Slashdot Mirror
End Of Support for Windows NT 4.0
IdleMindUI writes "This month is the last month that hotfixes for Windows NT 4.0 will be released. Security fixes will only be released to Microsoft customers with Custom Support Agreements. Custom Support Agreements are still available for customers that need them and can be obtained by contacting a Microsoft rep. More information is available on the NT 4.0 support lifecycle site."
At least we will not have to continue reading stories counting down to when Microsoft finally ends support for it.
Karma: bad (mostly unaffected by funny mods)
We just make sure the MSFT's R&D Division (commonly known as 'Apple') stays in the game ...
- People who believe other people have no right to live, got no right to live ...
Does this mean NT4 is considered 'abandonware' now?
If only we could expect a Linux company to support their distribution as long as Microsoft supported NT 4.
who cares, i use Warp...
right now is THE time to move in on all those businesses still running NT 4 and sell Linux/SAMBA boxes.
Use the line:
It'll be an even better domain controller, and if a user comes in with an exploited laptop you can be safe knowing that your PDC isn't hosed by it.
I've been using SAMBA as a windows PDC for several years now, I had one setup that was so sucessful that I started charging them for all the months I didn't come and fix it (it was so reliable I had to switch from a charge-to-fix to a service contract).
"Sometimes, I think Trent just needs a cup of hot chocolate and a blankie." -Tori Amos on Nine Inch Nails
That's NT 4 Server. NT 4 Workstation was EOL'd over a year ago.
Let's exclude IBM Mainframes here -- despite the hardware changes and market drift over the last few decades, it's still IEBGENR & CORGZ under the skin. And they haven't dusted the o/s since the 70's...
Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
Windows 2003 was released on Apr 24th, 2003.
A replacment to NT 4 was released, followed by a replacment to THAT, and NT 4 has still been getting support for a year+ after that. I'm a bit suprised that NT was still supported without needing those special contracts up untill now.
For reference, 2K will get "mainstream" support (cost-per-incidient, free hotfixes) untill Jun 30 of this year, and "extended" stupport (hourly cost, pay for hotfixes) untill Jun 30, 2010. Hotfixes are free for everyone untill '07. I can't find End-of-Life dates for Windows 2003.
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
We are still building new servers at work (a bank) to use NT4. By the time we are finished certifying Win2000 for internal use it will be 2007 at least. We still have a few dinosaurs running Solaris 2.1 (!!!) and no one wants to upgrade them because they run mission critical applications which don't allow for any downtime.
Fully featured, responsive, and with the new security built into SP2, practically invulnerable to virii or hacker intrusion. (God help you if you want to run with the firewall down, but that goes for anything, don't it?)
I'm still cleaning out tons of mal|spy|ad-ware laden SP2 machines every day. They still seem to get viruses too.
As for running with no firewall, proper behavior for ANY IP stack is to reject ALL connections unless there's a service up-and-running waiting for a connection. The problem is that on Windows, default users have the ability to open privileged ports. Firewalls add a layer of complexity and frustration to everyone, admins, users, and hackers alike. Properly implementing an OS that defaults to security settings that reflect the mean intelligence of your user base are what Windows needs, not more bubble-gum and shoelace to hold a bad thing together.
"Sometimes, I think Trent just needs a cup of hot chocolate and a blankie." -Tori Amos on Nine Inch Nails
It seems to me that anyone still running Windows NT 4.0 in 2005 is pretty successfully avoiding the particular "swirling vortex" you mention.
Actually, this is an opportunity for everyone who isn't Microsoft, not just Linux.
-- Microsoft is the most expensive commodity operating system and office suite vendor in the marketplace.
Just out of curiosity, what other major software vendors are still providing security (or other) hotfixes for platforms two or three generations back? Do Oracle, SAP etc. and other major commercial vendors do the same?
I know Linux does. The 2.0 development cycle has seen work from July 1996 to February 2004. Since the source is open and I'm sure there's some 2.0 folks still around, any security fixes, as rare as they come up in the kernel, could easily be backported.
Companies EOLing stuff after 9 - 10 years scares me. With the notion of pervasive computing and kernels showing up in a wide range of things, the concept of software lasting far longer than we thought is now nothing new. Consider Y2K-affected machines--engineers never thought their products would still be running 30 years later, but somehow, they were.
You'd think that as big a company as Microsoft is, they'd support old crufty stuff ad infinitum to give their own products that lasting aura of strength and integrity. Of course, there's no money to be made in releasing patches for 10 year old stuff, but the simple notion that all customers could have access to them could be a major competitive advantage.
Just think, do you really know when you're going to be replacing that server you've just setup?
"[T]he single essential element on which all discoveries will be dependent is human freedom." -- Barry Goldwater
I know the obligitory jokes and MS bashing will now commence - but IMHO this platform represented a major breakthrough for MS. It was the first truely "ready for prime time" platform from Redmond.
NT4 Workstation was state of the art at the time - NT Server 4.0 was pretty damn stable and was the first really big Novell killer.
