Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Windows Operating Systems Software Microsoft IT

End Of Support for Windows NT 4.0 505

Posted by timothy from the I-never-supported-it-at-all dept.
IdleMindUI writes "This month is the last month that hotfixes for Windows NT 4.0 will be released. Security fixes will only be released to Microsoft customers with Custom Support Agreements. Custom Support Agreements are still available for customers that need them and can be obtained by contacting a Microsoft rep. More information is available on the NT 4.0 support lifecycle site."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

End Of Support for Windows NT 4.0 More

End Of Support for Windows NT 4.0

Comments Filter:
  • Quick. Download the patch here [linuxiso.org]

  • I have one positive remark (Score:5, Funny)

    by testing124 ( 772675 ) on Tuesday January 11, 2005 @10:14PM (#11330577)
    At least we will not have to continue reading stories counting down to when Microsoft finally ends support for it.

  • Thank God this is over ! (Score:5, Funny)

    by SlashingComments ( 702709 ) on Tuesday January 11, 2005 @10:15PM (#11330584)
    I think MSFT is moving towards bigger and better future by "incorporating" features and algorighms from other small vendors and inventors.

    We just make sure the MSFT's R&D Division (commonly known as 'Apple') stays in the game ...

  • abandonware (Score:5, Funny)

    by moose5435 ( 761162 ) on Tuesday January 11, 2005 @10:16PM (#11330591)
    Does this mean NT4 is considered 'abandonware' now?

    • Re:abandonware (Score:4, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 11, 2005 @10:50PM (#11330908)
      If by 'abandonware' you mean it is now free, then no. However, if by 'abandonware' you mean, abandon hope, all ye who use NT4, then yes.

    • Re:abandonware (Score:5, Insightful)

      by eclectro ( 227083 ) on Tuesday January 11, 2005 @11:50PM (#11331338)

      Laugh as you may, Microsoft's number one competitor is itself with people hanging on to old software and systems.

      Prime target for the penguin.

      • Re:abandonware (Score:3, Insightful)

        by __aafkqj3628 ( 596165 )
        Prime target for the penguin.

        Or since most of the consultants brought in would probably be MCSE's (or equivalent), they now have more power to grab a bigger pay-cheque from those companies with huge upgrade and maintenance costs.

  • If only... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 11, 2005 @10:16PM (#11330596)
    If only we could expect a Linux company to support their distribution as long as Microsoft supported NT 4.

    • Re:If only... (Score:4)

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 11, 2005 @10:22PM (#11330661)
      When Microsoft lets you upgrade to new versions without paying another license fee, let us know.

      • Re:If only... (Score:3, Interesting)

        by bconway ( 63464 ) *
        So it's better to be forced to upgrade every 6 months or risk losing support than to have a single product supported for 8 years? Talk about vendor lock-in...

      • Re:If only... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by EnronHaliburton2004 ( 815366 ) on Tuesday January 11, 2005 @11:45PM (#11331304) Homepage Journal
        When commercial Linux vendors let you upgrade to new versions without paying another license fee, let us know.

        Most software companies do that, it's not unusual at all.
      • "When Microsoft lets you upgrade to new versions without paying another license fee, let us know."

        When RedHat or Novell lets you do this, let me know.

        Remember, in the enterprise, Linux doesn't mean "throwing up a copy of Fedora."

        Linux in the enterprise means a stable, supported product like NDL, SLES, or RHEL. And those products aren't free.

    • Wait, Microsoft... support? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Penguinoflight ( 517245 ) on Tuesday January 11, 2005 @10:53PM (#11330933) Journal
      Microsoft commonly waits months before they fix a found announced vulnerability. In the past Microsoft has attempted to ignore vulnerabilities, forcing security heads to make public announcements.

      Dont be fooled by the statistics, NT4 hasn't been supported for a while. When was the last service pack for NT4?

      The difference between support on linux and support on windows is mostly statistical. Look at debian, gentoo, even freebsd. You can upgrade to stable packages (maybe not gentoo) dynamically without running a time wasting installer.

      I personally dont like these automated tools, but I'd probably use them before windows update on a critical security network.
    • ...you can always hire someone to maintain it. Once you are sure a version is stable and conforms there is rarely anything you need to do beyond hardware failures. With Windows, you need much more because everything is out of your hands because they have all of the source.

      I think NT4 was a fine Desktop system. NT4 Server turned out to be NT4 Desktop with a few DLLs changed around and turned out to be a fairly robust system as well. All systems have to pass into legacy.
    • If only we could expect Microsoft to provide the source code so those who wanted to stay on the old version could do so, while fixing their own bugs.
    • Redhat and other commercial Linux vendors should pass people who want to stick with legacy distributions onto to independant contractors. There's many thousands of people who would love to support your Linux needs and get paid for it.
    • It is a bit unfortunate that MS offered more support for NT than RH would for RH 5.0 and try getting suppor for Mandrake distros before 9.x--prety thin on thr ground I'd guess. To be fair MS is huge and sitting on a few billion so I thing they can foot the bill for the support. I do tend to cut Mandrake some slack being they had to pull themselves out of bancruptcy protection and all.

      Ultimately, we don't need to expect a Linux vendor to have as long a support cycle. One thing that is different is that t

  • Heh (Score:4, Insightful)

    by dolo666 ( 195584 ) on Tuesday January 11, 2005 @10:17PM (#11330602) Journal
    Custom Support Agreements are still available for customers that need them and can be obtained by contacting a Microsoft rep.

