Microsoft is cunning
-
Microsoft Turns Up The Heat On Windows 2000 Users
Companies that rely on Windows 2000 face tough, end-of-lifecycle choices as Microsoft pushes upgrades to Windows Vista, 2003, and Longhorn Server.
By Brian Livingston
InformationWeek
Dec 15, 2006 09:31 AM
With the recent release of Microsoft's newest potential cash cows, Windows Vista and Office 2007, the company is expecting a wave of upgrades from users seeking the latest functionality. But what if you're not looking for new bells and whistles? What if you want to keep your old operating systems, such as Windows 2000, running as long as possible?
Microsoft isn't making it easy for you. Office 2007 and the software for the company's much-hyped Zune music player won't install on Windows 2000. As other new products emerge from Microsoft in 2007 and beyond, more and more of them are likely to leave Windows 2000 out of the party.
Which of these installation restrictions are caused by a real lack of capabilities in Windows 2000, however? Are any of them merely a "squeeze play" by Microsoft to convince buyers that it's necessary to immediately upgrade all PCs to Vista and all servers to Server 2003 or the forthcoming Longhorn Server?
One example of this conundrum is Microsoft's Windows Defender program. This antispyware program can be downloaded for free, but it will only install on Windows XP, Server 2003, and higher. The application won't install on Windows 2000, according to Microsoft's own product documentation.
Users have reported, however, that this is simply an artificial rule built into the Installshield package that copies Defender files to disk.
The installer contains a condition defined as VersionNT > 500. (Windows 2000 is technically considered version 5.0 of Windows NT.) Admins who've removed this condition using Orca, an Installshield editor, say Defender then installs and runs fine on Windows 2000. (For information on editing Installshield .msi files with Orca, see Microsoft Knowledge Base article 255905.)
Full article
An even better reason to turn down Microsoft products.
-
agree to it.
-
When I couldn't install msn live on windows 2000, its already a start.
-
dont trust windows? but windows like a very good os. i hear macintosh like damn lousy.
-
Mac is not lousy, just that users don't know how to use.
Some people actually know how to use Linux better than Mac, even though they are both Unix. -
This is the lamest excuse that people can give not to use macOriginally posted by ndmmxiaomayi:Mac is not lousy, just that users don't know how to use.
Some people actually know how to use Linux better than Mac, even though they are both Unix. , i mean how hard is it to learn to operate an already simple to use OS?I am a user of both windows and mac and i learnt how to use the mac Os in like 3 days.It is just that they are lazy and whether they are willing to learn 
-
lazy ppl pay more money
-
I don't know. As you said, it's the lamest excuse.Originally posted by orionlight:This is the lamest excuse that people can give not to use mac , i mean how hard is it to learn to operate an already simple to use OS?I am a user of both windows and mac and i learnt how to use the mac Os in like 3 days.It is just that they are lazy and whether they are willing to learn
Well, it's sort of true, if you have lots of computer knowledge. But if you don't, switching can be a hard thing. -
MS is too lame la... only want our pocket empty only
-
does this mean that i can install mac sofwares on linux?Originally posted by ndmmxiaomayi:Mac is not lousy, just that users don't know how to use.
Some people actually know how to use Linux better than Mac, even though they are both Unix.
another qn: now that macs are intel, can i install mac on my pc?
i can use both mac n pc 2
... but the cmd key.... -
Nope, although both are Unix, the operating system is different.Originally posted by asdfzhao:does this mean that i can install mac sofwares on linux?
another qn: now that macs are intel, can i install mac on my pc?
i can use both mac n pc 2 ... but the cmd key....
Macs are intel, but you still can't install Mac on PC, simply because Apple made it an illegal thing to do. You can install Windows on Mac though. -
The Addition of Intel processors onto the Apple computers made the choice of switching between Windows and Mac possible. As for Windows its a thing made for its own. Many open source OS users prefered the older computer systems without all the complicated add-ons tailored for Windows but still many applications (e.g media player, web browsers and so on) have to be sourced for and mounted before you can do what you wanted with the computer operating through open source OS.Originally posted by chanff8:Nope, although both are Unix, the operating system is different.
Macs are intel, but you still can't install Mac on PC, simply because Apple made it an illegal thing to do. You can install Windows on Mac though. -
sian... so that means i m still stuck on windows....
-
seriously, i feel very lost using a mac.Originally posted by orionlight:This is the lamest excuse that people can give not to use mac , i mean how hard is it to learn to operate an already simple to use OS?I am a user of both windows and mac and i learnt how to use the mac Os in like 3 days.It is just that they are lazy and whether they are willing to learn
of cuz dats like 15 minutes la.. while waiting for the queue in apple center. -
You don't need to be a rocket scietist to know how to use a mac, heck it's all on your own part,there are tonnes of idiot proof tutorials that you can find on the net.The hardest problem to overcome is the one sitting between the keyboard and the chairOriginally posted by ndmmxiaomayi:I don't know. As you said, it's the lamest excuse.
Well, it's sort of true, if you have lots of computer knowledge. But if you don't, switching can be a hard thing.