Dilbert and Win XP

[Dos_Box]

Now if only we could get these blown up and plastered all over UK schools and businesses. I do, however, envisage that in 5 years time Simon will be begging us not to remove and archive XP related posts

[Arcath]

The next cell schould be him turned round saying

"i use windows 2003"

[Dos_Box]

I am still surprised that many here have Server 2000 based networks, and even more shocked that some of their servers are so old they came installed with it!

[nephilim]

We had a 2000 network for our curriculum until last August!

[Little-Miss]

Makes me feel a little better....2003 here lol!

[bossman]

I am still surprised that many here have Server 2000 based networks, and even more shocked that some of their servers are so old they came installed with it!

Yeah so what you gonna do about it then!!!!
8 years old and still going strong!!!
Don't need to be bleeding edge just effective and efficient which we are!!
Be shocked be very shocked!!!

We take care of our own and we say when and where and How!!!
Get over it!!!

We run Linux also, integrated right across the board does that shock!!!

Who says you have to have Server 2008R2 with powershell to be able to run an effective network I still know people who run NT4 and they have very effective and efficient networks, give me good reasons why we need to be bleeding edge and upsetting our endusers with problems................NOW!!! or else you too will be assimilated into the Bossman team hehe!!!

We also have another network in the wings for September but will be sorry to see the old one go as it has been a very good friend of ours giving us 70072 hours of service which equates to 8 years albeit 8 hours short due to downtime...............yes you read it right 8 hours in 8 years and 4 of those was because we relied upon an outside source to configure our MIS server and they didn't do such a good job so now we commission all our own and manage all our own with no SLAs.

Those figures speak for themselves so don't diss server 2000 SP4 it is solid

[ICT_GUY]

Server 2008 and xp here, looking into buying win 7, as in giving it a slight nod in its direction and acknowledging its existence.

[cookie_monster]

2003/2008 and XP clients here. I don't have a problem with people running an old 'supported' OS but NT4 I know it's still out there and it's solid performance wise but it's an unsupported security nightmare. After July 13, 2010 Windows 2000 server will be in the same boat.

[TwoZeroAlpha]

Server 2003 here with all Xp clients. I'm looking towards more Linux integration but it's a spare time (I know.. what's that?) think rather than a development priority.

[bossman]

Projection of 1 year for 2008R2 and windows 7 ultimate for the clients as it stands barring any BSF problems!!

[36Degrees]

2003 and XP here, no immediate plans to change. I can't see the point in buying new equipment needed to run the latest OS when it's just to do the same day to day stuff, especially as there is a budget / funding crisis.

Exactly as the above!

[DaveP]

The next cell schould be him turned round saying

"i use windows 2003"

Create your own Dilbert punchline/joke:

[SYNACK]

Those figures speak for themselves so don't diss server 2000 SP4 it is solid

Of course it's solid, it was chiziled into stone back at the beginning of time , seriously though it was the first server OS I ran and it was alright but personally I wouldn't want to use it now if I had the option. Do you even still get bug fixes for 2000?