All, I've held my tongue on this issue (NT 4.0 retirement as a justification) because I think there is merit to it - but in a very negative and damaging way. There is another way - using the same method, but turning it positive.
Executives NEVER like to be backed into a corner. And, to say that Microsoft has backed them into a corner is not correct. This life-cycle timeline for Win95 and Windows NT 4.0 has been advertised for some time. 18 mos to 2 years comes to mind. And, regardless - the idea that they WOULD maintain both NT 4.0 and 2000, with 2003 coming is a bit inane anyway. Your tactics would be much more successful AND retain a stronger relationship with Microsoft if you were to sell them (as well as the rest of your tech staff) on the power, flexibility, TCO, ROI (yes - they are there if you know what to measure) of MOVING to Windows 2000 rather than threatening them with gloom and doom of ending support. Or, you could just tell them that you won't have to re-boot the NT 4.0 machines on a regular schedule because the reliability on Windows 2000 is just THAT much better. No one wants to hear that they MUST move to (insert whatever here) or you won't have any support. Firstly, I know this to be a bit of a misnomer. Define support and what it means to your organization. Are you calling Microsoft regularly with support problems? No - most of you seem to come here and save the money . Are you worried about the lack of patches? Hmmm. That's an issue, if you really are applying them timely. But, how many showstoppers have come out for NT of late? There is no, and will be no Service Pack 7. Oh, but we've known that for some time. Did we go bludgeon the Executives at that time? Nope. We waited until the last minute. If any of your executives are saavy enough to do just a little bit of research, they will find out that we've known about this obsolesence for more than a month or two. Their first question would likely be along the lines of 'Why didn't you tell me this last year - or the year before when you knew or suspected this was going to be a problem?' That's the really TOUGH question to answer. And for those of you that have NOT been priming the pump on this, better have a good explanation before you go in with tales of horror. For most companies, it's a bit late to budget for a major migration. I'm not saying not to justify it. I just would caution all to not use negative tactics as your primary motivator. Believe me - most execs are a lot more intelligent than you are giving them credit for. ;o) Oh, and lastly - if you can't get it done until 2004 Calendar / fiscal year - big deal. Support is going to be available. I know that a cottage industry is going to spring up or grow to encompass NT 4.0 transitional support. Be positive - you'll get what you need much easier. Rick Kingslan MCSE, MCSA, MCT Microsoft MVP - Active Directory Associate Expert Expert Zone - www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/expertzone > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Craig Cerino > Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2003 8:06 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] E2K and DC > > > Yes --- but i will tell you. If the desire to find articles > on migration is to convince "higher-ups" of the bnefits and > ROI of migration, one of the first things I would be sure > they understood is that Microsoft will no longer provide > support for Win NT4.0 after Dec 31, 2003. That's HUGE if you > company thinks about. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Carlos Magalhaes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thu 1/23/2003 8:28 AM > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > Cc: > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] E2K and DC > > > > Hey Craig this a great thank you for the info, this is > a dev machine so it wont be on the open net. > > > > Those articles actually help one motivate a migration? > > > > > > Regards, > > Carlos Magalhaes > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Craig Cerino [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2003 3:22 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] E2K and DC > > > > Hello Carlos, > > > > If you are limited to putting everything on one machine > (DC and EXC 2K) there's not much I can offer you other than > to say - do not install any unneeded add-ons. > > There is a LOT going on on a Win2K Domain controller > and a LOT going on a Ech2K box as well. > > > > If you become vulnerable to known exploits on an > Exchange box - - your network becomes compromised as the > Exchange box is also a domain controller. > > > > There are also plenty of article out there on the > migration from 4.0 to 2K out there - -too many to site right > now - I'd recommend starting at the MS site and going through > thier KB articles on the subject first. > > > > Craig > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Carlos Magalhaes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Thu 1/23/2003 7:43 AM > > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > > Cc: > > Subject: [ActiveDir] E2K and DC > > > > > > > > Hi all , > > > > > > > > We have a test server we bought, we would like to > test Windows 2000 AD and E2K can one install these on the > same machine (we a bit low on machines) are there any issues? > > > > > > > > P.s. are there any articles or links one can got > to for motivating moving from nt4 to win2k? > > > > > > > > Thanks all > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > Carlos Magalhaes > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > .+-wȆi0g-튺+Yb顲mPi慰0൹-튺+bᰲڪf.+-j!硶 > 0j!岊or氻yثIᚊV+v* > > .+w ������Y P ������ .+j > j ory IV���+v* > List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
