a stable tree and an unstable tree. Developers work on the stable tree to fix bugs and on the unstable tree to put in new features. I think this is a great system. I wish Microsoft learns from it."

      Um... NT and 9x?

  2. Possible by pasi · · Score: 5, Funny

    And now Microsoft will turn it to Open Software so volunteers can start an own fork of it and continue deveploving it. .. and will win eurovision song contest and soccer world championship. And SCO will be popular again.

    OR, then not.

  3. Primary link at Microsoft by LinuxParanoid · · Score: 5, Informative

    A full description of Microsoft's end-of-support, end-of-life policies, including dates for *all* it's OSes, can be found here.

    --LP

    1. Re:Primary link at Microsoft by madman101 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Those are for desktop operating systems only. BTW, the extensions were announced and heavily covered in the media back in February. "Apparently" announced? Where have you people been?

  4. We still have NT4 servers... by Surak · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...where I work. Why upgrade a server if it still works? Put 2000 and XP on the workstations, sure, but why replace an already-functional server? As long as it keeps serving files, right?

    Now there will be companies like ours scrambling to get 2000 Server or 2K3 server on their servers by the end of next year. And we won't have a choice. Upgrade or lose support. What do you do? You upgrade. :-/

    1. Re:We still have NT4 servers... by Talez · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Killing off NT4 and its old Microsoft LAN Manager "networking" was like killing off the 9x line. It had to be done and it'll hurt now and months later you'll be wondering what exactly the fuss was again.

    2. Re:We still have NT4 servers... by tsetem · · Score: 4, Informative

      If you upgrade from NT4, do it right. Use Samba.

      The latest version of Samba even allows you to set up your Samba server to be a PDC, and directly migrate your users & groups from an already functioning NT Domain.

    3. Re:We still have NT4 servers... by Surak · · Score: 4, Insightful

      When you have to maintain 24/7 and 3 9's reliability on limited staff, YES, you *have* to have vendor support. What if something fails that you can't figure out a solution for in less than hour? That's why you pay Microsoft (or Red Hat or IBM or whoever).

    4. Re:We still have NT4 servers... by Matrix272 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Because if it stops working, you have to reload it. Reloading W2K is a lot easier and faster than NT4. Besides, maybe, just maybe, sometime in the near future, somebody will want (gasp) a NEW FEATURE! If, and when, that time comes, you'll be stuck. Maybe sometime you'll want Active Directories... except when that happens in 2007, you'll only have worked with Windows NT4 for the last 11 years and will have no clue what Active Directories are, or how to use them... so the learning curve on getting YOU up to speed keeps the company from moving forward.

      Sometimes having a server that works isn't enough. Eventually you will need more features or additional security or more hardware/storage. When that time comes, you'll be screwed.

      --
      "It's better to have a gun and not need it than need a gun and not have it." ~ Christian Slater, True Romance
    5. Re:We still have NT4 servers... by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Er, no. This isn't like a car, this is an OS. There is no Consumer Product Safety Commission or a National Transportation Department looking over M$'s shoulder.

      I think it's completely irresponsible, of course. Most meaningful systems have an ROI measured in years. Once the thing starts paying for itself, it sucks to have to yank it because it can't be repaired anymore.

      Hell, what's the average lifespan of unix terminal, or a Mini? How about a Mainframe? These things would live for YEARS. We had a System 36 that operated our finance department from 1982 to 1999. That was replaced by an AS/400 that we are probably going to get another 10-15 years out of.

      People, business is business. We are not put on this earth to keep the unscrupulous and wasteful fat and happy.

      --
      "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
      --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
    6. Re:We still have NT4 servers... by Surak · · Score: 4, Funny

      You don't get the nifty collaboration features that Outlook has. Group calendaring, group task lists. It's nice, for instance, to be able check your boss's meeting schedule so you can fit in that Quake III Arena deathmatch. ;)

    7. Re:We still have NT4 servers... by Kadagan+AU · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'd have to disagree with you. If a server is working, and doing well, there's no reason to upgrade. Any half way intelligent sys admin makes regular backups of servers, so if it dies you can restore it. Also, who's to say that because you have an NT4 server, you can't also have 2k servers and linux servers and Tru64 servers and VMS servers, like we do where I work? You use the right tool for the job. If the NT4 server is doing well at what it needs to do, or if your company needs to support an older project it did, that was compiled on an NT4 system (since we make rail road software, we need to keep good support, and rail roads don't upgrade too darn often), you may have to keep some older servers up and running. We recently bought a new VAX from the late 80's and are setting it up with VMS 7.3. It's old as hell, but it's the tool we need for this job. Don't try and use a sledge hammer when all you need is a screwdriver.

