XP May Catch up to Windows 2000 by Year's End
Posted by Adrian on 15 June 2005 - 14:45 · 25 comments & 1983 views
About the Author
Full name: Unknown
Forum name: Adrian
Contact: via forum PM
Submissions: Normal · Headline
Full name: Unknown
Forum name: Adrian
Contact: via forum PM
Submissions: Normal · Headline
Slashdot It!
Submit to reddit
Submit to blinklist
Bookmark on del.icio.us
Add to furl
Share on Facebook
Add to Windows Live
Add to Google- Advertisement
-
-
(4 replies)
#1 Posted by TheSarge on 15 Jun 2005 - 14:58
- This just goes to show how badly Microsoft handled XP. It could have been done so much better.
-
#1.1 Posted by roadwarrior on 15 Jun 2005 - 15:03
- No, it just shows that there isn't much in XP that businesses find useful over 2000. The main reason that many businesses are starting to change over now is because it's increasingly difficult to actually buy a new machine with Windows 2000, and many machines that shipped with Windows 2000 on them are nearing the end of their useful lives or the end of their lease.
-
#1.2 Posted by neufuse on 15 Jun 2005 - 15:05
- badly handled? psh... more like if companies dont have a reason to upgrade why do it... Most companies upgade hardware every 2-4yrs... so if it isnt broke why fix it? this would be coming around to the time where most companies replace their workstations and upgrade anyways, and most of those old systems were probably running windows 2000... so the upgrade is now starting to xp with newer hardware
-
#1.3 Posted by sphbecker on 15 Jun 2005 - 16:41
- It it actually very typical of a minor upgrade such as 2000 to XP (version 5.0 to 5.1). Windows 2000 for business use offers most of what Windows XP Pro does. For a business there is very little cost benefit to upgrading from Windows 2000 to XP.
For home users it is a completely different story. If a home user is still running Windows 98 or ME then XP is a huge upgrade for them; if they are running 2000, then XP adds those nice things you expect to see on a home computer. -
#1.4 Posted by aristotle-dude on 16 Jun 2005 - 15:17
- Windows XP Pro offers really nothing for the corporate customer. Take my employer for example, we do not use Remote Desktop to manage desktops but rather use a product called remote admin.
I regret recommending upgrading to XP back in the day because it claimed to better support legacy DOS apps than Windows 2000 Pro. Win2k was much more stable.
-
(3 replies)
#2 Posted by Colin-uk on 15 Jun 2005 - 15:20
- the IT staff at my last college preffered 2000 over XP because it was stable
yes i know XP is too, but they just kept calling XP "windows disney edition" lol.
-
#2.1 Posted by ev0| on 15 Jun 2005 - 19:08
- that's pretty ignorant, and probably why they were IT at a college not a major corporation or university.
-
#2.2 Posted by Skyfrog on 15 Jun 2005 - 21:10
- Seems to me being the IT staff they should have known that you can turn off visual styles.
-
#2.3 Posted by aristotle-dude on 17 Jun 2005 - 00:56
- It has absolutely nothing to do with the visual style.
XP has a lot of issues.
-
(4 replies)
#3 Posted by Raa on 15 Jun 2005 - 15:38
- I work at 6 schools here, and do consultancy for countless home and business customers, I prefer 2000 over XP, always have...
I've always sold Win2k to my customers, Only done XP twice I think, and you can be sure that those are the 2 machines that have the most problems, plus all the other new customers that roll in with their "oh noes!! my new pc has spyware!!" crap :|
Gimme 2k anyday. Sooner XP is shuffled under the carpet and longhorn is here, the better I rekon!
Long Live Windows 2000
-
#3.1 Posted by betasp on 15 Jun 2005 - 16:08
- XP is in the minority here. We have more old Win98 boxen than we do XP. I swapped out one of our managers new XP box with a 98 box at his request because he found it more stable, faster and more usable than XP. We are slowly moving to a thin client environment, so in the future I won't have to deal that much with desktop issues. Oh yeah, and we still run Win2K Server and I probably won't go to a Win 2003 Server until I really have to because of the client licensing changes.
I read above where someone call XP the Windows 2000 Disney Edition. At this rate Longhorn will be the Windows 2000 Bloat Edition with all the features and "improvements" that keep getting pulled out. -
#3.2 Posted by Andareed on 15 Jun 2005 - 16:33
QUOTE . At this rate Longhorn will be the Windows 2000 Bloat Edition with all the features and "improvements" that keep getting pulled out.
So removing features from the os will give it more bloat...-
#3.3 Posted by betasp on 15 Jun 2005 - 16:58
QUOTE So removing features from the os will give it more bloat...
Yes, because if are not adding new features, why change it. Things like Avalon are really bloat as far as the average business user is concerned.-
#3.4 Posted by sphbecker on 15 Jun 2005 - 18:29
- We run almost all XP, very little 2000. For the most part we leap-frogged from NT 4.0/9x to XP. I have been very happy; I know 2000 is very much like XP, but in the areas they are different I like XP a lot more. I am really looking forward to Longhorn.
-
(1 reply)
#4 Posted by AMDMEFX-55 on 15 Jun 2005 - 16:44
- Wow I never knew I would see the day when someone says windows98 is faster and more stable then XP wow
. Not only dose xp support all the old hardware but all the new stuff also. 98 on the other hand have fun with all the damn drivers and crash after crash and don't get me started on windows ME.
