V
Virus Guy
The "recent release" of Vista? Is this journalistic bullshit?
In typical tech-journalistic style, the author here doesn't mention a
couple of key facts - like a huge percentage of existing systems
aren't capable of running even the most conservative version of Vista,
or that the true end-of-life for Win-2k is 2010 as mentioned deep
within this page:
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/891861
"The end-of-life date for Windows 2000 will be no sooner than January
1, 2010."
Note the issue regarding Windows Defender and forced incompatibility
with Win-2K.
---------------------------------
http://www.informationweek.com/shared/printableArticle.jhtml?articleID=196700071
Microsoft Turns Up The Heat On Windows 2000 Users
Companies that rely on Windows 2000 face tough, end-of-lifecycle
choices as Microsoft pushes upgrades to Windows Vista, 2003, and
Longhorn Server.
By Brian Livingston, InformationWeek
Dec. 15, 2006
With the recent release of Microsoft's newest potential cash cows,
Windows Vista and Office 2007, the company is expecting a wave of
upgrades from users seeking the latest functionality. But what if
you're not looking for new bells and whistles? What if you want to
keep your old operating systems, such as Windows 2000, running as long
as possible?
Microsoft isn't making it easy for you. Office 2007 and the software
for the company's much-hyped Zune music player won't install on
Windows 2000. As other new products emerge from Microsoft in 2007 and
beyond, more and more of them are likely to leave Windows 2000 out of
the party.
Which of these installation restrictions are caused by a real lack of
capabilities in Windows 2000, however? Are any of them merely a
"squeeze play" by Microsoft to convince buyers that it's necessary to
immediately upgrade all PCs to Vista and all servers to Server 2003 or
the forthcoming Longhorn Server?
One example of this conundrum is Microsoft's Windows Defender program.
This antispyware program can be downloaded for free, but it will only
install on Windows XP, Server 2003, and higher. The application won't
install on Windows 2000, according to Microsoft's own product
documentation.
Users have reported, however, that this is simply an artificial rule
built into the Installshield package that copies Defender files to
disk.
The installer contains a condition defined as VersionNT > 500.
(Windows 2000 is technically considered version 5.0 of Windows NT.)
Admins who've removed this condition using Orca, an Installshield
editor, say Defender then installs and runs fine on Windows 2000. (For
information on editing Installshield .msi files with Orca, see
Microsoft Knowledge Base article 255905.)
Regardless of whether Microsoft apps are unnecessarily shutting out
Windows 2000, the writing is on the wall. The company has fairly
strict policies defining when it stops supporting older products. In
the case of Windows 2000, the end of what Microsoft calls "mainstream
support" came in June 2005.
To understand the concept of mainstream support, you need to
understand that there are three lifecycle policies that affect
Microsoft products:
Microsoft offers five years of "mainstream support" and an additional
five years of "extended support" before a business product falls into
online-only support.
Consumer products, such as Windows XP and Service Pack 2, get five
years of mainstream support. After that, support will only be provided
by Knowledge Base articles online. The "consumer products" category
includes Microsoft Dynamics, a line of offerings formerly known as
Microsoft Business Solutions.
Annually updated products, such as Microsoft Money and Encarta, get an
even shorter leash. They're supported for three years.
Business software, such as Windows 2000 and Windows Server 2003, enjoy
five years of mainstream support plus an additional five years of
"extended support," after which they drop into online-only support
purgatory. It's this kind of software support that most affects IT
organizations.
Extended support, according to Microsoft, includes the continued
development of critical security patches and the availability of paid
support. It doesn't include the Redmond company taking requests for
new design features — a luxury that's reserved for products that are
still in the mainstream-support phase.
Some nonsecurity hotfixes will also be provided by Microsoft outside
of the initial five-year mainstream period. However, according to the
Microsoft Support Lifecycle Policy FAQ, companies must purchase an
"extended hotfix agreement" within 90 days of the end of mainstream
support. That leaves in the lurch a lot of companies that didn't
immediately leap to buy such a contract.
Microsoft's policies can lead to some big frustrations for companies
that have major investments in Windows 2000. One of the biggest
headaches at the moment is the lack of a patch to update the meaning
of Daylight Saving Time on Windows 2000.