      --
      This space for rent, inquire within.
  5. Oh Well... by deadlinegrunt · · Score: 5, Funny

    I dropped support for Microsoft too.

    --
    BSD is designed. Linux is grown. C++ libs
    1. Re:Oh Well... by Dukebytes · · Score: 5, Insightful
      You know thats funny - but somewhat true also. The promises that they will end support in 2001 - and 2002 and 2003 etc... kind of piss people off. The new licensing scheme - whatever the hell that currently is - is also pissing people off. We buy all shrink wrap licenses - might be stupid - be at least this way we know what we have - it wont expire - we can downgrade it and load it on any machine we want to.

      And (drum roll...) the next two Dell file servers we are getting in for pure storage will be "tested" with FreeBSD running Samba. Took me three years - but they are going to let me try it and see if it "works out" for us. The thing that finnaly pushed this over was when me and the big boss was going over the pricing for the servers - I said "remember we have still $1600 worth of M$ that we need to buy" and he said "Oh shit thats right" - and BOOM I went into action and low and behold we are going to try it out and see what happens...

      I even went out and bought Using Samba - just in case ;)

      Regards,
      Duke

      --

      FreeBSD: Nothing runs like a daemon with a pitch fork.
  6. Pulling support? by DarklordSatin · · Score: 4, Funny

    That's funny, there hasn't been a patch for NT4 in a very long time. What support is it that they're not going to be providing anymore.

  7. sad to see it go? by lingqi · · Score: 4, Insightful
    it's kind of sad to see NT4 go.

    I think it should have gone a LONG time ago, NT4 was tricky as a desktop OS because DirectX was pretty much nonexistant. I think once Win2K (and the first two or three SPs)came about, NT was a goner. The sad thing really is what came to replace NT and the like for the future-> XP, longthorn, etc.

    NT (4.0) wasn't that revolutionary, anyhow. kernel is about on par with 3.5, and the OS itself didn't become really stable until SP5 or so (SP4 caused crap (read: exchange) to crap out, IIRC), and by that time 2K was just right around the corner.

    I will be sad when 2K goes. in my opinion that's so far the best OS microsoft made. (XP drops low on the list b/c the nasty theme and horrible amounts of crap-service that comes pre-enabled, which (especially sys-restore) slowed your computer to a crawl and more).

    --

    My life in the land of the rising sun.

  8. Re:How often... by Advocadus+Diaboli · · Score: 5, Insightful
    microsoft should stop pretending to provide support over the lifetime ofr a product

    Well, they acutally do provide lifetime support for their products. The only problem is that they define when the lifetime of the product is over.

  9. kinda sad... by imag0 · · Score: 5, Informative

    ...After 7 years, it's kind of sad to see NT4 go.

    After spending two years in MA phone support for NT on laptops I would have to say I am happy the damn thing is finally dead.
    Installing NT on anything was time intensive, installing drivers had to go in a particular order or it turned that hardware into a doorstop:

    imag0: "You mean to tell me you installed the video drivers before you installed card services and your ethernet drivers?"
    Client, quivering after spending the past three hours reloading NT on a laptop: "Uh, yeah."
    imag0: "Ok, pull out your boot diskettes again and see if we can repair install..."

    A long running joke in laptop support was that NT meant "Not Today". And it was true. Repair installs didn't. Service Control Manager (SCM) was only there to throw cryptic, useless errors at users just long enough to generate support calls and let's not get into how hard Adobe Acrobat and SP4 clusterfucked in some Trident configurations.

    Glad it's dead. No love lost here. Burn your cd's and feel happy its gone the way of win 3.11 and MS Bob.

  10. Other MS lifecycle links by LinuxParanoid · · Score: 5, Informative

    Good point. Here's a better lifecycle link at Microsoft, which includes it's Windows server products and a bunch of other server products. For Office and other MS products, you can try this link.

