YIPEE, a Windows 2000 thread

[john3347]

I am glad to see this thread. I must be one of the only 3 people in the world that are still using Windows 2000. I have some old software (remember 8 character file name limitation?) that does what I need better than anything since that will not run well even on XP. I also have a flatbed scanner that scans better than any of the current multifunction scanners now available. I also find Windows 2000 to be the most stable and generally "smoothest" OS ever from Redmond. Guess what! I am still receiving security updates for this OS. Were it not for lack of support by application developers, I would still be using this as my primary OS.

[cleshe]

I too still run 2000. however, these days it's pretty slow.It's dead stable though, unlike this one!

[john3347]

At our age, it becomes important that we get the job done more so than how fast we get it done. (I'm speaking in reference to computers, of course) So a second or two here and there is no big deal, especially when the alternative is instability. I'm 68.

[reghakr]

I just fired up my 2000 Pro also!!

I've said in the past that I wish Windows 7 looked like 2000, but will all the new security features.

Definitely rock solid.

Congrats on User of the Month Tandem

[john3347]

Thanks reghakr! You do realize that 2000 is, as of only a couple of weeks ago, still getting regular security updates, don't you? No more Service Packs or non-security related updates, but still getting regular security updates. Far and away the most stable of any Microsoft OS ever, including XP and Windows 7. I virtually NEVER have a screen freeze or website fail to open in 2000. It is an occasional occurrence in XP and 7 and frequent occurence in Vista.

Are there not third party applications that will plug at least most of the security holes that may still exist in 2000? I have never had any problems with malware of any type on any OS I have ever used, but I know that some OSs were very "open". I just was never a "target".

[Mike]

Your faith in 2000 is interesting. In an IT environment it is a nightmare to deal with, because it is usually installed on dinosaur hardware. On a server network, it is increasingly difficult to manage, and thousands of kernel-level security flaws were patched when XP was released. What if I told you an entire investigative unit is still using Windows 2000 with 128MB of RAM? One of the employees can't use our server at all, because the netlogon service has been completely corrupted. That's just a hypothetical.... He may have even put in a request 6 months ago for new equipment but it has gone unanswered... hypothetically speaking of course... But those problems pre-date my existence at such an orgnization... it might be the first time an IT guy entered the room in 4 years.

[john3347]

My current installation is not on full dinosaur hardware (Pentium 4 processor and 1 GB ram), but dinosaur hardware is attached to it. I have a Mustek EP600 Plus flatbed scanner that performs circles around any of the current crop of multi-function printer/scanners. Mustek abandoned support for this scanner prior to XP. (It is interesting that within the last 2 or 3 years they have published a workaround to make the scanner work with XP, but I have not tried the trick) I also have a graphics program that is WAYYYYYYYY more intuitive and easy to work with than any of the current crop of photo tools that are currently available. (I have tried ones like Paint Shop Pro Photo, Photoshop essentials, and just find myself unable to do with them what I can do with Pro Image Plus. Pro Image Plus will only handle 8 character file names and will install, but runs very poorly, on XP and will not install on Vista. (Interestingly, it will install on Windows 7, but runs poorly as on XP.) I do not do any professional photo work, but I am the member of the family that takes most of the family pictures that get distributed around. I have Office 2003, including Publisher and Visio installed and a non-network printer (HP P1100 - also a dinosaur that performs circles around current printers that I could afford), Malwarebites and Avira and other than about 12,000 photos, not much else. Due to my lack of expertise, I am unable to get this computer to network well - file sharing - but it connects to the internet with Ethernet cable and IE6 provides internet access.

As I said in a previous post, this is the most stable and reliable computer I own, or ever have owned.......by a large margin. Long live Windows 2000!

As a side note, I find virtualization and dual booting, etc. quite complicated and troublesome (perhaps clumsy would be descriptive) for my simple mind. I much prefer to assemble a computer for each OS and use a KVM switch to switch between boxes. Just makes everything very simple and uncomplicated. 3 of my 8 computers are a "bank" of computers consisting of Windows 2000, Windows XP (Main computer), and a "play" computer which "samples" various Linux versions, but is currently "sampling" Windows 7. (There is also a Vista box over in the corner that miserably failed to prove its ability to replace XP. This one being the most UN-stable OS I have ever used, including the beat-on, abused Millennium)

[krypto]

my work still uses windows 2000 pro we so need and upgrade lol

[john3347]

my work still uses windows 2000 pro we so need and upgrade lol

It is worthy to note that here, 10 years later, Windows 2000 is still being updated. When one considers that Windows 2000 was really a business only OS and only represented a small percentage of the total Windows installations and is still being updated, they can realize that XP will be a viable OS for many years to come. Those who fortell the demise of Windows XP by predicting non-support in a matter of months are just farting in the wind. Oh well, XP isn't the subject here.

[Victor]

2000 was a good computer. Now is Windows 7 a lot better