From: "Antti Kurenniemi" 

There's also the fact that a company who is in the business of making money
really can't support and old product endlessly. We too are using a few NT4
servers, and would like to extend their lives indefinetly (they're rock
solid), but I do understand that it had to end some day. Didn't they
already extend the deadline a couple of times?


Antti Kurenniemi
(Liked NT4, Like W2k)

"Chris Robinson"  wrote in
message news:3E87FEA1.2B5592C5{at}NOSPAMtotalise.co.uk...
> Fair point - I'm guessing they've probably thought "well, support ends
> in a year or so, so it's not really worth the effort".  Maybe they don't
> realise how many people still use NT.
>
> Chris.
>
> "Geo." wrote:
>
> > "Chris Robinson"
 wrote in message
> > news:3E840946.5942ACF1{at}NOSPAMtotalise.co.uk...
> > > Yeh - they should do that.  I'm no expert on what fixing the problem
would
> > > require but how difficult can it really be?  Win2k is
"built on NT
> > technology"
> > > afterall - just how much did they change "architecturaly"?
> >
> > In W2K they took part of NT4 and completely rewrote them from scratch to
fix
> > things they said weren't designed right, one of those was how domains
was
> > handled, they wanted it to be based on dns.
> >
> > It was a major rewrite of some sections so I have no problem believing
they
> > couldn't use the same approach to the fix. But then I'm just suggesting
they
> > take care of their customers if they don't want to do the work a second
> > time.
> >
> > Geo.
>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-4