Windows 2000 is just two months away from ending free support. While there are alternatives, costly migration can cause many headaches and expenses. Do you still use Windows 2000? How are users going to be affected? You can read the story here.
Windows 2000 is just two months away from ending free support. While there are alternatives, costly migration can cause many headaches and expenses. Do you still use Windows 2000? How are users going to be affected? You can read the story here.
One big reason I will not change for a while is that I use TS+Citrix. Using a Win2K server, 2K/XP client get a free ride on the TS side of the house. Not so with 2003 Server, I would have to pay for both licenses. That is a lot of money. I am looking into removing the Citrix altogether and just using the TS. But no plans this year, that I know of.
For Microsoft it is.
I have converted my personal computer over to Mepis Linux and no longer need Windows 2000.
When support runs out for 2000 my wife’s computer will be converted too.
I’m tired of being squeezed or bullied and have no desire to participate in “product activation”.
Our non-profit uses mostly Windows 95. There are also 98, ME, NT, XP, and Linux. My workstation is Windows 2000.
We plan to get a Linux terminal server soon, but old, leftover Windows systems will not be upgraded for a long time.
Most of our hardware would crumble under Windows XP, the only Microsoft option at this point.
Also I just don’t like Windows XP. Microsoft’s best system was 2000 Professional.
(I know Microsoft is offering pay support for some older operating systems, but we aren’t paying.)
I know that Linux Companies don’t offer a whole deal more than MS when it comes to a support cycle (talking about RHEL, SLES and Mandriva Corporate Edition here) but I think this is ridiculous for Microsoft. Why are they not extending support until Longhorn is released? If they did this, customers would upgrade to Longhorn and wouldn’t have to worry about upgrading twice. Is this Microsoft’s new plan, force customers to upgrade to every single release of Windows, causing them to not have to produce as many new OS’s while still extracting the same amount of revenue for customers?
I’m willing to bet Microsoft will end support for XP a year before BlackComb is released, forcing customers to upgrade to LongHorn. In my opinion, you should only have to upgrade every second release.
I’m not an MS fanboy or anything, but you’re moving from Win2k due to a lack of support, to a free, unsupported Linux distro? I understand your point, but your argument seems silly.
Of course they are going to say that once you switch to GNU/Linux, problem solved. Though there seems to be reluctance for large scale migrations. However, if the cost of upgrading OS (and possibly hardware) is too prohibitive, GNU/Linux may score a few victories. But, for the most part, I think MS will successfully coerce their “customers” into upgrading.
All of our desktops and a few of our servers are running Win2000. The other servers are running either NT or Solaris. But we have no plans to upgrade unless the parent company tells us to. We rarely have problems, and if we do its usually a hardware issue or we just reimage the PC which seems to fix it. Now I wouldn’t mind upgrading to XP for 2 features, but I just don’t see that happening at our company.
I’m still running Windows 2000 on a home machine mainly because of its hardware. If I tried to put XP on this 733 mhz machine, I’d lose alot of performance. Granted, I still dual boot to Ubuntu, but I must keep Windows on this machine to run a few academic programs that don’t support other OS’s and don’t run under WINE.
Windows 2000 runs very fast, and is extremely stable on this box. Even if it had better hardware, I’d be hard pressed to spend 100 bucks to upgrade to Windows XP.
Windows 2000 is still a very good OS. In my experience it’s more stable than XP, takes up less resources (and thus runs faster), and most XP software and drivers work fine. You give up some plug-and-play and fancy GUI stuff but it’s worth it. I think it sucks that MS is giving up support. They should at least continue plugging critical security holes.
”
I’m not an MS fanboy or anything, but you’re moving from Win2k due to a lack of support, to a free, unsupported Linux distro? I understand your point, but your argument seems silly.
”
You do realize he is talking about security updates….not actual phone support, right? MEPIS does receive security updates.
I agree MS will coerce mostly thourgh FUD and Customers thinking either there’s nothing else or the alt. is to hard to learn.
>I’m not an MS fanboy or anything, but you’re moving from
>Win2k due to a lack of support, to a free, unsupported Linux
>distro? I understand your point, but your argument seems silly.
He’s looking at it like this: Security updates are important with either Windows or Linux, but Microsoft is forcing him to pay to get them. MEPIS upgrades are free, and unlike Microsoft, MEPIS requires no product activation.
I sympathize with him on both points, and I like upgrading Linux but don’t like upgrading Windows.
I’m using Win2K since the release came out, and plan to use it until the 64-bit stuff (OS, drivers, software) is ready for use. I prefer W2K over XP because of stability, speed and simplicity.
My single solitary Windows box will be using an unsupported OS!
Wait…
All the rest of my boxes are using unsupported OS’s (BeOS, etc) or those on life support (IRIX). This isn’t really a major issue, at all.
From TFA:
Under the Microsoft’s terms of support, they will only provide security-related patches during the product’s extended support cycle.