The beginning and ending dates of DST in the United States will be
significantly altered in 2007, thanks to an act of Congress. Various
changes also affect other countries. Western Australia made an
official switch to daylight time on Dec. 3, 2006. The last-minute
action by a state parliament afforded IT admins in that country only
12 days to adjust their computers' time.
Despite the importance of accurate timekeeping in many computer
networks, Microsoft doesn't plan to release a patch that will update
Windows 2000 systems to the new time-zone definitions. A patch was
posted on Nov. 21 for Windows XP and Server 2003 (see KnowledgeBase
article 928388). But a version is conspicuously absent for W2K.
Paul Chinnery is network administrator for a community hospital in
western Michigan. With 38 servers, all running Windows 2000, and
almost 300 workstations, 40 percent of which still run W2K, he's
furious that Microsoft won't provide admins in his situation with such
a simple patch.
"With the number of organizations in this country that are still using
Windows 2000," Chinnery said, "it's a dereliction of Microsoft's duty
to its customers not to put out a patch for the time-zone issue."
Patients in his hospital might not actually die if a computer's clock
was off by one hour, he said. But government regulations (not to
mention common sense) require accurate records for such things as
surgeries and medications, where one hour can definitely make a
difference.
In this case, there's a workaround that Windows 2000 admins can apply.
A utility known as tzedit.exe, which is included in the Microsoft
Windows Resource Kit, allows manual editing of Registry keys that
define the beginning and ending of DST. (For information, see
KnowledgeBase article 886775.)
Chinnery says he's accepted the fact that he'll have to use the
utility to fix his Windows 2000 systems. But, lacking an easily
deployable patch, it means he must walk around to tweak each machine
in his organization. This is a chore he doesn't feel he should face.
Other new software titles upset him as well. Chinnery wants the better
reporting features that are expected to be found in Microsoft's
forthcoming version 3.0 of Windows Server Update Services (WSUS). But
the Redmond software giant says its new patch-management software
won't run on Windows 2000. Chinnery says he might switch to Patchlink
Update, a competing product that supports a much longer list of
operating systems than WSUS.
Why doesn't Chinnery upgrade his machines? "If we go to Windows Server
2003 and then Longhorn Server comes out, it might be more money on top
of more money," he says. "Being a small health-care organization,
there's only so much money to go around."
Microsoft has a monopoly share of desktop operating system sales and
can pretty much call the shots when it comes to support. By contrast,
software publishers with smaller market shares tend to take a more
benign view of customers that want to keep their older products
running unchanged.
Sun Microsystems, for example, has an official policy that offers
support, paid and otherwise, for its Solaris operating system for at
least five years after a particular version stops being sold.
Microsoft's five-year mainstream period begins the first day its
products ship.
Sun's product-support lifecycles run for at least five years after an
operating system ceased shipping, not when it started shipping.
Sensing that some of its corporate customers aren't too keen on
change, Sun also maintains at least two major releases of Solaris on
sale at all times. At present, Solaris is available in three versions:
8, 9, and 10.
According to Chris Ratcliffe, Sun's director of Solaris marketing, the
Santa Clara, Calif., company is actually still supporting users of
version 2.6. That product is more than 10 years old and hasn't been
commercially available since 2002. But Sun's "vintage support" period
means the operating system is fully supported through 2007, Ratcliffe
says.
Even after 2007 ends, it isn't curtains for the older technology.
"After the end of vintage support," Ratcliffe explains, "we're
prepared to go into negotiations with customers on an individual
basis." For instance, Solaris version 2.5.1, which first shipped in
1995, is continuing to be supported by Sun on a case-by-case basis, he
says.
Why do companies want to keep using such old software? One big reason
is that newer software, besides the labor cost of testing and
installing the changed code, often demands more expensive hardware, as
well. It's cheaper in many cases to let the old stuff keep running.
Other companies simply don't feel any need to tamper with important
systems that are working as desired. "People who are shipping hundreds
of thousands of packages a day tend to build scanning solutions,"
Ratcliffe says, by way of example. "You build 'em and you leave 'em."
Financial firms also tend to rely on the same software year after
year.
Many users of Windows servers, Ratcliffe says, are switching to Sun
and other providers to get more predictability and stability. One
typical customer recently replaced all of its Windows-based file and
print servers with machines running Solaris 10, he says.
Conclusion
Microsoft's lifecycle support policies are well defined. If you can
live with the Redmond company's five-year horizon, when much of the
support for its products ends, you can persevere. If not, other
vendors can offer you a much longer window.
