This appeared in the Wall Street Journal on February 17, 2000. It should tell all you need to know about Windows 2000.
Windows 2000 Might Be
Right for Some Consumers
By WALTER S. MOSSBERG
AND NOW, for your $32,000 question: Is Microsoft's new Windows 2000 operating system, released Thursday, the successor to: (a) Windows 98, (b) Windows NT, (c) Windows 3.1 or (d) the 1999 Ford Taurus? If your final answer was Windows 98, the company's consumer operating system, you're being logical, but you're wrong. The correct answer is Windows NT, an operating system for businesses.
Despite the confusing similarity of their names, Windows 2000 and Windows 98 are entirely different products, meant for entirely different groups of computer users. Windows 2000 is a corporate operating system, aimed mostly at big companies and organizations. Microsoft is actively discouraging home users from even trying it, because it wasn't designed to be compatible with a lot of consumer-type software and peripheral devices.
Instead, Microsoft is hoping that people using Windows 98 at home and in very small businesses will upgrade to yet another version of Windows now being developed. It's called Windows Millennium Edition, or Windows ME for short (it's pronounced Windows me, unfortunately). Windows ME won't be widely available until the fall.
HOWEVER, AFTER TESTING Windows 2000 in my home and office for several months, I am recommending it for at least some consumers, under certain circumstances, for three reasons. First, Windows 2000 seems, in my tests, to be a very stable and reliable operating system. It never crashed on me. Second, switching to Windows 2000 doesn't require retraining, because its interface is almost identical to the one in Windows 98, and even has a few nice added consumer-type features, like a built-in viewer for digital photos. Finally, and most important, Windows 98 is so unstable and unpredictable, its quality so poor, that many consumers are desperate for an alternative. And the alternatives are scarce.
The forthcoming Windows ME may be more stable than Windows 98, but it is still written on the same underlying computer code, which limits how reliable it can be. The rival Linux operating system, available from multiple sources, is quite stable, but it is difficult to install and use unless you are a techie, and has severe compatibility problems. And today's Macintosh operating system, while a little better than Windows 98, is very old and still crashes. Apple is developing a new operating system, which looks awesome, but it won't be fully rolled out until year end. So that leaves Windows 2000.
All of this matters because operating systems control many of the computer's underlying functions, including how they run programs and interact with add-on hardware. Windows 98 often gets overwhelmed in juggling these things. But Windows 2000 is built to handle them smoothly and to protect the computer from crashing just because a single program fails.
THERE'S A CATCH. Windows 2000 is able to do this because it wasn't designed to work with everything in the computer store. It refuses to run the oldest programs, or any program that hasn't been certified as compatible. And it won't run peripheral devices, such as printers, unless the special programs that link them to the PC, called drivers, have been written for Windows 2000 or NT.
So which individual users should consider switching to Windows 2000? Well, if you're frustrated with Windows 98, and you mainly do routine, mainstream tasks with your PC, such as running Microsoft Office, surfing the Web and doing e-mail, you're a candidate for Windows 2000, although you won't be using the numerous corporate-administration features Microsoft built in. You should also be using only standard, popular peripherals. Don't even consider switching if you're a heavy game player.
Even if you fit the profile, I don't recommend you do a straight upgrade from Windows 98. I tried this on five computers, and in every case some key functionality, such as the modem, printer or DVD movie player, became inoperable, mainly for lack of compatible drivers. Unless you are very technically inclined and willing to hunt all around the Web for new versions of programs and drivers, I suggest you buy a new PC preloaded with Windows 2000. That's costly, but the outlay is offset a bit because you'll save the $219 price of buying Windows 2000 separately.
In my tests of Windows 2000, I found that compatibility with consumer software and peripherals is better than Microsoft implies, and is likely to increase. I randomly chose software to test, and found Windows 2000 easily handled such uncorporate products as Mavis Beacon Teaches Typing, the World Book encyclopedia, Sierra Complete Publisher, and the Common Application for applying to colleges. It handled my Palm Pilot and a Visioneer OneTouch scanner. But it didn't work with the Hewlett-Packard Photo-Smart P1100 printer or the Kodak Picture Maker printer, at least with the drivers I had. Music Match Jukebox, my favorite MP3 player, also didn't work right, although an upgrade is in the works.
Microsoft has set up a Web site that lets you check whether your stuff is compatible with Windows 2000, though I found that the site isn't always accurate. It's at microsoft.com.
Microsoft is already tweaking Windows 2000 for greater compatibility. It will be offering small patches for Windows 2000 over the Web to make more programs run properly.
Most consumers will probably be stuck with the low-quality Windows 98 until Windows ME appears, assuming that new system is even worth adopting. But if you're angry enough and fit the profile above, Windows 2000 is a viable alternative now. |