I switched to the Mac in November, 2003, so I my Windows 2000 Professional is the last Microsoft OS, and Office 2000 is the last office suite I will use on my home PC. Still, I hate to see Win2K getting pushed aside when it is such a good OS. It had the flexibility of Win98SE, better stability than NT4.0, and NO product activation.
Seriously, how many of us ever called Microsoft for support with their operating system? The VAST majority of Windows 2000 wouldn’t even know the difference.
Don’t get me wrong, I’ve called Microsoft for support regarding some of their other products (like Office) but I don’t ever recall calling them about their OS.
Windows 2000 was the first OS from Microsoft that I actually thought was decent. Too bad some folks are going to switch to XP or Linux or MacOSX or … just because of this (mostly) irrelevant issue.
…the options for people are win 2003 and linux (XP with his kernel-hardcoded TCP/IP stack limits isn’t exactly a good option…), and lack of security updates is too important for people these days. They could lose too many customers, I bet they’ll extend the free support to void linux migrations
this means only 2 more yrs b4 where i work moves away from win2k. so far the plan is too skip winxp and move everything all at once to whatever ms brings out next. (what i cant get bashed into there heads is that by no means will whatevers next run on most of our aging systems)
The limits you refer to are highly irrelevant. It’s merely a limit on how many simultaneous incomplete outbound TCP connection attempts you can perform (10). This basically has no effect at all on 99% of software. Kiddies who port scan, and warezmonkies on P2P will have problems. Then again, it’s extremely easy to bypass the limit (there are patching utilities).
” Windows 2000 is still a very good OS. In my experience it’s more stable than XP, takes up less resources (and thus runs faster), and most XP software and drivers work fine. You give up some plug-and-play and fancy GUI stuff but it’s worth it. I think it sucks that MS is giving up support. They should at least continue plugging critical security holes.”
This whole Windows 2000 scenario is basically like the “Boy who cried wolf”. You will still get critical updates for Windows 2000 security issues. But new software such as WMP, IE, Office, or any non-security hotfixes will not be forthcoming. Most admins that I know and that I talk to are not concerned at all about this issue. The concensus is they dont really care for new features or functionality this late in the game they just want to keep their systems up until its time to upgrade the hardware. Which by 2010 any software thats Windows 2000 Certified will be totally obsolete. To me this is a non-issue because in my opinion Windows 2000 was cut from mainstream support years ago. This is basically the Linux types and Mac types who are making a bigger deal of this than there really needs to be.
Amen. Using Windows 2000 in 2010 is like using Windows 95 on your Athlon 64 system now. This is a complete non-issue.
I’m not an MS fanboy or anything, but you’re moving from Win2k due to a lack of support, to a free, unsupported Linux distro? I understand your point, but your argument seems silly.
I doubt anyone here is looking for phone up technical support – most just want the security and bugfix updates; like the previous poster said; they should extend Windows 2000 support out to the release of lonhorn (maybe overlap the two by 6-12 months).
The fact remains, when Windows XP was released, it was only a matter of 18 months after the last release (not even that!) – deployment, retraining and execution costs taken into account, as well as time, it wouldn’t have made a whole lot of sense to move anyway.
As for ‘unsupported distribution’ – how do you define support in the first place? I consider Debian to be a high quality, supported distribution; sure, there isn’t the flashy advertisement, cool marketing slogans and gimicky pomises, but you can get what is required – security updates and bug fixes at that rock bottom price of zero; with all the testing and regression testing one see’s in an over pumped software company.
Amen. Using Windows 2000 in 2010 is like using Windows 95 on your Athlon 64 system now. This is a complete non-issue.
People USES win2000 and is installing it on servers, just like there’re people installing windows 98 SE in 3.4 P IV just because they have this little MSDOS app.
Windows 2003 is tarting to be used, but most of apps are being tested and used against win 2000 not 2003. What will make people use win 2000 will be dual core CPUs – and even then
I’m tired of being squeezed or bullied and have no desire to participate in “product activation”.
If you are running a legal copy of windows what do you have to fear?
If I tried to put XP on this 733 mhz machine, I’d lose alot of performance.
It amazes me on how many people still run such old geezer hardware. Then use that as an excuse to run old outdated operating systems. Hell a 2.0Ghz machine is starting to get moldy. Don’t whine to me about hardware costs when you can buy a brand new P4 HT 2.8Ghz Dell 400SC server for around US $400 Decent AMD hardware is even cheaper. Most of the second hand hardware i have laying around my house not in use is faster then 744Mhz (P3 1.0Ghz, P4 2.0Ghz, P4 2.8Ghz) I stay bleeding edge and still manage to upgrade my system every 1-2 years for less that US $400
It’s a lost cause trying to get through to some of you. Yes, Windows 2000 is in use — but in 2010, it will be TEN YEARS OLD. Windows 95 is ten years old NOW. THAT is why it’s a valid comparison.
As for XP causing a loss of performance … not true. XP is both faster and more stable than Windows 2000. Turn off the themes and some useless services, and it makes the box feel newer and faster.
It amazes me on how many people still run such old geezer hardware.
