I got the same fear, but then again i think many companies won't be happy if ms stops supporting win2k. I don't think companies are willing to change OS's again after just up[censored] all their winnt4 computers to win2k. i'm not planning to go xp for a while either. i'm really happy with win2k. Finally all the drivers are out (after a year of waiting) and i'm not plannig to go trough the same troubles with winxp + i don't like that activation thingy, even if i bought a legal copy...unless someone comes up with a crack.

The same was said prior to SP2 - but it did come out, isn't it?

The same was said prior to SP7 for NT4 - but it didn't come out, did it?

rgodart,
 
<<<Finally all the drivers are out (after a year of waiting) and i'm not plannig to go trough the same troubles with winxp >>>
 
I know exactly what you mean, I definitely don't want to go through that again !
 
In fact, these days I'm also putting off a lot of (what I would call) 'automatic' upgrades, e.g. office 2000 -> officeXP.....whats the point ?

W2K Drivers will work on XP.
 
For me however W2K has been great but its just a stepping stone to XP. Microsoft has dealt with most issues that have stopped W2K from being the messiah of OS's so XP should be good (and from what i've heard from the Beta testers i work with its going to be grand).
 
I'm expexting great things from XP and I've never been afraid of trying new things (cept this one time.....Win95) he he he.
 
I'm just glad they have dumped the 16bit stuff.
 
-Mua

Mua_dib,
 
I read somewhere that XP is best on a latest PC and with large amounts of RAM.......'better with a new/latest pc than as an upgrade' (is what I've heard).
 
I may well go to XP myself one day, but DEFINITELY I will NOT be one of the first in the queue (more like one of the last !).
 
Also, I'm a little tired of getting the latest just for the sake of it - which I'll admit being guilty of in the past.
 
Actually, I was happy with NT but I needed USB, so off to W2K I went. And I am glad I did but it's been expensive in terms of time/money/learning curve (learning curve as in installing OS, drivers, hardware issues etc etc as I am not an IT expert).
 
Also, I'm not too sure about where MS is heading with licence issues and $$$ as far as the latest Office XP and Windows XP are heading towards (or indeed whether it is something I agree with).
 
Basically I'm happy with what I've got and can't see much improvement as being essential.
 
What 'great things' is it in XP which you are expecting ??
 
Regards,
 
Jez

Well, I do indeed enjoy Windows 2000. I really have no reason for upgrading at all. ie: look at all the pc companies like dell and compaq that are still churning out 98 boxes.
 
BUT!
Like when all the other OS's were released I tried them. Some I didnt like at all (WinME), but some that did thier job fairly well.
I think that win2k is fantastic, I love it, but whats to say that XP isnt even just a bit better. And with that reasonable doubt in mind, I am at least gonna try it for a couple weeks (....heh...sshhhhh) and if i dont like it I havent lost anything. I still have windows 2000 and short of taking a couple hours away, it can always be re-installed. The point I'm getting at is that I want my computer to be rock solid stable, and running the fastest, mostuseful software money can buy. So if XP doesnt appeal to me...no loss. But if it does...then there is no loss either, more of a gain.

I agree with CrazyKillerMan, for the most part anyway. Win2k rocks and ME sucks. I've tried out the XP beta 2, but I really don't see any good reason to go to it, since 2k works great, and IMO, XP is just 2k with eye candy and some apps I really don't care for--specifically Movie Maker. And the stuff that I don't want---like Movie Maker, I cannot choose whether I want it installed. Another thing I don't like about XP is the Product Craptivation BS. I ain't buyin' 2 copies of XP. No way in hell am I doin' that!
I'm not holding my breath for SP3, seeing as how SP2 took forever to come out. (Some people didn't think it would show up in the first place, but it did. )

I think one of the 'great things' that XP will improve over w2k on is application compatibility....so the beta testers tell me anyway. This will be of use to me and other network administrators who suffered a little going to Win2k from NT4 on a network with hundreds of different kinds of apps to support.
 
On a home note though i have experienced some difficulties with older apps on W2k and apparently XP is going to resolve some of those issues.
 
BUT!
If SP3 is a huge improvent i may be at the back of the queue with ya!
 
-Mua (and dont even start me on WinPatchMe!)

Keep your opinions coming Guys ! Its always nice to hear from around the world.
 
As far as I'm concerned (and this is really my own personal, non-professional opinion, so please don't flame me!)..... I think MS may be in for a bit of a shock.
 
Firstly, I think the timing of XP could be wrong for W2K users - that is if they are expecting/hoping them to upgrade to XP.
 
I personally waited a fair amount of time before I was able to jump to W2K (from NT).
 
I then waited a fair amount of time for SP2.
 
Now, I'm really happy with my PC, what I can do with it and what it can do for me.
 
I really have no complaints.
 
But, no sooner has all this happened, they are going to bring out ANOTHER Operating System.
 
I say, "give us a break!".
 
CrayKillerMan, I too have all the latest and greatest software, but there just comes a time when you realise that you haven't totally exhausted what you have and what they are proposing you have isn't THAT much different than what you've already got.
 