    --LP, who is 'journal whoring', not karma whoring thank you very much ;-)

  11. sad to see it go? by Lumpy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Funny, I dont think any of my NT4 critical systems are going to go anywhere.

    as far as support no longer available, Big deal. I can get 3rd party support.

    My NT4 servers are going no-where... they all server me very well with 99.9% Uptime and each decoding 24 different MPEG2 DVD quality video streams at once on a Pentium 166.

    Until the vendor writes Windows 2000 drivers for these very high end MPEG cards, NT4 is the de-facto standard in cable tv headends for many more years.

    sorry, but this is a non-issue for most of us... it doens make the OS magically dissappear.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  12. The devil you know by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm not convinced this is a good thing. While I generally think MS got Win2K right (though not XP), several people in my office still explicitly request NT4 on new machines. One guy who works on my team is considering this now, after spending a week chasing a bug somewhere on his WinXP box that causes it to reset without warning when running some essential software. Sometimes, better the devil you know really is good advice.

    --
    If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    1. Re:The devil you know by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 4, Interesting
      I have a whitebox I built at home, and continually tweak when I have a few bucks to burn. It has an ATI all-in-wonder that I use to throw my playstation on the screen.

      We upgraded from 98SE to XP because I wanted an OS that could walk and chew gum at the same time. Let me tell you, mistake, mistake, mistake. Anything that uses the 3d accelleration crashes the system randomly. Which defeats the purpose of having an athlon-XP to work on computer animation now doesn't it?

      It's always dual booted, and I have finally gotten the Linux side so stable, my wife only boots into Windows to use M$ office. I have open office on the system, but she keeps mumbling something about layout. She like it because it boots from power switch to login, to KDE finished loading in 30 seconds. I'm digressing...

      I never thought I would see the day, but I actually have better driver support under Linux than XP for my machine. I have the firewire card working, with software to OPERATE the firewire card. My printers work without having to reboot to clear a printer-error condition. (A bug in the USB driver for XP.) My DVD playback and surround sound are perfect.

      And all this without having to drop another dime on hardware.

      --
      "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
      --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
    2. Re:The devil you know by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 4, Interesting
      You really should have a company-wide standard and that probably should be windows 2000.

      Unfortunately, in a small company like ours, that simple isn't financially viable. Even if it were, not all of our PCs are used for the same purposes, so we wouldn't want them all to be the same, or even necessarily run the same basic software.

      By the way, we develop software that ships on more than a dozen different platforms, including several flavours of Windows, several *nix variations, older non-UNIX'd MacOS versions and more. We're well aware of the strengths and limitations of these platforms relative to one another.

      NT 4 is considerably less stable than 2000.

      Several of my colleagues would disagree with you, from direct personal experience. For standard networked Dell boxes running Windows+Office and nothing else, sure. From personal experience, Win2K is generally more stable and the one they got right. But certainly for some machines, particularly those with any "unusual" hardware, it's quite common for NT4 to be more stable than 2000.

      I would also tell you XP guy to turn off the auto-restart on blue screen so that he can actually see what it is saying.

      I'm sorry, you misunderstand me. There is no blue screen. The system either locks up or resets, immediately. This is rare with the better Windows versions, but quite possible technically, and happening with monotonous regularity on this particular system. Or did you think that highly privileged code was immune from bugs that screw up the state of the floating point unit, and device drivers never set threads to run at the dangerously high priorities allowed by the Windows API? ;-)

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    3. Re:The devil you know by xYoni69x · · Score: 4, Insightful
      We upgraded from 98SE to XP because I wanted an OS that could walk and chew gum at the same time. Let me tell you, mistake, mistake, mistake.

      98SE is a good OS considering it's 16-bit (read: it sucks!).
      Very simply put, XP = 2K + crap.
      You should have installed 2K, it's the best Microsoft OS so far (I have yet to try 2K3 so currently have no opinion on it).

      --
      void*x=(*((void*(*)())&(x=(void*)0xfdeb58)))();
    4. Re:The devil you know by nuggetman · · Score: 5, Informative

      Windows XP resets without warning because that's the default behavior on the blue screen of death. To make it show the BSOD and possibly track down the problem

      Start > Control Panel > System
      Advanced Tab
      Startup and Reovery settings
      Uncheck "Automatically restart" under System Failure

      --
      ...and that's all there is to it.
    5. Re:The devil you know by necrognome · · Score: 4, Informative
      Actually, 98SE is 32-bit with 16-bit legacy support.
      see here.
      For many programmers, a topic of immediate interest will be how to transport existing applications originally written for the 16-bit Windows 3.x (Win16) to the 32-bit Windows 98 and Windows NT (Win32) environments. Fortunately, such conversions, although sometimes tedious, can be relatively simple.

