• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

MSCA Course? Windows 2000 or 2003?

I'd take 2000, because the amount of 2003 servers out there compared to 2000 is low. The majority of companies out there with big servers have either migrated to 2000, or are clinging to NT4, and will be going to 2003 sometime in the future.

Plus, 2003's features are more similar to 2000 than 2000's to NT4, so you'll find the 2003 course easier if you take 2000 first.

Just my 2p's worth 🙂

Dopefiend
 
I'm starting mine in about 23 minutes (sh!t I should get dressed).

We're doing 2003. They're so simliar that I can't see any reason to jump in with the old. Plus the book we're using (Sybex one) so far has pointed out the few places where 2003 differs from 2K. Besides the real point is to learn the fundamentals of windows/users/licensing/iis/etc. And those are barely any different. Once you've got the fundamentals down, we all know we're just gonna refer back to the books/documentation/msdn when it comes to doing anything specific.
 
I vote 2003.

I figure that most companies who do use w2k are planning to switch to something else with in 2-3 years or so. Especially if they want to upgrade the hardware. To upgrade you have to go 64bit soon(at least after a year or two). To upgrade to 64 means to upgrade to w2k3... I don't think they got w2k 64 bit.

So hurry up and get it before it becomes too fasionable..

If you get w2k, it just means that you will have to pay to get w2k3 soon anyways.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top