So is XP. Win2K is NT 5 while XP is NT 5.1.
Posted on 06/02/2005 7:09:51 PM PDT by Panerai
Microsoft has drawn some criticism after confirming that it will not make the next version of Internet Explorer available to users of its Windows 2000 operating system.
In a blog posting at the end of last week, a Microsoft employee confirmed that the company would not be releasing IE 7 for Windows 2000, as this would involve a lot of work for an operating system that is in the later stages of its lifecycle.
"It should be no surprise that we do not plan on releasing IE 7 for Windows 2000. One reason is where we are in the Windows 2000 lifecycle. Another is that some of the security work in IE 7 relies on operating system functionality in XP SP2 that is non-trivial to port back to Windows 2000," according to the blog posting.
Although Windows 2000 will be supported until 2010, at the end of June of this year Microsoft will no longer accept requests for design changes or new features for the operating system.
A number of Microsoft blog readers were unhappy to learn that IE 7 would be unavailable on Windows 2000.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.com.com ...
As I said, it dies on the vine becausre it floated like a lead baloon..
I like tne new Netscape 8.0 also.
Me too. But "missing out" on IE is like "missing out" on herpes, so it's no skin off my nose.
I run XP Pro on my main system, mainly for the native digital photo printing built right into Explorer. My daughter's system, and my laptop have Win2k, and I have another box that I run Gentoo Linux on. As of March of this year, when an app was released that sync's my Pocket PC 2003 equipped PDA to my Linux box, I could totally live without the XP box. I have been a firm believer in Win2K since it was released, and I hate that MS has such limited support for it.
I loaded ver 1.4 to start out with, but have since updated to the latest version. I don't know what it's called. I have had tremendous help from a friend of mine who is a Linux nut, and went with Gentoo on his reccomendation. So far, so good. Installing it was a major pain, but it's been worth it. The thing that I've found with Gentoo is that it is what you make it. You have to spend some time optimizing it for your specific needs, but once done, you have a rock solid platform. Also, I might mention that my Gentoo box is a P-III 700, w/ 128 MB RAM, and my XP box is a P4 2.2 Ghz w/ 512 MB RAM. The Gentoo box is faster in ALL comparable apps than the XP box is.
I'm am very happy with my Win 2000 Op Sys. It's the most stable MS system Iv'e ever used. Must be because it's based on NT. I have XP pro on several other systems and they are not nearly as stable.
I guess I will move to Foxfire then.
So is XP. Win2K is NT 5 while XP is NT 5.1.
I have found that Linux runs much faster than WinXP (XP is kinda bloated) and is more stable. I have found no real difference in speed or stability between Win2K and Mandrake, though. In fact, my Mandrake has crashed on occassion, while my Win2K blows out maybe once a year.
XP has many great features and I like it, but it is pretty unstable and can crash or have 'exceptions' for no particular reason.
Win2K is probably the most stable OS I've run yet (since DOS) and that includes Linux and OS/2.
Anyone can say anything on an internet blog these days. Better source would be from Microsoft itself.
Whenever I elect to "Send the Error Report" to MS, it never has a solution to my particular problem(s). I wonder whats the point of the error reporting function?
I would suggest just loading it on a spare box and playing with it. I had an advantage in that I had my friend I could call if I got in a tough spot. It's worth doing, and it's ablity to be customized intoduces you to Linux command lines alot quicker than the other Linux builds. I'm working on one at work right now that I am going to secretly put on our network and customize the desktop to look like XP and see if anyone notices. If they don't, I will most likely re-build 5-6 systems from spare parts, and add them as I complete them, and have several Gentoo boxes quietly providing internet access, email, print jobs, etc.
True. But who am I gonna believe, the guys who SELL the product or the people who acutally USE it.
Overall, I still think MS is better for the average user, but Linux can compete if it becomes easier to install and supports 3rd party software without all the 'dependancy' issues.
I feel the same way and have stopped using that feature.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.