Sure it wasn't perfect - Sure it wasn't secure - but give it its props - this was a decent platform
---- "Logoff! That cookie shit makes me nervous!" - A. Soprano
Sun produces patches in support for Solaris two years after the last ship date, and ends support five years after the last ship date. That has them creating patches for Solaris 7 until next August and phase 2 support for Solaris 2.5.1 ending next September.
Microsoft commonly waits months before they fix a found announced vulnerability. In the past Microsoft has attempted to ignore vulnerabilities, forcing security heads to make public announcements.
Dont be fooled by the statistics, NT4 hasn't been supported for a while. When was the last service pack for NT4?
The difference between support on linux and support on windows is mostly statistical. Look at debian, gentoo, even freebsd. You can upgrade to stable packages (maybe not gentoo) dynamically without running a time wasting installer.
I personally dont like these automated tools, but I'd probably use them before windows update on a critical security network.
"And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the World"
1 John 4:14
Betcha you can still find a lot of Netware 3.11 and Netware 4 installs out there too... Just because it's old doesn't mean you should stop using it.
Why invest 20k for NT or Linux if you don't have to?
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
So you're saying that the firewall should be implemented in the IP stack.
No, he's saying that a proper IP stack will not respond to a request for service from a TCP/UDP port that has no service listening to it on that machine. I'm not 100% sure of the veracity of the statement, but I'm pretty sure XP does this as prescribed.
Whether the firewall is a separate service or whether it is built into the networking stack or whether it is a separate machine sitting at the root of the network, a firewall is needed.
Yes, for any external communications, a firewall (and encrypted links if you want to be picky) is a neccesity, and has been for quite some time. SP2 finally provided a firewall on by default, and gives the average user a fighting chance.
If you are cleaning out "mal|spy|ad-ware SP2 machines every day", you work with idiots. Or perhaps you are the idiot to continue working with them. Either way, I'm glad I don't work where you work.
I'm a BOFH. I work with lusers. Lusers are SpongeBob Squarepants without the personality. They are un-intelligent generally, but more so when it comes to computers. They don't know about computer security, nor do they care, since it's not thier job to administrate thier machine. The luser should be able to log on, go about it's business and not concern itself with what is in my prevue - making sure our comapnies data is safe.
Now, the problem XP, Win2K and NT present is that I, as an intelligent, responsible admin, do all that I can to prevent security issues and they still occur regularily, despite my best efforts. In order to be truly protected, I'd need to remove some of the machines functionality, which kinda removes the point of having the bloody PC there in the first place.
When I need to teach a luser how spyware gets on to thier XP SP2 machine - firewall and all - in order to try and prevent that event from happening is when I begin to question how much value XP really provides.
Soko
"Depression is merely anger without enthusiasm." - Anonymous
It's not that they necessarily have to perenially support old software. The problem is, they are essentially trying to force the user into buying new software. It is as if you have an old car, and, say, Ford says, "We will no longer carry parts for this car or fix it, even when there is an undiscovered flaw, and there is no where else you can go to get it fixed. If they intend to stop supporting something, there should be some way to go to a third party for patches and whatnot. A poster on a different thread suggested that once they end support, MS or whoever should have to open that code up so that a third party or the user him/herself can produce patches. That's my nickel for the day
My other computer is a Jacquard loom.
Well, if you are still running NT4 it is because you have software on that system that you have not needed (or wanted (or been able to)) upgrade.
My guess is that if you can get it to run on a Mac you should have switched years ago.
I use it exclusively on the back-end I built back in '99. Paying out 1.1 mil for what is in truth just new icon rendering lib and a folder view .dll is downright stupid, especially when there will be *no* change in actual performance or function. Yep, walk the dependancies on why stuff won't run on NTS4 and "requires" 2K+ - 99 times out of 100, it's shell UI crap. 1.1 mil for... exactly what I have, but now with new color schemes and stupid, obfuscating, irrelevent wizards... on rackmounted iron who's KVMs aren't touched but twice a year to see if they work. Thank God 2k3 comes preloaded with AOL, MSN, WMP and Solitare. All of that trash is extremely appropriate in a real production, really.
So yeah, I still use NT4. I don't upgrade my toaster because a new one comes out, I don't upgrade my car stereo when a new one comes out, I don't upgrade my lawnmower when a new one comes out, I don't upgrade my lightbulbs when a new one comes out, and I don't upgrade a server just because a "new" one comes out.
Call me crazy, but I only trash these things when doing so will accomplish a measureable objective. I'm also one of the few retards who dares to run NTS4 without a firewall - I've got one that's a quad-homed box, hosting two T1s and a DS3. No firewalls, just straight from the NICs into Adtrans etc. I put it on the line back in mid '99, and to date it has yet to be compromised or faulted, despite hosting both IIS4 and Exch55, and running some rather unique and complex software in each. Why the f*** would I want to swap that out... well, a Linux solution aside, why *else* would I want to swap that out... no "current" MS product is going to do any better than what I've got now, and in fact will probably do worse. Much worse.
I don't repaint my car every year, I don't replace the doors on my house every year, I don't buy a new bed every f*ing year, and I don't toss a solution that will continue working perfectly unless there's a damned good reason. "New screensavers" and "wizards" doesn't cut it.
help me i've cloned myself and can't remember which one I am