My main computer is 500mHz. It does word processing / mp3s / web surfing perfectly fine. You’re suggesting that because some consider it slow, I should spend the money to upgrade? How about this for an option: I continue to use the hardware I have, as it’s perfectly suitable for my needs, and I use software that works with it?
We’re talking about consumer choice here. If MS doesn’t offer me a product that works for my system, I will look elsewhere. Currently, WinXP seems to do the job fine (yes, I run WinXP on a 500mHz with decent performance).
Windows XP is faster than 2000. You turn off the services and the themes and it is really good. It also boots faster and can look really good if you find some themes. There is also nLite where you can take out a lot of the features and make it run faster:
http://nuhi.msfn.org/
Also go to http://www.blackviper.com/
And defrag your hardrive once in a while. It helps. Remove spyware, have a firewall, remove viruses.
http://www.lavasoftusa.com/software/adaware/
http://www.zonelabs.com/store/content/home.jsp
http://free.grisoft.com/doc/1
Windows 2000 is great and is very fast, but as seen above, working with Windows is a pain in the butt.
To rid yourself of all these problems, install Ubuntu Linux. Great distro. Professional, completely free and no viruses, spyware and more secure because of the linux kernel. All my hardware was detected, am using wine for some of my programs and you can also use vmware or win4lin 6 to boot windows inside linux. Also it is so easy to configure and also easy to install software using apt-get
http://www.ubuntulinux.org/
http://ubuntuguide.org/
Is trusted,
well known,
less prone to weird crashing issues*,
less bloated,
runs very well on less than 1ghz and 512mb,
enough industry support,
is the favorite of the kids,
Win2k is not going away anytime soon, there’s nothing that can be done on an XP box that can not be done on Win2k.
Win2k is not a piece of crap like win9x was at all.
My next upgrade (2 years) is going to be to a Debian distro.
(* Note: I’m not saying XP crashes a lot I mean that Win2k crashes less than XP)
>If you are running a legal copy of windows what do you have >to fear?
If you are a law abiding citizen, what do you have to fear if the government passes a law that allows it to search your house without a warrant? If you have nothing to hide, what do you have to fear if cameras are installed throughout the city you live in (as in London now). This type of mentality is for sheep. It is not a matter of being afraid, it is a matter of drawing a line as to your right to privacy. Have you read the EULA for XP? Most people just blindly click the OK button, but if you actually read it, you come with statements like this:
“You acknowledge and agree that Microsoft may automatically check the version of the Product and/or its components that you are utilizing and may provide upgrades or fixes to the Product that will be automatically downloaded to your Workstation Computer.”
This ‘harmless’ sounding statement in fact means that MS has the right to go into your hard drive and download software into your computer automatically, without your permission.
Further, the ‘product activation’ system is a perversion:
1) Suppose that you want to have a copy of Windows XP on two machines for a legitimate reason (you own a desktop and laptop and don’t use them at the same time.) MS will assume you are a criminal and refuse permission.
2) Suppose you deinstall your copy and sell it to a third party. MS will assume the buyer is a criminal and refuse him permission.
Win2k is the last MS OS I will run. I will not be upgrading.
I don’t want to use XP! It just plain sucks! I would use Server 2003, but it costs just a biiit too much. Mabe there will be unnoficial service packs like there are for win9x already.
I still use Windows 2000, and I have no plans to upgrade or move to any other version of windows. I had originally planned to move to Xp64, but… while the first public beta of Xp64 was great and free of bloat code… the last release canidate brought all the bloat back plus windows product activation.
Sorry, no dice. For me? I’ll be slowely changing more computers over to Mepis Linux, which meets all of my needs quite nicely. And, I’ll plan on holding more game developers to the fire for Linux versions of their games.
You do realize he is talking about security updates….not actual phone support, right? MEPIS does receive security updates.
Extended support on windows 2000 provides security fixes.
Its hot fixes for non security related items that requires a support contract.
People can’t even get the basics right when they start crying about MS support on OSes. *shrugs*
> Win2k is the last MS OS I will run. I will not be upgrading.
Same here. Whoever likes product activation is welcomed to use Windows XP/2003. But I don’t.
Before Ubuntu I thought I’m going to use Windows 2000 until 2010 when the extended support runs out and then switch to Linux oder MacOS. But fortunately the Linux desktop systems became better and useable much quicker than I expected and now I doubt the both remaining Windows 2000 installations here will even survive the next two years.
Before you get strapped into a strait jacket and medicated:
1) If you had read what I quoted from the EULA, you would realize that MS has given itself the right to inspect your computer and put stuff on it EVEN if you turn automatic updates off.
2) Software is supposed to work like a book: My wife and I can read the from same copy if we each read while the other isn’t. Only if we want to read the book at the same time do we need two copies. If Amazon doesn’t like it, well that’s too bad. MS is ripping its customers off by taking away their right to legally use the same copy of their software on two machines. While you obviously do not have enough brain cells to realize you are getting screwed, we of the Homo Sapiens species tend to be resent this, and do not want to play ball.