      Because both Windows 3.x and 98/95/NT follow the same general structural format, use the same messaging systems, and employ the same resource elements, the overall structure being moved from Windows 3.x to 98/95/NT does not change. For the most part, existing Windows 3.x applications will run directly under Windows 98/95/NT without requiring recompilation for the 32-bit environment.

      --


      Let's get drunk and delete production data!
  13. Re:This policy could work to linux's advantage.... by Delusion- · · Score: 5, Insightful
    and I'd bet your boss will ask "are there any alternatives" to which you can grow horns and reply "why yes, sir" and show him/her your linux desktop or introduce them to one, using x-windows and staroffice


    And then your bosses financial department screams at you the next time he can't read their convoluted, thoroughly programmed-to-death excel files. Most People who find staroffice a useful alternative aren't using ms-office so much as halfway to the limits of its functionality. I found this out the hard way: accountants are not Most People. Neither are auditors, and in some cases, even the people in the human resources department. They know crafty Excel techniques which simply don't translate into Freebie Office documents of any flavor, for good or bad.

    Desktop evangelism can be dangerous, as it tricks the typical geek into thinking that because Staroffice is good enough a replacement to him for word and Excel (particularly the latter), that it's good enough for everybody. In a perfect world, maybe, but not in a real office with a lot of legacy programming, legacy programmers, legacy users, and genuinely talented Excel weenies. Much less Access weenies.

    Same debate? Gimp versus Photoshop. I've had people 'explain' to me why the gimp is a perfectly suitable replacement to Photoshop. For making web graphics, sure. For doing advanced production work for high level print processing? Not only is Gimp not even in the same league, it's not even playing the same game.

    Half of the corporate honchos I've had to deal with in regards to desktop issues get irritated that their office PC doesn't have the same annoying shovelware, quirky desktop setup, and bells & whistle proprietary add-ins as their ridiculous and expensive name brand PCs. Visions of apoplexy dance in my head at the idea of explaining to them why the "My Computer" icon is called something else, why it behaves differently when opened, and why the hell I can't load their three-versions-old copy of AOL onto a sweet chromed linuxy desktop, or if I can (via an emulator) why it runs slower, and why there's extra "stuff to click".

    These are the same people I had to have meetings with about why the naked dancing chick.exe attachment their cousin sent them doesn't seem to work at the office (all attachments stored at server, released by me as appropriate - e.g. no exes, .doc files (because .rtf files don't harbor viruses), unapproved .zip files, and all the usual suspects (script files, vb files, etc.)

    I'll pass on evangelizing a more complicated (or even just 'different') user experience to these people, thank you very much.
  14. Ummmm by AntEater · · Score: 5, Funny

    "After 7 years, it's kind of sad to see NT4 go."

    7 years ago, it was kind of sad to see NT4 coming.

    --
    Alex, I'll take keybindings not used by Emacs for $400....
  15. Re:Joe ServicePack is perplexed... by Matrix272 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I can't see how anybody can say that the security in NT4 was enough, especially compared to newer OS's. And if you want to get all technical about it, since Joe ServicePack has never received any support from Microsoft, then he's running Windows NT4 without any service packs... since the service packs have to be developed by Microsoft. Keeping that in mind, I'd say Joe ServicePack probably has a long and hard road ahead of him to upgrade to an operating system developed in the better part of the past decade. I wish him luck.

    --
    "It's better to have a gun and not need it than need a gun and not have it." ~ Christian Slater, True Romance
  16. Re:So let me get this straight by mindstrm · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Because using linux as a pdc avoids a lot of licensing expenses, and works quite well?

  17. You have to hand it to Microsoft by DrXym · · Score: 4, Insightful
    NT 4.0 has been out since 1997 or some time and they're just pulling support now. That's pretty impressive, even if they've been in maintenance mode for a long while.


    Contrast that with Red Hat for example, who are yanking support for their 'personal' operating systems 12 months from the time of their release. It's kind of sobering to think that Red Hat 8.0, 7.3, 7.2, 7.1 are end of lifed in six months from now and 9.0 a mere four months after that.


