nope. gnome2 is nothing like win 2000. comparing a gui/shell with a whole OS is not serious at all. also why should be gnome 2 developped still? its highly customizable anyway, much more than gnome 3, gnome shell or unity.
Anyway, regarding MIR, after reading a lot about this situation I've become rather angry at Canonical's behaviour here.
Basically here's what happened:
Canonical "thoroughly researches" wayland to see if it will fit their needs. Only they failed to get even a basic understanding of how wayland works, and never once reached out or spoke to a single wayland developer. A canonical developer even admitted in the wayland IRC after mir was announced, that they didn't really understand how the wayland input model worked.
Then they start working on MIR in secret. They announce it, with a list of "technical reasons" why wayland is inferior and doesn't fit their needs. This list is very quickly debunked by wayland developers as basically being completely untrue FUD, but Canonical keeps truckin with their pointless new display server, which is a great example of this: http://en.m.wikipedi...n_of_commitment
If they had just come out and said "we made this because we want complete control over our display server", I still wouldn't be super happy about it, but I would understand their justification. Instead they clearly didn't even understand how wayland works, and tried to use a list of totally untrue reasons as to why wayland doesn't work for them as justification.