Yes, I have looked at the bug reports for the Linux kernel. What I see is a system that responds quickly to flaws. I also see someone who doesn’t know how to differentiate between minor and more serious flaws, but that pretty typical for around here.
Activation is an invasion of privacy if it requires, or is linked to personal information about the user. Microsoft is on the milder end of the spectrum as far as that is concerned.
What disturbs me more is that information regarding installed software, hardware devices, UIDs and the like are sent to Microsoft if you use Windows Update. I also read that Windows XP “phones home” in ways that 2000 never did.
Linux distributions do not collect that level of information on their customers. Updates for my distro are done via anonymous FTP.
Regarding licenses, I purchased Libranet 3.0 the other day. I am allowed to install it on other machines that I own. I will not give it away, because I appreciate the flexibility I am given. I give away other distributions, like Kanotix, because I am allowed to. Both are far more flexible in their licensing than Windows. Hence, I use them.
Regarding licensing agreements with Red Hat, I don’t think you understand them. You may use virtually all of the software as is. You may not receive support. Because of this, you have outfits like CentOS that take Red Hat Enterprise Linux and repackage it. It is legal to do this. You purchase Red Hat if you need, or want the support. That is how Red Hat makes its money.
Now, am I a whiner? Perhaps I am one by thinking that Microsoft is an overly nosy, lying, cheating, bully of a company. Add to that the approaching train wreck of separating you from your data via proprietary formats and DRM, and you have this whiner agreeing with others who say that Windows 2000 is the last Windows operating system I have used.
My 2000+ AMD work machine runs w2k. Nice OS, i have no problem with it, installed 1.5 years ago and still works fine
Anyway, i want to explain 1 myth:
XP BOOTS FASTER!!!
Yes. Because most of the services starts even after logged in, winding the HDD for lots of seconds when you are at the desktop. Compared to w2k, where (nearly all the)services start before the login screen appears. So, which one is better? Waiting for all the necesseary services to start (aprrox. 10-20 secs), and logging only after that to get a responsive system. Or logging in as fast as possible, and waiting for long seconds because the hard disk is 100% busy loading all the necesseary stuffs while we want to start working.
” I still use Windows 2000, and I have no plans to upgrade or move to any other version of windows. I had originally planned to move to Xp64, but… while the first public beta of Xp64 was great and free of bloat code… the last release canidate brought all the bloat back plus windows product activation. ”
I disagree, I think XP 64 is a great system and I have already done my free upgrade for one of my systems to XP64. I dont like Product Activation, but I understand it. Microsoft needs to make sure its copies of Windows are legal, Product activation is pretty much effortless, I have completed product activation on numerous PC’s with the client and server editions of Windows XP and Windows 2003 Server. I wasnt on hold for any long periods of time and it was a no brainer. They dont ask personal questions such as whats the name of your first born, favorite color, favorite food, what movies you like etc. They ask simple straightforward questions. Surprisingly enough most of the people I encounter that whine and complain about product activation dont even run Windows. They use other products such as Mac, Linux or another system.
” Sorry, no dice. For me? I’ll be slowely changing more computers over to Mepis Linux, which meets all of my needs quite nicely. And, I’ll plan on holding more game developers to the fire for Linux versions of their games.”
Good for you Mepis is a good distribution, as for “Holding more game developers to the fire”, good luck with that. Developers develop software for systems that make sense. Right now Windows is king, mac is second. Its idiotic to expect game developers, or any developer for that matter, to develop code for a system that rarely anyone uses for that system. Most of my Linux friends who are heavy gamers often keep at least one Windows box for gaming when I asked them about the few games that have Linux versions, I always get the same response, performance sucks. It also doesnt help that a lot of the companies that make controllers or other gaming accessories dont make Linux drivers and you have to rely on buggy third party hacks that may or may not screw up the hardware device. Personally, with specialized and often times expensive hardware like that, I prefer not to take the chance.
Thor: That’s how software is “supposed to work” in YOUR opinion. Now go try to convince all of the major software companies that they should let you install multiple copies of the software on different machines with only ONE valid license. That is the nature of licensed commercial software. Don’t like it? Don’t use it.
Peter: Activation does not send any kind of personal information. XP doesn’t partake in any “phoning home” either. That’s probably been one of the most grossly exagerrated rumors ever. Install a packet capture program and wait for those packets that will never come.
Also, what kind of “invasion of privacy” is being performed if Windows sends information about installed devices? None at all. <sarcasm>I’m sure MS can trace you by noticing the fact that you have a GeForce 6600 GT and 512 MB of RAM! Oh noes!</sarcasm> As for installed software and UIDs … I wonder where you got that from. Microsoft has no interest in knowing what installed software you have. Again, go check out a packet capture utility.
As for Linux kernel vulnerabilities … who cares if they’re patched quickly? The fact is that they are THERE. These Linux fanatics who proclaim that “Linux is always 100% secure” are just fooling themselves. NOTHING is completely secure. Linux doesn’t particularily have a good track record in this respect. The truth is that there have been more exploits in the Linux kernel ALONE this year than there have been exploits for the entire Windows operating system.
