Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tony Viola who wrote (95814)	1/12/2000 2:58:00 PM
From: Steve Lee	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

A lot of effort certainly went into MS DNS. Not sure about catching up with Solaris security. Mainly to improve scalability. By scalability I mean ease of integrating a large number of computers within the same security context, rather than the type of scalability that refers to a Wintel server being able to cope with as large and important a task that a Solaris server can cope with (that's already in the bag). That was a long sentence. I like Windows 2000. The use of DNS means you don't have to use the old WINS system anymore. That IS good news and will ease a lot of headaches for system designers. Apart from that, there are many little improvements and additions here and there to all the stuff we are already used to in NT4. It is my view that Windows 2000 will be implemented by most organisations - eventually. Changing operating systems throughout a company is not a trivial task. It is not like upgrading from Win 95 to Win 98, it involves rethinking the security, domain structure, support staff provisions, hardware requirements etc. With the new directory services, all this will have to be planned out and implemented on the servers before the desktops are rolled out. It is more complex than changing from Win 95x to NT 4 or from NT 3.x to NT 4.