Quote:
Originally posted by Kadath
Heh. It would be better to say that, of the OSes that MS has released, 95, 98 and XP are extremely weak when compared with 2000/2k3.
However, NT has two letters...and rules.
|
Concur bro. w2k and w3k are nice, and those others are weak. i am also quite fond of nt.
Quote:
Originally posted by Pragma
You, sir, are clinically insane. As a long-time system administrator of NT, there are many things it does and "rules" is not one of them.
|
'Rules' is subjective. Maybe 'blows everything else away,' would be better. All in all w2k and w3k (not widely in production yet) have been quite stable, relatively speaking, to all this home networking, TCP port, wireless craze. XP and all those other garbage OSes like ME or 98se are/were rediculous. You want hardened, given me a 3.51 server and see if you can get in
Quote:
Originally posted by Xsas
differences?
|
The actual difference here, is you cannot connect an XP home workstation to an Windows domain (AD or otherwise).
Why do you ask?
-bear