IT Guys- Any of you folks still working on Windows 2000 server?

[Ns1]

I'm trying to get one of my clients to upgrade to a goddamn win2k3 server but he doesn't want to plop the 800 bucks.


Should I give in and let him xfer his old Win2k server shit onto a new server, or hold the line until he upgrades to 2k3?

 

[Kev]

Is there a reason you want him to upgrade, other than to have the "latest and greatest"

 

[iamwiz82]

I actually still kind of prefer 2k since it doesn't have all the nanny BS that I end up disabling anyways.

 

[Ns1]

Originally posted by: Kev
Is there a reason you want him to upgrade, other than to have the "latest and greatest"

1. The server is fucked up, so there is an inherent need to move onto a new server. Whether the issue is hardware or software is unknown. My honest opinion is that it's both.

1b. Thus, if we use say Acronis and image the server into a new HD, there may still be problems.

2. I don't want to work on a Windows 2k server since I have shit to learn from it. I'm doing most of this work more or less pro-bono

The difference is about 700 bucks, Windows 2k3 server + 10 CAL's

I have no idea where the original media is.

 

[JDMnAR1]

Sure, we still have a few servers running Windows 2000. For that matter, we even have a couple running NT4, simply because the vendors either have not certified their software with newer versions, the functionality we need was deprecated in newer releases, or we are too cheap to upgrade.

 

[iamwiz82]

Originally posted by: Ns1

Originally posted by: Kev
Is there a reason you want him to upgrade, other than to have the "latest and greatest"

1. The server is fucked up, so there is an inherent need to move onto a new server. Whether the issue is hardware or software is unknown. My honest opinion is that it's both.

1b. Thus, if we use say Acronis and image the server into a new HD, there may still be problems.

2. I don't want to work on a Windows 2k server since I have shit to learn from it. I'm doing most of this work more or less pro-bono

The difference is about 700 bucks, Windows 2k3 server + 10 CAL's

I have no idea where the original media is.

Why image it? Build from scratch and migrate.

 

[KB]

Just start charging your clients more for supporting out of date products. Call it a non-supported product fee.

 

[Ns1]

Any other compelling reason for him to use Win2k3?

I mean, spread over a 60month useful life it's only 15 bucks a month difference...

Originally posted by: KB
Just start charging your clients more for supporting out of date products. Call it a non-supported product fee.

That's what I'm thinking...

 

[MrWizzard]

Originally posted by: iamwiz82

Originally posted by: Ns1

Originally posted by: Kev
Is there a reason you want him to upgrade, other than to have the "latest and greatest"

1. The server is fucked up, so there is an inherent need to move onto a new server. Whether the issue is hardware or software is unknown. My honest opinion is that it's both.

1b. Thus, if we use say Acronis and image the server into a new HD, there may still be problems.

2. I don't want to work on a Windows 2k server since I have shit to learn from it. I'm doing most of this work more or less pro-bono

The difference is about 700 bucks, Windows 2k3 server + 10 CAL's

I have no idea where the original media is.

Why image it? Build from scratch and migrate.

QFT, you are the IT guy it is your job to fix the problems not find the easiest way to get a broke machine barly running on another one. That being said I have servers of both OSes and still like 2000 slightly more.

I know that it won't be fun but IT is sometimes that way.

 

[TheKub]

The new Group Policy Management tool in 2k3 is SOOO much better than in 2k. At least I think its only 2k3, though I may be in correct. The only 2k servers we have are member servers.

 

[Steve]

2k8?

 

[Genx87]

I am assuming they are running active directory? Native 2003 AD is more secure than Native 2000 active directory. There is also shadow volume services for backups.

btw did they buy a volume or retail license of win2k? If not you cant transfer it even if they want you to(legally). It is tied to the hardware if it is oem.

 

[Mr Pickles]

Originally posted by: MrWizzard

Originally posted by: iamwiz82

Originally posted by: Ns1

Originally posted by: Kev
Is there a reason you want him to upgrade, other than to have the "latest and greatest"

1. The server is fucked up, so there is an inherent need to move onto a new server. Whether the issue is hardware or software is unknown. My honest opinion is that it's both.

1b. Thus, if we use say Acronis and image the server into a new HD, there may still be problems.

2. I don't want to work on a Windows 2k server since I have shit to learn from it. I'm doing most of this work more or less pro-bono

The difference is about 700 bucks, Windows 2k3 server + 10 CAL's

I have no idea where the original media is.

Why image it? Build from scratch and migrate.

QFT, you are the IT guy it is your job to fix the problems not find the easiest way to get a broke machine barly running on another one. That being said I have servers of both OSes and still like 2000 slightly more.

I know that it won't be fun but IT is sometimes that way.