-
(4 replies)
#5 Posted by Max™ on 15 Jun 2005 - 17:04
- People who complain about XP crashing every 5 minutes obviously have a problem with their hardware/drivers/software. XP in itself is rock solid.
-
#5.1 Posted by rajputwarrior on 15 Jun 2005 - 17:17
- yeah real rock solid, how many security holes are they patching every month?
-
#5.2 Posted by MtDewCodeRedFreak on 15 Jun 2005 - 17:57
- That doesn't matter. MS is doing their best to make it more rock solid.
My XP Pro SP2 with all the patches just makes it more stable.
Why did MS refuse to make SP5 for Win2K? Like duh, the company quit supporting it when IE 7 was announced to work on XP with SP2 only.
And, Win2K is old. I wouldn't go back to the dull gray UI of it. And the Win logo on 2K is the same as 3.x, 9x, and ME's.
Sorry to be blunt, but .... this is where the technology world is heading nowadays. Of course things are gonna get bigger and better, thus requiring more.
Some people may not like it, but you know what? Tough sh*t for them; they should've bought a new computer that is XP and/or Longhorn compatible. If they don't like the new UI of XP and LH, then they can simply change to the classic mode of it.
And, don't give me that "But we can't afford it" crap. Puh-leeze! Dell Dimension 2400 costs 300 bucks. There ARE cheap computers around.
Saddens me on this issue, literally. Some people just can't think and instead bash and troll, bash and troll, bash and troll. -
#5.3 Posted by Skyfrog on 15 Jun 2005 - 21:12
QUOTE eah real rock solid, how many security holes are they patching every month?
Right, because regularly patching security problems is a bad thing.
-
#5.4 Posted by Unplugged on 21 Jun 2005 - 02:30
- And I suppose 2000 dident have a new patch out every 2 weeks?
In fact I remember when it was launched hardware support was so scratchy that it was often difficault to get it to run stably at all especially if the machine had any specialised hardware. Granted XP had similar problems but nowhere near the startup problems that 2000 had.
-
#6 Posted by ev0| on 15 Jun 2005 - 19:11
- i don't care about the UI's but XP SP2 has so many security enhancements that I really would like to see it on as many desktops as possible.
-
#7 Posted by lylesback2 on 15 Jun 2005 - 19:46
- i know my work WAS running windows 2000. and are slowly upgrading to windows XP
-
#8 Posted by eilegz on 16 Jun 2005 - 01:57
- upgrading xp its just a waste everyone its happy with windows 2000 xp cost too much and bring less new things maybe corporate may consider to upgrade to longhorn but again theres still people that use NT 4 and 98. XP its not a worthy upgrade at least not for corporations. But somehow common users xp its a great thing.
-
#9 Posted by wpoeit on 17 Jun 2005 - 17:25
- I don't see what all the fuss is about Windows XP. It's been out for over 3 years and despite remaining flaws, at least Microsoft managed to fix it and even enhance the OS what with the two service packs, especially the second. I'm pretty sure that some people will continue banging their heads against the wall railing that Windows NT4/2000 or even Windows 98 is more stable than Windows XP even when that has been proven false. The vast majority of 98/NT4 users are running the OS under Pentium I/IIs and older AMD Kx chips as even the posters here who say win98 is more stable than XP just won't come clean and speak the truth. I've tested thouasands of PCs that were built after mid 1999 and not a single one of them had any problems running under Windows XP. Even an AMD-K6 350 Mhz with 160 MB RAM and onboard video ran smoothly under Windows XP. Most people who complain about Windows XP upgrade from Win9x not going smoothly fail to use their common sense that of upgrades can be messy and that a better solution would be to back up and do a clean install of Windows XP like any other OS. About Windows 2000 and corporations, let's not forget that back in 2001 Microsoft openly admitted that they never expected corporations with Windows 2000 to migrate to Windows XP Professional. As for Windows 2000 being more stable and resource free than Windows XP, one need only change a few settings in XP Pro and then it's just as good as 2000 and one can always revert back when they're ready to do so.
AssetMetrix released a report Tuesday showing that Windows 2000 installations have declined by only four percentage points to 48 percent of existing installations in the first quarter of 2005, down from 52 percent in the fourth quarter of 2003. AssetMetrix Research Labs is the technology and market research arm of AssetMetrix Inc. of Ottawa, Ontario, which provides IT asset management services.
Windows 2000 is "at the inflection point" of being replaced by Windows XP as large corporations upgrade their PC inventory, and as the introduction of the Longhorn version of Windows approaches in late 2006, according to the AssetMetrix report.
Moderate Threat
MS05-032: Vulnerability in Microsoft Agent Could Allow Spoofing (890046) Important
A vulnerability exists in Microsoft Agent that could enable an attacker to spoof trusted Internet content. An attacker first have to persuade a user to visit the attacker’s site to attempt to exploit this vulnerability.
MS05-033: Vulnerability in Telnet Client Could Allow Information Disclosure (896428) Important
A vulnerability exists in the Windows Telnet Client that could enable an attacker to retrieve unpredictable information from a system.
MS05-034: Cumulative Security Update for ISA Server 2000 (899753) Important
Vulnerabilities exist in Microsoft ISA Server 2000 that could allow circumvention of a packet filter and enable an attacker to retrieve unpredictable information from an ISA Server’s cache or from a system behind the ISA server .