    While this might save Red Hat money in the short term I have to wonder what impact it will have on customer confidence. Even assuming you bought it on the very day of release at best you get twelve months maximum of bug fixes, which isn't very much especially if you were planning on deploying it. If some horrible exploit is discovered ten months from now you're screwed. You might appeal to the community to produce an updated patch, but you still forfeit any QA testing or automated RHN update that you would have gotten before.


    But let's face it, only a small fraction of people would be aware of or bother to manually plug new exploits anyway. With time a burgeoning number of exploitable RH boxes will become a prime target for crackers. Too bad for them you say, but often those cracked boxes are used to launch attacks and are therefore a danger to everyone. Look at Microsoft's reputation concerning security of their operating systems and wonder if Red Hat's end of life policy will mean the same for them.

  18. Re:So let me get this straight by Xpilot · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This "Linux for everything" bigotry is just silly

    So "Linux for everything" is "bigotry"... but...


    It is better than an NT 4 domain for so many reasons. However almost equally important is the fact that Windows Server is the Microsoft solution.


    ... "Microsoft for everything" isn't? Interesting.

    --
    "Backups are for wimps. Real men upload their data to an FTP site and have everyone else mirror it." -- Linus Torvalds
  19. Okay, tar and feather me, but . . . . by LazloToth · · Score: 4, Interesting



    Yeah, NT is not *nix. Yeah, NT isn't a lot of things. But I've worked with it since SP1, and, you know, once you get used to it, you can get a lot of productivity out of it. So much depends on drivers and, of course, program code. These days, NT lacks some refinement. So does Linux, for that matter. Nonetheless, after 6 1/2 service packs, NT delivered (and continues to deliver) a fair amount of bang for your hardware buck. In some ways, it is refreshing to use a product that is not weighed down with useless features. Our remaining NT servers, running on Compaq Proliant 1600 hardware, are fine producers. And contrary to myth, they do NOT have to be rebooted every day, every week, or even every month. This isn't a Microsoft ad - - I'm leading the charge away from MS products at my company. But I will give some credit where it's due.

    --


    It's only funny until someone gets hurt. Then, it's hilarious.
  20. Have I got something for you... by gosand · · Score: 4, Funny
    After we finally got the thing stable.... they're going to pull the plug! Damn!

    You got it stable? Yeah, and I have a magic-box powered Delorean I'd like to sell you.

    --

    My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

  21. Ctrl-Alt-Del by jpmorgan · · Score: 4, Informative
    The login sequence (ctrl-alt-del) is there for a very particular purpose - it's an important security feature.

    Since no user-program can grab ctrl-alt-del keystrokes (yay x86), forcing the user to hit c-a-d before they login proves that the login dialog is actually the system login dialog, and not some trojan somebody wrote to collect usernames and passwords.

  22. They just don't get it, do they? by yAm · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Look, I have to ride herd on a pile of MS servers, just now more 2k than NT. We've built a damn good business using the these machines. We've stretched the things to their limits of the with some of the processes that we have implemented. We've discovered deep bugs and pushed MS to fix 'em. We have a functioning, stable business that relies on this OS.

    This is where MS *always* makes it greatest mistake. They desire to become respected in the Enterprise market, yet these idiots cannot put a leash on their marketing department.

    Hint to Microsoft: If you want to be taken seriously, stop changing your OS's willy-nilly. IBM supports OS's and hardware for years after they've gone past their prime. Why? Because their customers still use them. Businesses are built using your software as a tool to get work done. Now just because you decide that hammers are out of vogue, you cannot force everybody to switch over to pneumatic nail-guns. This "ok, ok, ok, we're serious now. We've come up with a great new way to do X" shit has got to stop. DDE, OLE, OCX, ActiveX, COM, DCOM, COM+. .NET and now not .NET.

    You know, it is possible to run a network with their tools (quiet down, I work for people who have made this decision and pay me to implement it), but for cryin' out loud, business processes change slowly if at all and once that you realize that marketing won't sway established systems to change at the drop of a hat, the sooner that you will find customers that will stick with you for the long haul.

    That is until you get greedy and start gouging on licenses...

    --

    Chris

    So Buddha walks into a pizza parlor and says: "Hey, make me one with everything."