Improving your diction would greatly improve your credability, and that would help your case.
Looks like someone didn’t bother reading the article OR the thread. Good for you.
There is nothing wrong with my word choice. While we’re at it, though, what is “credability”? Perhaps you mean “credibility”?
It says: In a couple months you’ll have to pay for support for Win2k. These fixes will only be security fixes; and since Microsoft tends to call things like IE7 and major bugfixes for IE features; this is a big sucktobeyou..
You’re right though, I only skimmed the rather short and straightforward article.
You said “as” when you mean “has” earlier. Reread; I was more refferring to the verbal definition of diction to describe your spelling error while you called someone else an idiot. Normally, I ignore little errors, however: If you call someone an idiot, be careful not to make obvious errors when you do it. I say this for obvious reasons.
Yes I did, thank you spell checker. Maybe I was spelling it out phonetically for you
. Nah, I wasn’t. But the point is, I wasn’t calling you an idiot. Because no one who bothers to care and think about things should be called an idiot and I think you must since you post a lot here.
This is why I don’t use “free” commercial products, they can quickly become not so “free” and my work stuck in the middle.
http://secunia.com/product/2719/ <- Linux 2.6
http://secunia.com/product/1/ <- Win2k
http://secunia.com/product/763/ <- Linux 2.4
Now, this is a kernel to a kernel + shell so it’s not really fair. But, I think it does show that Linux security is not an “oxymoron.” It has several priv-escalation holes still open.
But check this out:
http://secunia.com/product/100/ <- OpenBSD 3.x
http://secunia.com/product/1132/ <- FreeBSD 5.x
Pretty comparable, except the stellar bsd record.
What the article basically says is that Microsoft will continue to release security fixes for free until 2010. Feature/compatibility fixes will have to be paid for.
In other words, quite acceptable, considering the age of the OS already. You’d be lucky to even get 3 years of this kind of support from someone like Redhat.
BTW, with those Secunia links — you’re comparing a *kernel* to an entire *operating system*. Of course the OS is going to have more exploits as a whole rather than just the kernel. Now add in all of the “OS” components, and that Linux list will grow to a couple hundred, if not thousand.
Another way of looking at it: The Linux 2.4/2.6 kernels have half as many exploits as the entire Windows operating system. Is that really something to be proud of?
FTFA:
Full, free support for Windows 2000 officially ends on June 30th, 2005. After that deadline, the both client and server versions of Windows 2000 will go into the “extended” support cycle, where they will charge for it.
…
Under the Microsoft’s terms of support, they will only provide security-related patches during the product’s extended support cycle. Non-security fixes are only available with a hot-fix agreement plan. Anyone without this service will not have access to these updates.
I don’t see 2010 anywhere. I also don’t see prices mentioned other than an agreement and prices will exist. It’s business as usual, but I think Microsoft is doing it to push people to update. They are probably sick of supporting Win2k and XP and Win2K3. Understandable, but I don’t think they gave many people good reason to part with $100 for XP over 2000. They should wait six months after releasing Longhorn, and then cut it. That’d likely satisfy many of these users who don’t like XP.
RedHat guarantees 5 years of support for all their products. After that you have to upgrade, but since you pay yearly this is a technical issue not a money issue. Also, you can always keep your mozilla browser up to date after the end of the cycle, but you can’t fix IE in 2K without a bit of help from Microsoft.
I already stated what I was comparing kid. Please RTFP.
Here’s your full OS:
http://secunia.com/product/2536/
Kinda puts Windows to shame now doesn’t it. Little do non-linux users realize: Vanilla kernels are rarely used by distributions. Vanilla means you haven’t applied any patches. And RedHat WS 3 is not only an OS; it’s a full working environment with over 1500 packages (translates to like 100-300 useful programs, I’m counting cp/rm and the like as one there).
“Why are they not extending support until Longhorn is released? If they did this, customers would upgrade to Longhorn and wouldn’t have to worry about upgrading twice. Is this Microsoft’s new plan, force customers to upgrade to every single release of Windows, causing them to not have to produce as many new OS’s while still extracting the same amount of revenue for customers? ”
Yes, this is their plan. You have to buy every release, period. They technically ended support for w2k in approx 2002-3. There are quite a few articles saying that it has been reduced to patch mode (only).
Go look at Microsoft’s site for the meaning of “Extended support cycle”. They have very specific definitions of what the various support stages are.
Considering that something like Gentoo has ~590 advisories, no, I can’t say that Linux puts Windows to shame.
By the way, is Redhat still releasing security updates for RH6/7?
You mean RedHat’s never officially supported products that were just free? No, they also still don’t officially support Fedora.
http://secunia.com/product/339/ <- Gentoo’s secunia record.
