03-18-2004, 11:00 AM
|
#1 |
|
Rear Admiral Upper Half
  
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: the peanut gallery
Posts: 3,909
   |
Do people still use NT server?
Or am I just going crazy?...
Management wants to use NT instead of 2k, due to security reasons. But, 2k has sooo many improvements.... bah, watever!
__________________
|
|
|
|
03-18-2004, 12:01 PM
|
#2 |
|
Captain
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: You can’t get there from here, USA
Posts: 1,797
|
I still use NT 4.X server at work. no need for us to upgrade it is just a file / print server basicly and serves our needs. and we have a headless horseman here too it is server 2003 it is to help us comply with the homeland security act and maintaing AD relationships. it dont even have a hey board it is managed at a highr leval.
|
|
|
|
|
03-18-2004, 04:04 PM
|
#3 |
|
What's Da Pho*?
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: SoCal (714)
Posts: 13,296
|
I could see problem when you can't get support for NT 4.X.
__________________
Dell Dimension 9200 | Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 (2.4GHz) | 4x1GB DDR2 | 256MB nVidia GeForce 8800GT Dell Studio 17 | Intel Core i7-720QM (1.6GHz) | 2x2GB DDR3 1066MHz | 1GHz ATI Mobility Radeon HD 4650 Intel P4-C 3.0GHz | ECS 865PE-A | 3x512MB PC3200 | 128MB PNY GeForce 6600GT 
|
|
|
|
|
03-18-2004, 04:31 PM
|
#4 | |
|
Captain
Join Date: May 2000
Location: L.A..... Costa Mesa... Whatever, Man!
Posts: 1,824
|
Quote:
No Kidding! First... M$ will be putting out security patches for Win2k long after they stop for WindowsNT (in fact, they may have already stopped for WindowsNT). And many times, NT and 2000 are vulnerable for the same reasons, so I'd stick to one that M$ is willing to support... i.e. Windows 2000. Also, hardware vendors (such as HP) have stopped supporting NT for new systems. Go with 2000, if for no other reasons than those I've mentioned (plus, you get to use AD). Dave. |
|
|
|
|
|
03-19-2004, 10:21 AM
|
#5 |
|
Fleet Admiral
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Michigan
Posts: 9,390
 |
Yeah, there are a lot of places still running NT4 because they don't have the resources (or a good reason) to upgrade, but I've NEVER heard of anyone choosing NT4 over W2K for security reasons!
Thanks seems pretty back asswards to me. |
|
|
|
|
03-19-2004, 12:53 PM
|
#6 |
|
Captain
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: You can’t get there from here, USA
Posts: 1,797
|
why not use server 2003 isnt it out?
also you want to check the HCL to make sure all your hardware will work with what ever version u choose |
|
|
|
|
03-19-2004, 01:48 PM
|
#7 |
|
Rear Admiral Upper Half
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: the peanut gallery
Posts: 3,909
|
to be honest, I have no idea how to use 2k server and Exchange 2k. Active Directory? Never used it before. And no one else here seems to know. They just told me, "Try this. If it doesnt work, fall back to NT 4." Why they have me doing this, I really don't know. Probably because I'm the lowest on the food chain, and no one else wants to deal with it.
 So anyways, NT4 with service pack 6, Exchange 5.5 is whats going on. I guess my 'assignment' is to install a mail server. |
|
|
|
|
03-19-2004, 01:54 PM
|
#8 | |
|
What's Da Pho*?
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: SoCal (714)
Posts: 13,296
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
03-19-2004, 03:10 PM
|
#9 |
|
Rear Admiral Upper Half
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Michigan
Posts: 3,672
|
i have a few clients using NT 4. I have one client that runs a large print press that is forced to use NT because the company that makes the presses only supports NT. Kinda sucks.
__________________
http://ribitch.com/ipod.html |
|
|
|
Linear Mode
