Microsoft dropping support for Windows 2000 and Windows XP SP2.

[Smith6612]

Just to give you all a heads up, in about a month Microsoft will be fully dropping support for Windows 2000, which was on extended support, and Windows XP SP2. If you are running Windows 2000, I suggest a move to Linux if it's possible for you to do so as PCs that old will probably not run Windows 7 all that good, and Windows XP isn't really on sale any more. If you're running SP2, shame on you as SP3 has been out for literally a year. Of course, if you wish to stay with Windows 2000, feel free, just keep tabs on your PC.

 

[krofunk]

...I guess I should update the home server.

I have/do use linux work stations - but I have never used a linux server...possibly the wrong place to ask but can you recommend a guide for setting up a linux server?

 

[alexandgruntz]

Hallelujah! Now all those stuck in the past will have to upgrade.

 

[techairlines]

I use Windows 7 (upgraded from Vista) on my desktop and I recently changed my XP Laptop to Ubuntu.

 

[mjserv]

good thanks to those who have macs

 

[Smith6612]

...I guess I should update the home server.

I have/do use linux work stations - but I have never used a linux server...possibly the wrong place to ask but can you recommend a guide for setting up a linux server?

I don't have any set in stone guide for setting up a Linux server, but if you know how to use the Terminal and can configure software through a command line, or perhaps editing it with a text editor it's all that is really needed to set up a server. Do some Googling around for the programs you wish to run and you should get everything from a "wget" address to how to configure the piece of software.

 

[lemon-tree]

Hallelujah! Now all those stuck in the past will have to upgrade.

To be honest, if people are that dedicated to one of these versions this probably isn't going to be what forces them to upgrade.

 

[redmoon22]

i think this is ok as long as the technology is under evolution..

 

[monkeymhz]

About time, I really don't know why people are so skiddish about upgrading some times.

 

[krofunk]

ok thanks I shall see how it goes!

 

[priyaa161]

If you're running SP2, shame on you as SP3 has been out for literally a year.

Yes, Shame on me cause I'm running SP2. And truly speaking I don't need support from Microsoft cause I can get an engineer or at least a technician (for smaller problems) within an hour in my home. Lots of engineers here to work for less wages on computer shops and computer shops provide this service for free to their customer.

 

[bikedoccycles]

What's the status of XP x64?

-Kurt

 

[techairlines]

What's the status of XP x64?

-Kurt

The Windows XP 64-bit Edition (IA-64) is unsupported.

XP Professional x64 SP2 has extended support until July 13, 2010. I don't know if x64 got SP3. It heard it wasn't compatible.

 

[chrisa]

Microsoft continually update their software. If you are using Windows of any ilk, then you should be using auto update anyway. In general I would suggest that if you do use Windows software then it is advisable to upgrade to the latest service packs shortly after they arrive. This would mean that you software is always up to date.

With regard to moving to Linux, there are several flavours of Linux available. A number of them are free, whilst others the software is free but the support is costly. RedHat for example. You must also consider that a large number of Linux command are issued from a command line rather that a GUI interface. This is something that should be considered.

 

[carl6969]

You must also consider that a large number of Linux command are issued from a command line rather that a GUI interface. This is something that should be considered.

You are correct, however, speaking from about two years of experience with Ubuntu on my PC, I have never found it necessary to use command line except when making advanced changes or tweaks. Some folks make advanced changes and tweaks to Windows by changing registry settings.

 

[dazman10]

Most modern software houses will only offer support for their latest product; if you want support for something older, you have to pay. I believe Adobe do this.

For MS to do this is, I feel, a little different. Since an OS is the most crucial piece of software any machine has, I feel that if it is not broken, don't attempt to fix it. I still use WinXP, albeit SP3, but I feel forcing users to upgrade from 2000 and XPSP2 is harsh not only because of the cost, but because of the learning curve that inevitable when upgrading. I work in software development, so for me to productively do my job to an equal quality with the same ease on a new OS would take some time to get used to - time I am not willing to expend.

Anyway, just my two cents, as the Americans say...

 

[chrisa]

As a fully signed up computer nerd I often use the Linux command line and hack the Windows registry!!!!

 

[jdawg2k]

Because unlike Linux, all MS "upgrade" are not always advances! Look at Windows 98 to Windows ME for example. Vastly unstable. Or 98 to XP when not able to update to NTFS. I'm not so sure its that they're totally skiddish. If anything I think its that they want other people to find out the bugs b4 upgrading and fixing something thats not yet broke.

About time, I really don't know why people are so skiddish about upgrading some times.

 

[jdawg2k]

My experience with MS home OS is that half their updates fix bugs that proper testing coulda found and also if I recall there are several free Linux server distros that are GUI based for install and config. Please advise me on this. Also there is plenty of user support for Linux if you google the issue. Also for me if I were launching a server (which I'm considering) I'd go Linux since there's a lack of Linux viruses and its slightly more secure than MS systems.

Microsoft continually update their software. If you are using Windows of any ilk, then you should be using auto update anyway. In general I would suggest that if you do use Windows software then it is advisable to upgrade to the latest service packs shortly after they arrive. This would mean that you software is always up to date.

With regard to moving to Linux, there are several flavours of Linux available. A number of them are free, whilst others the software is free but the support is costly. RedHat for example. You must also consider that a large number of Linux command are issued from a command line rather that a GUI interface. This is something that should be considered.

 

[jdawg2k]

All granted but may I ask, considering the machines that are running 2000, is support even needed? I mean, haven't they been stretched to the max of what MS can make them do? MS usually takes more ram to run as it gets more advanced and I've installed Win 2000 on a Compaq LTE 5000 laptop thats below specs for anything recent. I mean its slow but its a 166 Mhz MMX, 48 MB ram, and I think 1MB vid ram. I don't think it could do much better. LOL

Most modern software houses will only offer support for their latest product; if you want support for something older, you have to pay. I believe Adobe do this.

For MS to do this is, I feel, a little different. Since an OS is the most crucial piece of software any machine has, I feel that if it is not broken, don't attempt to fix it. I still use WinXP, albeit SP3, but I feel forcing users to upgrade from 2000 and XPSP2 is harsh not only because of the cost, but because of the learning curve that inevitable when upgrading. I work in software development, so for me to productively do my job to an equal quality with the same ease on a new OS would take some time to get used to - time I am not willing to expend.

Anyway, just my two cents, as the Americans say...