If we're speaking in terms of dealing with the customer aspect of this I think finding the easiest way to get a broke machine barly running would be to go with 2k again wouldn't it? But actually we don't really have enough info. here. Depending on what all is on the server, rebuilding from scratch might take forever. I've seen home grown app migrations take rediculously long. You are the IT guy it is your job to ensure that the customer is aware of the safest and most efficient choices available to them on the market right now.

If they won't budge then so be it, but highly recommending and pushing the upgrade option is best practice.

About 1\10 of our servers are 2k right now. By 2009 we aim to be strictly a 2k3 environment.

 

[Steve]

This is unbarable.

 

[Mr Pickles]

Originally posted by: Steve
This is unbarable.

What is?

 

[iamwiz82]

Originally posted by: Mr Pickles

Originally posted by: MrWizzard

Originally posted by: iamwiz82

Originally posted by: Ns1

Originally posted by: Kev
Is there a reason you want him to upgrade, other than to have the "latest and greatest"

1. The server is fucked up, so there is an inherent need to move onto a new server. Whether the issue is hardware or software is unknown. My honest opinion is that it's both.

1b. Thus, if we use say Acronis and image the server into a new HD, there may still be problems.

2. I don't want to work on a Windows 2k server since I have shit to learn from it. I'm doing most of this work more or less pro-bono

The difference is about 700 bucks, Windows 2k3 server + 10 CAL's

I have no idea where the original media is.

Why image it? Build from scratch and migrate.

QFT, you are the IT guy it is your job to fix the problems not find the easiest way to get a broke machine barly running on another one. That being said I have servers of both OSes and still like 2000 slightly more.

I know that it won't be fun but IT is sometimes that way.

If we're speaking in terms of dealing with the customer aspect of this I think finding the easiest way to get a broke machine barly running would be to go with 2k again wouldn't it? But actually we don't really have enough info. here. Depending on what all is on the server, rebuilding from scratch might take forever. I've seen home grown app migrations take rediculously long. You are the IT guy it is your job to ensure that the customer is aware of the safest and most efficient choices available to them on the market right now.

If they won't budge then so be it, but highly recommending and pushing the upgrade option is best practice.

About 1\10 of our servers are 2k right now. By 2009 we aim to be strictly a 2k3 environment.

I have no issues with 2k3. It works and about 75% of my servers are on it currently. However, there are legacy apps that run just fine on 2k and there really is no reason to move forward at this point. Assuming that this is a program that has been installed for a long time (since you are replacing hardware) I would guess that must have run just fine on Windows 2000 previously. Give him the options, tell him the consequences and do what he wants.

I have seen win2k3 blow up older programs pretty spectacularly in testing.

 

[Ns1]

Originally posted by: Genx87
I am assuming they are running active directory? Native 2003 AD is more secure than Native 2000 active directory. There is also shadow volume services for backups.

btw did they buy a volume or retail license of win2k? If not you cant transfer it even if they want you to(legally). It is tied to the hardware if it is oem.

Really now?

They bought it from a local PC vendor, so I presume that it's OEM.

Thanks for the all the input.

 

[takeru]

same here. a few of our servers are about a third windows 2000. gotta watch licensing costs. i don't understand why you dislike windows 2000 so much. its not like its totally different or anything. server migration depends on what is on the server, ease of transfer, gains from transfer, cost of downtime, etc etc. we just retired the companies first server, an Compaq Proliant ML530 with windows 2000 server. i know a lot of people remember that beast. it was the PDC also, so lots of work building the new server, but it was fun (well to me at least). that aside, yeah, you are the IT dude. do it, live it, deal with it, and QQ in private.

 

[Ns1]

sigh. Guess that was a losing battle for me.

I gave him his options, I'll report back what he says. 99% he's gonna opt for Win2k though

 

[ViviTheMage]

yes, make him go to 2k3....makes supporting a bit easier. I am not sure if ms supports 2k anymore....I have called in on 2k3 and they helped support certain migration issues we had.

 

[Homerboy]

so you're going to update him to Win2k3 with Win2k8 right around the corner?

 

[Ns1]

Originally posted by: Homerboy
so you're going to update him to Win2k3 with Win2k8 right around the corner?

There is nothing Win2k8 offers that this company needs

 

[Czar]

Originally posted by: Ns1

Originally posted by: Homerboy
so you're going to update him to Win2k3 with Win2k8 right around the corner?

There is nothing Win2k8 offers that this company needs

way longer support time, that counts for alot

 

[rh71]

I already got an email about testing 2008 server compatibility. I'm skerred.

 

[SoulAssassin]

Originally posted by: Ns1

Originally posted by: Homerboy
so you're going to update him to Win2k3 with Win2k8 right around the corner?

There is nothing Win2k8 offers that this company needs

You know what I'm going to say here so I won't even bother.