Looks like 0/592 outstanding. Pretty good for an OS that’s bleeding edge and has the largest software repositories you will see from anyone… I’m shocked there are only 592, I bet there are a lot more unrecorded for Gentoo: Which is usually considered to be a hobbyists distro. So in reponse: There are like totally no outstanding security exploits with Gentoo according to like secunia.
Microsoft says: http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/programs/sa/support/extended.msp…
From the page:
“This means customers do not pay for extended support unless hotfixes are required.”
Now they also said:
“As always, security fixes are automatically extended to customers.”
Oh and don’t forget:
“Current Software Assurance customers should note that the 90-day time frame to sign up”
Hmmm, looks like it’s free security fixes; but things like IE7 likely won’t be a free-for-all. I think that’s what I said before though.
Yes, IE7 isn’t a security fix. IE7 is a new feature. Is it starting to make sense now? 🙂
You’re right. But if they cut support for IE6 and only support IE7 security issues then those who can’t upgrade to IE7 will be SOL.
Yeah, but since IE6 is integrated into 2K after a certain service pack, it’s a part of the OS in MS’s eyes. If there is an IE6 vulnerability, I don’t see why they wouldn’t release a patch for it for 2K.
I’ve used windows 2000 Professional for quite a while, before I switched to linux. I like linux much better. I have tried windows XP, and XP Professional. I don’t like either of them, they are unstable and memory hogs, especially with SP2 installed. I’ll stick with Linux, but if I had to go back to Windows for some reason, I’d have to stick with Windows 2000 Professional. Microsoft really should have worked with that product more, as it is quite stable, the most stable and speedy windows product I ever used.
/2 cents
My work computer running XP SP2 has been running for 37 days, and always under heavy use. My home computer has been on for 8 days, and that thing is *always* under some kind of load.
Unstable. Feh.
I bet there’s a Solaris machine out there that has run 50 times longer than that
. Yes, I just said 5 years.
I never said Microsoft gathered personal information during product activation. What they take is a snapshot of your machine. That snapshot is renewed when you access Windows Update.
As for XP “phoning home,” you engage in argument by assertion. I do not have a copy of XP to monitor. Yet I read in multiple places that XP “phones home” when you click on “start, search.” Why is it so difficult to keep the Media Player from phoning home? Why does XP phone home when you activate the help system? I am sure, Tom, that a single assertion by you to the contrary will quiet my unease.
It’s not that I necessarily ascribe evil intent to Microsoft (actually, I sometimes do), but frankly, I consider such “non-personal” data mining techniques an invasion of privacy.
Your exchange with thors_hammer123 reminds me of something from the fairly distant past. Software came on floppies, and was largely copy protected. Naturally, companies had to deal with a lot of complaints over disks that couldn’t be read on many machines. Eventually, most companies dropped copy protection because it was considered bad for business.
Activation changed some of that. With activation, you have the possibility to force upgrades. Companies like Intuit and Broderbund are going this route. All they have to do is limit product activation to a certain period of time from purchase. Microsoft says it won’t do that. Microsoft has an impressive culture of lying. What happens when you need XP activation after Longhorn comes out.
Regarding other issues, no-one in this thread has claimed that Linux is free of bugs, or security holes. What WAS said in multiple ways is that you can’t read a bug list. Likewise, just one person has claimed that XP is unstable. Others have said that 2000 is more stable than XP, but add they are not saying XP is unstable. I have even had decent luck with Windows 98. Stability is not my complaint, and never has been. I stopped with 2000 because of concerns with XP’s activation and privacy.
RedHat guarantees 5 years of support for all their products. After that you have to upgrade, but since you pay yearly this is a technical issue not a money issue. Also, you can always keep your mozilla browser up to date after the end of the cycle, but you can’t fix IE in 2K without a bit of help from Microsoft.
It is a little odd to worry about MS switching 2000 to ‘security updates only’ after 5 years in light of this, don’t you think?
Furthermore, it is perhaps even more odd to consider that I will continue to receive said security updates on 2000 without ever paying any yearly support fee at all…
Yes, that’s correct. However, currently RHEL has a better security record than 2000
. But trust me, they will find a way to convince you to upgrade, if they weren’t good at that they’d be out of business by now… Everyone has to make money somehow 
.
Also, in this case the main problem lies in that their only newer release is one that many people dislike. Which itself is over three years old, and isn’t due for replacement for another 18 months.
I’m not a RH salesman by any means, so criticize their pricing/policies as you wish; I don’t care
.
Yes, I do have an RHEL4 machine at the moment.
It amazes me on how many people still run such old geezer hardware. Then use that as an excuse to run old outdated operating systems. Hell a 2.0Ghz machine is starting to get moldy. Don’t whine to me about hardware costs when you can buy a brand new P4 HT 2.8Ghz Dell 400SC server for around US $400 Decent AMD hardware is even cheaper. Most of the second hand hardware i have laying around my house not in use is faster then 744Mhz (P3 1.0Ghz, P4 2.0Ghz, P4 2.8Ghz) I stay bleeding edge and still manage to upgrade my system every 1-2 years for less that US $400
I hope you realise that not everyone has their whole life revolving around computers. Maybe that particular person had higher priorities than getting a new computer? maybe he has a keen interest in cars? saving up for a deposit on an investment property?