In typical tech-journalistic style, the author here doesn't mention a
couple of key facts - like a huge percentage of existing systems
aren't capable of running even the most conservative version of Vista,
or that the true end-of-life for Win-2k is 2010 as mentioned deep
within this page:
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/891861
"The end-of-life date for Windows 2000 will be no sooner than January
1, 2010."
Note the issue regarding Windows Defender and forced incompatibility
with Win-2K.
---------------------------------
http://www.informationweek.com/shared/printableArticle.jhtml?articleID=196700071
Microsoft Turns Up The Heat On Windows 2000 Users
Companies that rely on Windows 2000 face tough, end-of-lifecycle
choices as Microsoft pushes upgrades to Windows Vista, 2003, and
Longhorn Server.
By Brian Livingston, InformationWeek
Dec. 15, 2006
With the recent release of Microsoft's newest potential cash cows,
Windows Vista and Office 2007, the company is expecting a wave of
upgrades from users seeking the latest functionality. But what if
you're not looking for new bells and whistles? What if you want to
keep your old operating systems, such as Windows 2000, running as long
as possible?
Microsoft isn't making it easy for you. Office 2007 and the software
for the company's much-hyped Zune music player won't install on
Windows 2000. As other new products emerge from Microsoft in 2007 and
beyond, more and more of them are likely to leave Windows 2000 out of
the party.
Which of these installation restrictions are caused by a real lack of
capabilities in Windows 2000, however? Are any of them merely a
"squeeze play" by Microsoft to convince buyers that it's necessary to
immediately upgrade all PCs to Vista and all servers to Server 2003 or
the forthcoming Longhorn Server?
One example of this conundrum is Microsoft's Windows Defender program.
This antispyware program can be downloaded for free, but it will only
install on Windows XP, Server 2003, and higher. The application won't
install on Windows 2000, according to Microsoft's own product
documentation.
Users have reported, however, that this is simply an artificial rule
built into the Installshield package that copies Defender files to
disk.
The installer contains a condition defined as VersionNT > 500.
(Windows 2000 is technically considered version 5.0 of Windows NT.)
Admins who've removed this condition using Orca, an Installshield
editor, say Defender then installs and runs fine on Windows 2000. (For
information on editing Installshield .msi files with Orca, see
Microsoft Knowledge Base article 255905.)
Regardless of whether Microsoft apps are unnecessarily shutting out
Windows 2000, the writing is on the wall. The company has fairly
strict policies defining when it stops supporting older products. In
the case of Windows 2000, the end of what Microsoft calls "mainstream
support" came in June 2005.
To understand the concept of mainstream support, you need to
understand that there are three lifecycle policies that affect
Microsoft products:
Microsoft offers five years of "mainstream support" and an additional
five years of "extended support" before a business product falls into
online-only support.
Consumer products, such as Windows XP and Service Pack 2, get five
years of mainstream support. After that, support will only be provided
by Knowledge Base articles online. The "consumer products" category
includes Microsoft Dynamics, a line of offerings formerly known as
Microsoft Business Solutions.
Annually updated products, such as Microsoft Money and Encarta, get an
even shorter leash. They're supported for three years.
Business software, such as Windows 2000 and Windows Server 2003, enjoy
five years of mainstream support plus an additional five years of
"extended support," after which they drop into online-only support
purgatory. It's this kind of software support that most affects IT
organizations.
Extended support, according to Microsoft, includes the continued
development of critical security patches and the availability of paid
support. It doesn't include the Redmond company taking requests for
new design features — a luxury that's reserved for products that are
still in the mainstream-support phase.
Some nonsecurity hotfixes will also be provided by Microsoft outside
of the initial five-year mainstream period. However, according to the
Microsoft Support Lifecycle Policy FAQ, companies must purchase an
"extended hotfix agreement" within 90 days of the end of mainstream
support. That leaves in the lurch a lot of companies that didn't
immediately leap to buy such a contract.
Microsoft's policies can lead to some big frustrations for companies
that have major investments in Windows 2000. One of the biggest
headaches at the moment is the lack of a patch to update the meaning
of Daylight Saving Time on Windows 2000.
The beginning and ending dates of DST in the United States will be
significantly altered in 2007, thanks to an act of Congress. Various
changes also affect other countries. Western Australia made an
official switch to daylight time on Dec. 3, 2006. The last-minute
action by a state parliament afforded IT admins in that country only
12 days to adjust their computers' time.
