• 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.

NT VERSUS 2000

T

tkim

Platinum Member
can anyone tell me all the pros and cons about upgrading to 2000?? if not give me a link to where i can begin researching it??

i typed it in many search engines but i only get UNIX VS. NT.

thanks!
 
Well...2000 *is* NT....so I'll assume you mean NT4 vs 2000 (NT5).

Do you want to know for the server versions or the workstation versions?
 
well, i just need to know the basic overview. for example, i know that 2k is more stable than nt4 and that it is plug and play. i knew...you could say a very general idea about the major differences. the reason for this is that i am doin a presentation on it but i dont know squat about 2k!! i only know nt4 🙁 thanks for you help!!
 
NT4 is quite solid and stable OS, but Win2k just as stable as NT4. The main difference is the full support for USB, ACPI and AGP graphics. AGP cards do run under NT4, but they run in PCI66 mode (a bit slower).

vash
 
Vash is correct, but what do you want to know? Professional or the server versions? I could type out a damn novel on Active Directory alone. Are you going to include Active Directory in your presentation? If not, you need to. Most of the benefits you get with Windows 2000 are part of Active Directory. Like Smart Card logon. You need to have an Enterprise Certificate Authority that requires Active Directory. Do you want to talk about IPSec? How about Kerberos authentication vs. NTLMv2 and NTLMv1? What about Disk Quotas? Or TRUE Plug-n-Play? Or Intelli-Mirror?

And that is just on Windows 2000 Professional (and the server versions, but the server versions have many more features).
 
definitely. W2k is way way better than nt4.0. I'd go with it just because everything is easier to use. Layout = better. Also it's more stable and game friendly.
 
also, MS will stop supporting nt4 next year, they will not long provide packs or any more critical updates. which means that eventually everyone will have to run 2k like it or not.




dam()
 
make the move to 2k.. liek others said.. full support for USB, AGP.. and others.. that way when ever you upgrade you won't have as many headaches if you are already familiar with it..
 
All of the above plus Win2000 allows you to choose between FAT32 and NTFS partitions, an added benefit if you choose to dual boot with Win98.
 
FIRST, thanks for all of your help! AT is DA BOMB!!

second, i knew there were a lot of differences but no THAT many!! i guess what you guys have said is good. for my presentation, all i need to know is why should a compnay even bother to do a 2k roll out?? from a cost point of view, ease of administration point of view, and...from a very general point of view---> the reason----> i am going to present to an audience that has no technical (if not, very little) background. i guess the MAIN benefits would be nice.

i wouls assume active direcotry is one of the most important. then comes ease of use (simplicity), plug n play...better hardware support, trouble shooting, centralized administration (i think this goes with active directory, right?) better securuty b/c of group policies (acive directory again?).

I THANK ALL IN ADVANCE....W/O AT AND THE AWESOME PEOPLE HERE, LIFE WOULD BE HARD!!!!!
 
NT4 is a well established business operating system, windows 2000 is much more friendly and has better features....plus, I luv it 😀

Corm
 
I liked NT4 both work/server better than NT5 (2k). If you don't need USB devices than NT4 is really nice to use because its much faster than NT5 (2k). Active Directory is overrated, for small business or small companies, this feature don't mean much because they have no huge database, storage, or $50K printers to maintain unlike the larger size corporations.
 
CocaCola5 - I don't agree with your statement that Active Directory is overrated. Most small businesses really can't take full advantage of Active Directory, but it's uses are there. I really don't agree with you that NT 4 is faster than Windows 2000. That is just not true. And to say that if you don't need USB support, stick with Windows NT 4, I really don't think that you either know what you are talking about or you haven't truely worked with Windows 2000 and NT 4. The stability factor alone with Windows 2000 is a big reason to move to Windows 2000. If you are a small business that already has Windows NT 4 Server setup with a Windows NT 4 domain, then you really don't have a need to upgrade to Windows 2000, yet.

Please, if you have specific concerns or disagreements on this, let me know either via PM or email.
 
I've done a similar presentation and I've come up with a ton of information comparing NT4 to Win2k. Two points that stand out is that Win2k is scalable and faster at doing certain things than NT4 is capable of.

Active Directory can be nice however I found a study that polled several large business about their ROI after having Win2k installed for over 1 year and many didn't see that much of a savings...at least nowhere near what was projected.

My company is debating now whether to rollout Win2k to 10,000 desktops or wait until XP comes out and do that installation.




 
Superself and TKIM: I think the major reason why some companies haven't seem the ROI as high as what Microsoft claims is that most of them did not, and do not know how to configure, plan, or support a full Windows 2000 network.

All of the features with Active Directory and Windows 2000 make it a great business platform. There was and still is a big learning curve on Windows 2000 and Active Directory. It is not the same as NT 4. In no way is it. It takes a while to learn AD and Windows 2000. The OS is very similar to that of it's NT 4 brother, but the huge difference is Active Directory.
 
that does make a lot of sense. i know 2000 has many features that can and whoop nt4's ass in the future but there just aren't many people who can full understand and implement it correctly and successfully.

hey shadow...do i sound like i know 2000 more or what? hehe 🙂😀
 


<< Superself and TKIM: I think the major reason why some companies haven't seem the ROI as high as what Microsoft claims is that most of them did not, and do not know how to configure, plan, or support a full Windows 2000 network.

All of the features with Active Directory and Windows 2000 make it a great business platform. There was and still is a big learning curve on Windows 2000 and Active Directory. It is not the same as NT 4. In no way is it. It takes a while to learn AD and Windows 2000. The OS is very similar to that of it's NT 4 brother, but the huge difference is Active Directory. >>




Name one real world situation where its even worthwhile to run Active Directory? Sure it works but does it even concerns productivity?. Besides, theres another name for it already and its been around for awhile, its called Data Backup/Inventory. The idea of publishing on a company intranet every single thing within a company(from cdroms and printers on each PC to John Doe's Documents) don't represent a leap in innovation but just another attempt by MS to differentiate itself from what is already working fine as is. Theres also another name for this, its called rebranding.
 
Email. Company directory. Searching for published applications (Internally). Delegation of Administration. Complete control over your entire platform, from the desktop to applications either based on user or computer within certain devisions (i.e. HR, Sales, etc.) (Yes, I know. In order to have this &quot;complete control&quot; you need to have an all Windows 2000 or XP environment.)

Is that enough for you?

&quot;Besides, theres another name for it already and its been around for awhile, its called Data Backup/Inventory&quot;

&quot;The idea of publishing on a company intranet every single thing within a company(from cdroms and printers on each PC to John Doe's Documents) don't represent a leap in innovation but just another attempt by MS to differentiate itself from what is already working fine as is. Theres also another name for this, its called rebranding.&quot;

What the hell are you talking about here? Are you just rambling, or are you just confused? Are you reffering to NDS? If you are, it's Microsoft implementation of a true Directory service. Also, then why bash AD? Why not NDS?

I'm not trying to bash you, but I just want to know if you really know what you are talking about. 🙂
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top