• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

will microsoft release a ipv6 for windows 2000 by 2006

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

Outlaw Wizard

Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2004
Location
eldorado ok
will microsoft relesase a update for the os for ip v6 for windows 2k by 2008 or will they discontinue support for the operating system .as i understand it all goverment coputers will be switching to ipv6 by 2008. does that mean that all the goverment computers will be running windows xp+ or lenix by 2008 . any idea what will hapen with windows 2k and ipv6. sorry i ment 2008 in the headlines
 
Last edited:
definitely over, 2003 though will probably be updated which is what is recommended now anyway.
 
No further patching will be done to Win2k by 2008. After that they abandon it completely, like has been done to Win98.

It's unfortunate, really. I may have to dump Win2k for something like XP at that point. That's a shame. I consider Win2k to be the best Windows OS Microsoft has ever released in the history of forever.
 
Captain Newbie said:
I think you will find that support for 2K will be over by 2008.
I agree from a monetary standpoint (read,grdy ********) there is no way MS woud ake 2000 support iPv6 when tey can just stop supprt foritand force everyone t buy upgrades. Though given a 7-8 year old OS by that time it is a reasonale "request"
 
I think its wrong to call them greedy ******** in this particular case. RH7.3 is no longer supported by redhat, are they greedy? No, they want people to move on from old and outdated software*. If MS supported windows 95, 98, ME, 2000, XP, 2003, windows server 2006, and windows 2008 do you really think they could continue to develop new software? Software development would be ground to a halt as they attempt to design updates and such they'd be bogged down trying to create other versions to run on the other systems. And the kicker is that even if microsoft supported them, the little guys developing all those nifty tools like ATITool, etc - wouldnt becuase they dont want to hassle with it and dont have the resources microsoft does.

No matter how much you love your win2k and no matter how great it is you have to move on sometime.

* Yes, win2k is old and outdated the same way RH7.3 is. The newer versions have better and more comprehesive features. "BUT BUT BUT they RUN slow!" thats right, it does run slower. Thats why hardware gets faster, to support the development of softwares new features. If you want the fastest possible OS, get something with a command line. "BUT, WHY NOT ADD ALL THE FEATURES OF VISTA TO WIN2k? THEN it will be fast!" no, no you see the new features are what slows an OS down, add those features to your beloved win2k, and you get vista. All slowdowns included.
 
Captain Newbie said:
Head Rat Red Hat isn't greedy, they just suck.

But I agree, twoeyes. :cool:


HAHA I completely agree, Which is why i use Debian/Ubuntu

But I wouldn't see why If microsoft doesn't add in IPv6 support, that someone else won't come up with a fix or addon.

edited for grammar.
 
Last edited:
Hmm not sure what you just said synthetic your grammer confounds me, BUT i do know that no matter you prejudices towards RH you can place any distro in place of them and its the same thing, in fact, you can place any software maker in RHs place in my post, simply because its called the software development cycle. Old versions are phased out, new ones are put in place with more features to match the hardware of the time.
 
twoeyes said:
I think its wrong to call them greedy ******** in this particular case. RH7.3 is no longer supported by redhat, are they greedy? No, they want people to move on from old and outdated software*. If MS supported windows 95, 98, ME, 2000, XP, 2003, windows server 2006, and windows 2008 do you really think they could continue to develop new software? Software development would be ground to a halt as they attempt to design updates and such they'd be bogged down trying to create other versions to run on the other systems. And the kicker is that even if microsoft supported them, the little guys developing all those nifty tools like ATITool, etc - wouldnt becuase they dont want to hassle with it and dont have the resources microsoft does.

No matter how much you love your win2k and no matter how great it is you have to move on sometime.

* Yes, win2k is old and outdated the same way RH7.3 is. The newer versions have better and more comprehesive features. "BUT BUT BUT they RUN slow!" thats right, it does run slower. Thats why hardware gets faster, to support the development of softwares new features. If you want the fastest possible OS, get something with a command line. "BUT, WHY NOT ADD ALL THE FEATURES OF VISTA TO WIN2k? THEN it will be fast!" no, no you see the new features are what slows an OS down, add those features to your beloved win2k, and you get vista. All slowdowns included.
Last I checked the average version of red hat didnt cost 200-300$ so ya, kinda greedy. Yes it will be old by then but its a forced cost to replace something that does in fact still work.
 
why is it that everytime i get an update for my winxp i get the same update for my win2k . for a operationg system to be that different the updates seem to be verry simular . looks like to me they should support it as long as the updates remain the same.
 
XP and 2K are extremely and you're right, unfortunatly vista and 2k is a no go ;) they probably have a few more differences.

pik4cho, lets be realistic, they're a corporation and corporations need to make money, more money in fact every year or investor moral goes down and its suddenly in the news how they're tanking. Make no mistake, nearly any of these linux distros would gladly charge $200 if people would pay it. Its all about demand. Dont fret though, as soon as the windows emulators mature (wine being the most prominant at this point) and we get our own dynamic link libraries written so its legal we'll be in fine shape and microsofts iron grip on the market will waiver.
 
pik4cho, lets be realistic, they're a corporation and corporations need to make money, more money in fact every year or investor moral goes down and its suddenly in the news how they're tanking. Make no mistake, nearly any of these linux distros would gladly charge $200 if people would pay it. Its all about demand. Dont fret though, as soon as the windows emulators mature (wine being the most prominant at this point) and we get our own dynamic link libraries written so its legal we'll be in fine shape and microsofts iron grip on the market will waiver.

I direct you to my first post.

pik4chu said:
I agree from a monetary standpoint (read,grdy ********) there is no way MS woud ake 2000 support iPv6 when tey can just stop supprt foritand force everyone t buy upgrades. Though given a 7-8 year old OS by that time it is a reasonale "request"
My point is, yes I know they are a corporation, but they are still greedy to charge that much money for a forced upgrade. I do however wish linux would catch on a bit more. Well Im sort of torn in that Linux seems nice (just kinda getting my feet wet) but windows is still going strong and its what I do for a living.
 
Back