So why upgrade ? To say "I've got the latest and fastest software" ?
 
Been there, done that....get's tiring.
 
The other thing I think MS may have miscalculated is the 'Product Activation' thingy and the .NET stuff.
 
None of my software is cracked, but I will admit that I am 'sharing' A VERY SMALL PROPORTION of software (Office, Autoroute, W2K) over my 3 home machines (over 2 people). Still that's wrong, but I guess MS are targeting even people like myself (as well as the 'hardended' pirate).
 
We shall wait and see !
 
Thanks guys, Let me hear what you think !
 
Jez

Quote:
I think one of the 'great things' that XP will improve over w2k on is application compatibility....so the beta testers tell me anyway. This will be of use to me and other network administrators who suffered a little going to Win2k from NT4 on a network with hundreds of different kinds of apps to support.

On a home note though i have experienced some difficulties with older apps on W2k and apparently XP is going to resolve some of those issues.

BUT!
If SP3 is a huge improvent i may be at the back of the queue with ya!

-Mua (and dont even start me on WinPatchMe!)


Yes Mua, I've heard that in this area, XP excels. Jez

SP3 for NT5 will come out. SP's for NT OS'S usually take around 6+ months time. SO expect SP3 sometime around then. Althought SP7 for NT4 is not coming out hotfixes for the OS are still being released! I'm not happpy that they are not releasing SP7 but at least they are still supporting it. Also NT4 came out in '96. The last SP for NT4 ame out in 99. That's 3 years of supporting NT4 with SP's. I think we can expect at keast that much support for 2000.

I am not as optimistic as DosFreak. While NT was supported with Service Packs for almost 4 years, MS did not release an OS to directly compete with it during that time. Then, W2K comes out, and no more Service Packs. All time that was put into it was written off, and only a handful of hotfixes remain. W2K will be about 1.5 yrs old in full retail trim when XP Pro shows up on the scene. So who knows what the next step in SP methodology will be for MS. The only thing that is keeping my hopes up is that W2K Server has been doing well, and there *should* be a real need to support those even when "Blackcomb" comes out.

I do agree that XP's timing seems strange and it will be interesting to see if they continue to do SP's for both Win2k and XP. Or maybe starting with SP3 or maybe SP4 there will be relevant updates included for both OS's. After all they have virtually the same kernel.
 
At least Mico$oft is giving us more of a choice now
 
-Mua

Yeah, what's up with MS shooting out XP so fast? Really, on the home front at least, there really is nothing on the verge of clobbering Windows, even with ME screwing things up. And then for Win2k users? My opinion is that XP is just a facelift for 2k. All the games I'm interested in playing work fine. There is one game that needs a part for Windows instead of DOS, but I just lost interest in it.
 
Oh waitaminute! I know why MS is releasing another OS! To combat the root of all evil, LINUX!!!
According to Steve Ballmer, anyway.
 
I would side with clutch about SP3, though. It would be nice if they got it out; however, I'm not going to be holding my breath.

If I get my hands on XP I will slap it on my system during a break period from school. If i like it, it stays... but then I can always go back to the fascinating win2k. I really like the functionality of it.

For me, W2k SP2 is as good as it's going to get with Windows. My W2k servers will stay as they are until they are no longer useful and then they will be replaced with Linux. I don't like the activation in XP. I don't know why, but I just don't like it. I am already using Linux on my desktop. I'm not a gamer so I don't care about that and every thing else I can do in Linux. Right now I am using Win4Lin to run some of my windows apps under Linux but I am moving farther and farther away from Microsoft.

Like i said earlier, XP will do better in terms of Application Compatibility. This may not be of any benefit to those that run 2K already without any problems.
When XP does come along, i'll be getting it. Mainly because my migration from nt4 workstation to 2K pro did not go as smoothly as i liked mainly because on app problems. My 2K servers have got a fair few SI packages just waiting to be served to XP boxes that wont run well or at all on 2K machines.
As soon as thats in place i spose i'll change over to the Server 2002 family
Gotta stay employed somehow
 
-Mua

well i see things much simpler:i don't think that windows XP are going to replace win2k for the simple reason that winXP is aiming for the home users which means they are going to be a more sophisticated and reliable version of win9x/ME having all the great reliability of NTFS and win2k.
 
win2k is mainly aimed for companies and not for home users.But it's the reliability that made them popular and of course it's the way win9x/ME sucks so much that you need to restart your PC every 2 hours of work or play.
 
concluding i think that MS made itself clear about XP and what purpose they are going to be serving.

Thymios,
 
XP is completely unrelated to 98/ME architecture. XP is based on the NT Kernel with many improvements. Its more accurate to say this is a more improved version of Win2K/NT4.
Also XP will come in 2 version. XP Home (aimed at home users as you mentioned) and XP Professional (Win2k pro's replacement/alternative)
 
As for Win2K Pro's future, who knows? It is unlikely that a new OS released 2 years after another is going to be missing some of the features introduced in the earlier incarnation. That would be a step back.
 
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/default.asp
 
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/home/default.asp
 
These Links should help.
 
-Mua