Despite the importance of accurate timekeeping in many computer
networks, Microsoft doesn't plan to release a patch that will update
Windows 2000 systems to the new time-zone definitions. A patch was
posted on Nov. 21 for Windows XP and Server 2003 (see KnowledgeBase
article 928388). But a version is conspicuously absent for W2K.
Paul Chinnery is network administrator for a community hospital in
western Michigan. With 38 servers, all running Windows 2000, and
almost 300 workstations, 40 percent of which still run W2K, he's
furious that Microsoft won't provide admins in his situation with such
a simple patch.
"With the number of organizations in this country that are still using
Windows 2000," Chinnery said, "it's a dereliction of Microsoft's duty
to its customers not to put out a patch for the time-zone issue."
Patients in his hospital might not actually die if a computer's clock
was off by one hour, he said. But government regulations (not to
mention common sense) require accurate records for such things as
surgeries and medications, where one hour can definitely make a
difference.
In this case, there's a workaround that Windows 2000 admins can apply.
A utility known as tzedit.exe, which is included in the Microsoft
Windows Resource Kit, allows manual editing of Registry keys that
define the beginning and ending of DST. (For information, see
KnowledgeBase article 886775.)
Chinnery says he's accepted the fact that he'll have to use the
utility to fix his Windows 2000 systems. But, lacking an easily
deployable patch, it means he must walk around to tweak each machine
in his organization. This is a chore he doesn't feel he should face.
Other new software titles upset him as well. Chinnery wants the better
reporting features that are expected to be found in Microsoft's
forthcoming version 3.0 of Windows Server Update Services (WSUS). But
the Redmond software giant says its new patch-management software
won't run on Windows 2000. Chinnery says he might switch to Patchlink
Update, a competing product that supports a much longer list of
operating systems than WSUS.
Why doesn't Chinnery upgrade his machines? "If we go to Windows Server
2003 and then Longhorn Server comes out, it might be more money on top
of more money," he says. "Being a small health-care organization,
there's only so much money to go around."
Microsoft has a monopoly share of desktop operating system sales and
can pretty much call the shots when it comes to support. By contrast,
software publishers with smaller market shares tend to take a more
benign view of customers that want to keep their older products
running unchanged.
Sun Microsystems, for example, has an official policy that offers
support, paid and otherwise, for its Solaris operating system for at
least five years after a particular version stops being sold.
Microsoft's five-year mainstream period begins the first day its
products ship.
Sun's product-support lifecycles run for at least five years after an
operating system ceased shipping, not when it started shipping.
Sensing that some of its corporate customers aren't too keen on
change, Sun also maintains at least two major releases of Solaris on
sale at all times. At present, Solaris is available in three versions:
8, 9, and 10.
According to Chris Ratcliffe, Sun's director of Solaris marketing, the
Santa Clara, Calif., company is actually still supporting users of
version 2.6. That product is more than 10 years old and hasn't been
commercially available since 2002. But Sun's "vintage support" period
means the operating system is fully supported through 2007, Ratcliffe
says.
Even after 2007 ends, it isn't curtains for the older technology.
"After the end of vintage support," Ratcliffe explains, "we're
prepared to go into negotiations with customers on an individual
basis." For instance, Solaris version 2.5.1, which first shipped in
1995, is continuing to be supported by Sun on a case-by-case basis, he
says.
Why do companies want to keep using such old software? One big reason
is that newer software, besides the labor cost of testing and
installing the changed code, often demands more expensive hardware, as
well. It's cheaper in many cases to let the old stuff keep running.
Other companies simply don't feel any need to tamper with important
systems that are working as desired. "People who are shipping hundreds
of thousands of packages a day tend to build scanning solutions,"
Ratcliffe says, by way of example. "You build 'em and you leave 'em."
Financial firms also tend to rely on the same software year after
year.
Many users of Windows servers, Ratcliffe says, are switching to Sun
and other providers to get more predictability and stability. One
typical customer recently replaced all of its Windows-based file and
print servers with machines running Solaris 10, he says.
Conclusion
Microsoft's lifecycle support policies are well defined. If you can
live with the Redmond company's five-year horizon, when much of the
support for its products ends, you can persevere. If not, other
vendors can offer you a much longer window.