Re: Is Win2k still usable on new systems?

On Aug 10, 2:22 pm, <nos...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"nemo" <gnu...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in messagenews:1186763675.245775.88660@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Aug 10, 11:05 am, "rjplu...@xxxxxxxxx" <rjplu...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Aug 10, 10:28 am, nemo <gnu...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I have been using Win2k on my computers for some 5 or more years. I
like the fact that when I upgrade the hardware I don't have to buy a
new OS license. I am about to build a new computer and it occurred to
me that maybe Win2k is not supported by the hardware makers so much
now. If I buy all new components, will I be able to find Win2k
drivers for them?

I have heard little except bad about Vista, so I guess I might be
willing to give XP a try if I have no other choice. Vista is actually
the reason I want to build a new system rather than buy. Dell's
prices are not much higher than a DIY machine, but it looks like they
only provide Vista and not XP anymore. Any thoughts on Vista?

I too have been using Win 2000 for a couple of years now. I also use
XP Pro on a different machine and I'm quite happy with it. I see no
compelling reason to got with Vista. They're still working the bugs
out it and I'd wait until the first service pack comes out.If I were
you I'd just go with XP for the moment. If your going to build one
just make sure the components are Vista ready.

Thanks for the info. I would much prefer to use W2K if that is a
viable option. Of course the software doesn't go bad with time, but
if it is not supported by the hardware vendors, it will be a PITA over
the next few years.

Win2K is being kept alive by the business sector, many of
whom ignored XP and are currently ignoring Vista. Myself,
I've been running the same installation of Win2K since 12/99
on three different hardware platforms and have no plans to
"upgrade" anytime soon. It's rock solid, it runs everything I
throw at it (which is quite a bit) and I don't need to get MS's
permission to change my own hardware.

My understanding is that MS has dropped "official" support of W2k and
that manufacturers were therefore going to stop writing drivers for
new products. Am I mistaken about this?

Maintaining W2k on existing platforms is not the same as hosting it on
new ones.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: WINDOWS VISTA DELAYED AGAIN AGAIN AGAIN AGAIN
    ... if you look at the predicted hardware requirements for Vista ... to require a significant upgrade. ... I expect there to be an outcry by users for M$ to keep Windows XP on the ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: How to make Windows XP last for the next seven years
    ... down by processor-and RAM-hungry Vista. ... having to spend the money to upgrade or get new hardware. ... There's still plenty of life in your old ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: Leopard slips badly
    ... Vista is ahead of 10.0, which was - really - just a big public beta as far ... glow, RSS issues, very high hardware requirements, non-realtime indexing for ... upgrade to it. ... I have seen that with printers and even internal DVD drives ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: AS is so slow
    ... full of complainers when WM5 first rolled out, ... Many, like Bev Howard, basically have refused to upgrade, sticking with PPC ... To get the hardware I want, I accept that I have to suffer through ... give Vista the benefit of the doubt before making the same mistake. ...
    (microsoft.public.pocketpc.activesync)
  • Re: Upgrade Vista Home Premium to Windows 7 - How much $$$ this time?
    ... I'd add that hardware manufacturers are at least as much to blame for us having to upgrade some older hardware. ... They are the ones who decide whether or not to write drivers for the new OS. ... My computer came with XP MCE 2005 and the OS switch to Vista was mostly painless. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.vista.general)