We're currently eyeing a Windows 2000 active directory migration at our company, but the main justification for this is the more granular user and resource management.
From a file/print/application and even a desktop standpoint, there's not a compelling reason to upgrade to W2k. The kicker is the benefits of the AD on administration. The ability to tie down administrators to rights for individual groups of users is a pretty useful feature. Even more important, perhaps, is the ability to allow help desk and other support personnel the right to unlock passwords without having all the security overhead that goes along with the account operator rights (or installing third-party software on the domain).
So W2k stands as an infrastructrure upgrade that's far more appealing to large distributed companies than smaller ones. I'm sure MS had this pretty forefront in mind during the design phase.
Slashdot Mirror
From a file/print/application and even a desktop standpoint, there's not a compelling reason to upgrade to W2k. The kicker is the benefits of the AD on administration. The ability to tie down administrators to rights for individual groups of users is a pretty useful feature. Even more important, perhaps, is the ability to allow help desk and other support personnel the right to unlock passwords without having all the security overhead that goes along with the account operator rights (or installing third-party software on the domain).
So W2k stands as an infrastructrure upgrade that's far more appealing to large distributed companies than smaller ones. I'm sure MS had this pretty forefront in mind during the design phase.