I don’t know, but to simply imply that everyone should upgrade because you have is ignorant at best.
Pretty sad. Win2K is the best OS Microsoft has put out. (Yes, a backhanded complement.)
My prediction is that MS extends support until Longhorn. No point is risking switchers to Linux.
And as has ben said before, most people really dont need a faster pc ..
If you only browse the web and read some emails .. what’s the gain ?
Correct. You gain jack-diddly-squat by upgrading. The difference between Windows XP are *SO* small, the only people who’d know the difference are those who subscribe to MSDN’s developer magazine – most of the features are cosmetic (which cause users more grief that actually solving problems) and some minor kernel alterations (removing limitations imposed on driver developers etc).
Don’t like the next version of WIndows and all you want to do is surf and write letters to aunt Purl, then purchase a mini-Mac, and recycle the keyboard, mouse and screen. If you want to keep the existing computer – you may want to join a local Linux user group, where by someone can install it for you – thus all the hardwork will be relieved from you.
W2k is my personal favorite windows OS. Due to M$ trying to force users to upgrade to XP, my setup is like this (and has been since they cancelled SP5): Linux for the overwhelming majority of use, W2k for the small amount of things I can only do in windows. And as linux matures, I’ll use w2k less and less. So much for XP.
I hope you realise that not everyone has their whole life revolving around computers.
<sarcasm>Really there are people like that!</sarcasm>
Master of the obvious!
Maybe that particular person had higher priorities than getting a new computer? maybe he has a keen interest in cars? saving up for a deposit on an investment property?
Fine have higher priorities; never suggested someone would be denied that, but then again don’t come here whining that your machine is slow running XP becasue you 233Mhz Pentium MMX with 64MB’s of memory can’t handle it because somehow its Microsofts fault becasue they don’t support a 5-10 year old operating system. Reminds me of the old DOS people or OS/2 GET OVER IT! Technology progresses for the betterment of all!
I don’t know, but to simply imply that everyone should upgrade because you have is ignorant at best.
Never said or implied that! you reading comprehension really sucks.
The people i am addressing here are the same ones that still have a Betamax VCR becasue it is better than VHS and somehow its going to make a comeback. I bet you still have a 8-track deck somewhere i bet.
If you are a law abiding citizen, what do you have to fear if the government passes a law that allows it to search your house without a warrant? If you have nothing to hide, what do you have to fear if cameras are installed throughout the city you live in (as in London now). This type of mentality is for sheep. It is not a matter of being afraid, it is a matter of drawing a line as to your right to privacy. Have you read the EULA for XP? Most people just blindly click the OK button, but if you actually read it, you come with statements like this:
“You acknowledge and agree that Microsoft may automatically check the version of the Product and/or its components that you are utilizing and may provide upgrades or fixes to the Product that will be automatically downloaded to your Workstation Computer.”
This ‘harmless’ sounding statement in fact means that MS has the right to go into your hard drive and download software into your computer automatically, without your permission.
Further, the ‘product activation’ system is a perversion:
1) Suppose that you want to have a copy of Windows XP on two machines for a legitimate reason (you own a desktop and laptop and don’t use them at the same time.) MS will assume you are a criminal and refuse permission.
2) Suppose you deinstall your copy and sell it to a third party. MS will assume the buyer is a criminal and refuse him permission.
Win2k is the last MS OS I will run. I will not be upgrading.
They are coming to get you dude! Lock your doors!
Simple logic if people wouldn’t pirate Microsoft Products two things would happen. A.) Microsoft products would be inexpensive. B.) There would be no need for the current product activation scheme(which in my opinion is well worth it based on the quality of the product that results) The idea that people would not pirate software of course goes completely against human nature so here we are.
You gave up your right to privacy in England along time ago you are just having a hard time dealing with the reality of it. Hell its not that different in the US but at least we retain some rights that we can use to leverage against oppression..the second amendment to the US bill of rights
comes to mind. You people in england are 1984 waiting to happen
“It amazes me on how many people still run such old geezer hardware.”
Well, I’m typing this on my Win2000 733mHz PIII, just like the original poster. But this is my work machine that I have to use for 3D CAD (Solidworks 2005) and some light coding in VB6.
This is my WORK machine. Some companies are just not upgrading all equipment, let alone home users. Although, if you leave my engineering dept. and go up to the marketing droids dept, they all have new laptops or pcs with flat panels. (Yeah, I’m bitter)
But at home, even my lowly 1.3G Athlon runs so much better on 2000 versus XP. I did a fresh install of XP, and it ran much slower (sorry, only 256mb ram) AND I had a half dozen crashes in 3 days time — that’s how long XP lasted on my machine before going back to 2000.
