General discussion

Locked

Windows 2000: To do or not to do

By Erik Eckel Contributor ·
What's the chief reason an IT Consultant's shop should (or shouldn't) migrate to Windows 2000 Server as its NOS platform?

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

16 total posts (Page 1 of 2)   01 | 02   Next
| Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

Windows 2000: To do or not to do

by vancottom In reply to Windows 2000: To do or no ...

It would depend on what NOS you are using now, and how much of an investment you have in it. I upgraded from NT 4.0 to 2000 server, and found it to be much more stable, and MUCH easier to administer once I learned the way around AD. I also run a Novell 5.1 system (and have been doing Novell since version 2.15) and like the way it runs too, although there were a lot of instability at first (read that ABEND). Bad enough we had Novell engineers in to look it over. No problems with 2000, so far.

Collapse -

Windows 2000: To do or not to do

by Erik Eckel Contributor In reply to Windows 2000: To do or no ...
Collapse -

Windows 2000: To do or not to do

by DC1 In reply to Windows 2000: To do or no ...

TCO. With built in functionality like RIS, QOS, and Terminal server 2000 provides in one package what a shop would need several servers to do. Also the benefits of GPO's make administration much easier.

Collapse -

Windows 2000: To do or not to do

by Erik Eckel Contributor In reply to Windows 2000: To do or no ...
Collapse -

Windows 2000: To do or not to do

by fredf In reply to Windows 2000: To do or no ...

I wouldn't touch 2000 with a 10-foot pole, at least not until MS has found and fixed the bugs you normally expect in a new rollout. Before I recommend upgrading to one of my clients, I'll make sure they do a thorough cost analysis -- upgrading the memory and hard drives on the servers and end user machines will cost a bundle.

Collapse -

Windows 2000: To do or not to do

by Erik Eckel Contributor In reply to Windows 2000: To do or no ...
Collapse -

Windows 2000: To do or not to do

by ejtucker In reply to Windows 2000: To do or no ...

Erik,

I would consider the chief reason to upgrade to be the "dogfood" component. If you are an IT consulting firm which sells itself on the microsoft platform you will in the not too distant future be dealing with projects involving Windows 2000. Alternately you are going to be answering questions about the platform well before that.

If you are in a position to intelligently answer those questions and give your own experiences as real life examples (because you ate your own "dogfood") you are going to be in a much stronger position to gain the client, make the sale and deliver the project properly.

Collapse -

Windows 2000: To do or not to do

by Erik Eckel Contributor In reply to Windows 2000: To do or no ...
Collapse -

Windows 2000: To do or not to do

by jun1cez1 In reply to Windows 2000: To do or no ...

A WHOLE LOT OF REASONS WHY YOU SHOUL

FUNCTIONALITY,
DEPENDABILTY,
INTEGRITY,
BROAD SUPPORT FOR NETWORKS (SAY ENTERPRISEWIDE OR EVEN BETTER, WORLDWIDE), HIGHER SECURITY (LAN TO WAN),
BETTER INTER-OPERABILITY WITH OTHER NETWORKS(TO GET THEIR BUSINESS),
RELIABILITY,
MANAGEABILITY,
BROADER HARDWARE SUPPORT,
AND MOST IMPORTANT, THE MOST HIGHLY SECURED NOS FOR A CENTRALIZED ADMINISTRATION OF A LAN OR WAN.

WHY NOT?
WELL, ITS KIND OF EXPENSIVE FOR A SMALL NETWORK. THE TCO ALONE IS MORE THAN ENOUGH TO SEND TO CHAPTER 11. BUT IF YOUR INTO AN EXPANDING NETWORK, ITS WORTH IT.

GEE, NOW I SOUND LIKE A MICROSOFT MAN.

JUN

Collapse -

Windows 2000: To do or not to do

by Erik Eckel Contributor In reply to Windows 2000: To do or no ...
Back to Desktop Forum
16 total posts (Page 1 of 2)   01 | 02   Next

Related Discussions

Related Forums