[WinMac] Re: Windows 2000 FSM
Subject: [WinMac] Re: Windows 2000 FSM
From: Glen Mark Martin (glenmark[at]utxvms.cc.utexas.edu)
Date: Fri Oct 19 2001 - 14:19:53 EDT
> "Donovan, Harold" <donovan.harold@nbpub.com> wrote: I am thinking of
> replacing my NT4 servers with a Windows 2000 one. We are a newspaper
> printing two different daily's 6 days a week, going to press every 12
> hours. The NT boxes we have, have worked flawlessly for 5 years.
> Is 2000 as solid? Is there anything I need to look out for? Any
> insights would be appreciated.
>
> Thanks in advance
>
> Harold
Windows 2000 is considerably more stable than NT 4.0, and out-of-the-box
security defaults are greatly improved. Fewer reboots are also required
when making modifications to a running system (especially network settings).
On the downside, domain administration with Active Directory is orders
of magnitude more complex than NTLM (4.0 and before) domains and
requires the cultivation of considerable expertise (added complexity
being the price of added capabilities). Standalone systems or members of
NT4-style domains are no problem, though.
If you use Services for Macintosh, W2K provides AppleShare over IP,
which is handy if you need to share files with Macs on the other side of
routers which do not route AppleTalk, although problems with this have
been discussed in this forum. (On the flip side of this, Mac OS X 10.1
now has built-in SMB client support. Just installed the upgrade on my
iBook last night and haven't had a chance to test that functionality...)
Glen Martin
ITS Windows & OpenVMS Enterprise Support
University of Texas at Austin
(* but speaking only for myself *)
*** Windows-MacintoshOS Cooperation List ***
FAQ: http://www.darryl.com/winmacfaq/
Archive: http://www.darryl.com/winmac/
To unsubscribe, send mail to winmac-unsubscribe@iffy.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28
: Fri Oct 19 2001 - 14:17:52 EDT
|