It’s been running 2000 for about a year since I built it with no crashes EVER. So, I agree with some here, for my money I’ll take Win2000 anyday, and have no plans to ever use XP unless I buy an OEM system that comes with it. (But I’ve built every system I’ve owned since my first pc in 1990)
What a crap-storm!
I said “Time IS running out. For Microsoft it is.”
What time is it?
It is now time that Microsoft is no longer the only viable desktop operating system to be used by the masses.
It is now time that Microsoft can no longer hold MY data hostage.
It is now time that I can choose to do something different than what Microsoft has chosen for me.
You can choose differently. That’s Freedom.
I pay for the products that I use, too!
I am still forced to use their product, albeit an older version.
I use Win4lin (fully paid for and licensed), Windows98 (fully paid for and licensed), pclite98pro (fully paid for and licensed), Autocad 2002 (fully paid for and licensed).
I use Autocad for 3d modeling and usually have four or five drawings opened at once.
I have a new 3.8gig machine at work with XP on it and all eye candy turned off. It consistently crashes three to four times a day. (with genuine Microsoft trained personnel taking care of it.)
I have been using 2000 on my home machine (2gig) and running the same load it crashes about once a week and runs about the same speed as XP does at work.
I now use Win4lin on Mepis with Win98 and Litepc98 to turn off all of the Web-Channel crap and it runs faster than both of the other systems and hasn’t crashed yet! Whoodah thunk it!
Use what you like and like what you use.
BTW, Mepis was the easiest OS to install that I have ever seen. It took all of 14 minutes and everything was set up except the printer. That took another 2 minutes.
Tom,
You obviously have never ran a 3rd party firewall like sygate or Tiny… as soon as you turn that on and start running various windows applications messenger, explorer, IE, etc, various windows system components, the kernel, LSASS, etc, contact various MS IP address’ what are they doing if not calling home?
also MS keeps a running DB of what you install and what your run… is it possible maybe, that the calling home and the DB are connected?
{sarcasm}no microsoft is completely trust worthy.{/sarcasm}
as for the security holes found in linux, Most GNU/Linux distros by default are more secure than windows by default.
Let’s say a hole is found in a MS kernel vs the Linux Kernel… the linux kernel a patch will be released right away…. but even if you don’t get it, the black hat hacker has to target exactly the version with the problem which a small percentage of the total linux users will be running… linux is not homogenized like windows, which even when linux becomes the mainstream OS, will prevent widespread attacks like “my doom”.
Whether or not Windows (XP) “phones home” or not is easy to answer. Yes, it does. XP phones home on pretty much every user-action (and sometimes even without any user-action).
Read this:
http://www.hevanet.com/peace/microsoft.htm
It’s a great article and it shows why we should be concerned about Microsoft’s EULA. When they want the right to access my PC, no matter what I want – then we have a licence which is close to invalid (in Denmark) – and it’s highly immoral and disgusting.
Windows2000 is my last windows version – the next will be Wine (which actually works fine – if you care for fiddling).
/dylansmrjones
.. as for “Holding more game developers to the fire”, good luck with that. Developers develop software for systems that make sense. Right now Windows is king, mac is second. Its idiotic to expect game developers, or any developer for that matter, to develop code for a system that rarely anyone uses for that system. Most of my Linux friends who are heavy gamers often keep at least one Windows box for gaming when I asked them about the few games that have Linux versions, I always get the same response, performance sucks. It also doesnt help that a lot of the companies that make controllers or other gaming accessories dont make Linux drivers and you have to rely on buggy third party hacks that may or may not screw up the hardware device.
Dude, you’re stuck in the ’90s. Linux is a great gaming platform these days. ANY USB game controller is supported out of the box. If a game doesn’t directly support controller events, you can run something like QJoyPad which can map controller events to the mouse and keyboard using several modes of behavior. I keep a different QJoyPad configuration for various games I play using a Playstation Dual-Shock on a USB adapter.
Speed is also a non-issue. DOOM3 is just a smidge faster in Fedora Core 3 than XP Pro, but not enough to make a noticeable difference. Same thing running American McGee’s Alice in WINE in FC3 vs. XP Pro. Any modern linux distro with the proper video drivers will perform the same as Windows, or close enough that you can’t tell the difference.
The only real reason developers don’t support linux more often is bosses who don’t look beyond raw numbers – the installed base is the bottom line. There’s no denying that Windows has many more users. Even the lousiest piece of garbage game on Windows will sell more than HL2 or DOOM3 on linux just simply due to the sheer number of users. As linux becomes more prevalent (and it is), more games will be released with linux versions.
The only thing that annoys me, that MS didnt released Service Pack 5.
If you install a slipstreamed w2k+sp4, you are still vulnerable to blaster even after 2 years!! Thats terrible. Of course there are hacks to integrate even hotfixes into the boot cd, but its just hacking, not a “clean” official solution.
I aggree buy every single one and upgrade to the new.
Win2k isnt that good out of the box. Service packs increase support and stabillity. XP SP2 is flawed in many ways and some have not bothered to upgrade to it. OS’es are good towards the end of support. awaits SP3 for XP