    That's like buying a betamax, no? If you're running NT 4, you could be running something else.

    • Re:Heh (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Billly Gates ( 198444 ) on Tuesday January 11, 2005 @11:00PM (#11330986) Journal
      Have any idea how many older systems that run Windows3.1, SunOS, SCO/MS Xenix, or other obsolete platforms?

      A decade ago my old man had a friend who still used a TRS-80 that I would make fun of. Why?

      Because all his data on tapes could not be transferred to a modern system.

      In the business world if its not broke why fix it?

      Also the layoffs and understaffing due to the .com crash has many IT shops understaffed. They do not have the time or budget to upgrade such systems. Most CEO's and CFO's after the .com phase seriously wonder if there is any return at all with upgrading software? So it stays the way it is until it hurts the bottom line.

    • Re:Heh (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Lumpy ( 12016 ) on Wednesday January 12, 2005 @06:31AM (#11333195) Homepage
      If you're running NT 4, you could be running something else.

      really? cool please tell me what OS can run my servers that each use SCSI mpeg decoder boards (24 decoder boards per server) run the commercial spot insertion software I use, and is no more difficult or even less difficult to maintain?

      Oh wait, you can't. The vendor has no plans to move from NT 4.0 because W2K is considered unstable to them still for anything but workstations.

      MOST of your TV commercials on cable TV are broadcast to you using NT 4.0 and NT3.51 (or in some cases DOS)

      and there certianly are noi plans in the near future (5years) to replace them.

      I have several Pentium I 133 mhz servers that can play 24 seperate and different DVD quality mpeg2 videos all at once. each server makes the company around $11,000 an hour in ad revinue.

      NT4 and even NT3.51 are still very useable operating systems, and are still in use be large amounts of companies making large amounts of money off it.

  • It will be interesting (Score:2, Interesting)

    by BJZQ8 ( 644168 )
    It will be interesting to see how many people take the Linux plunge and break from the swirling vortex of regular, forced product updates. I am betting very few, unfortunately. It's just too much of a leap for most people...when Windows XP/20XX offers such a warm fuzzy UI feeling.

    • It will be interesting to see how many people take the Linux plunge and break from the swirling vortex of regular, forced product updates. I am betting very few, unfortunately. It's just too much of a leap for most people...when Windows XP/20XX offers such a warm fuzzy UI feeling.

      The look & feel of mmc.exe is so much different than the old NT 4.0 admin utilities that it might take me a while to find my way around an NT 4.0 box - wonder how quickly it would come back to me?

      Oh, and wasn't it cool how

    • Re:It will be interesting (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Phexro ( 9814 ) on Tuesday January 11, 2005 @10:29PM (#11330712)
      It seems to me that anyone still running Windows NT 4.0 in 2005 is pretty successfully avoiding the particular "swirling vortex" you mention.
    • It will be interesting to see how many people take the Linux plunge and break from the swirling vortex of regular, forced product updates. I am betting very few, unfortunately. It's just too much of a leap for most people...when Windows XP/20XX offers such a warm fuzzy UI feeling.

      I switched from NT to Samba running on Debian over a year ago. I'm not stuck relying on some company to deliver on-time updates. I've never had a virus infection. Oh, and the only time I need to reboot is to update the kernel (w

    • Re:It will be interesting (Score:5, Insightful)

      by SunFan ( 845761 ) on Tuesday January 11, 2005 @10:32PM (#11330743)

      Actually, this is an opportunity for everyone who isn't Microsoft, not just Linux.

      • Re:It will be interesting (Score:4, Interesting)

        by oconnorcjo ( 242077 ) on Wednesday January 12, 2005 @12:04AM (#11331433) Journal
        Actually, this is an opportunity for everyone who isn't Microsoft, not just Linux.

        What other vendor keeps supporting an OS 8 years after release and 5 years as a legacy OS?

        Certainly not any linux distribution. I run Linux on my machine and it is still on fedora core 1. I refuse to update the machine to another core (due to RedHats cavalier approach to Fedora) and need to upgrade soon to another distro because I really like getting regular security updates from a reliable source.

        When NT 4 was first out I was running RedHat 5 which I then had to upgrade to Redhat 7/8 and then I jumped to fedora core 1. Does RedHat even support 7 anymore?

        My wife is using a win 2000 machine and it has been getting regular updates since the year 2001 and I expect her to get regular updates probably till the year 2008. I only WISH a Unix/Linux vendor had the support MS does for thier legacy products!

        I would not consider this bad press for MS.

    • I'm going from Windows 98 to Mandrake Linux, any tips for people doing so? You're saying people should get out of the MS bubble so lets see what advice you got for us :)
    • It will be interesting to see how many people take the Linux plunge and break from the swirling vortex of regular, forced product updates.

      Which "forced updates" are those ? You do realise you're talking about people still using an OS released nearly 9 years ago, right ? How many people do you think there are still out there running Redhat 3 ?

    • It will be interesting to see how many people take the Linux plunge and break from the swirling vortex of regular, forced product updates.

      Swirling vortex? This is how you define an end to a product cycle which has been around over a decade? If you are running NT4 and have not upgraded since the start, then why start now? How is this nonsense insightful? Oh yes, it is a M$ bash. Duh.

      I am betting very few, unfortunately. It's just too much of a leap for most people...when Windows XP/20XX offers such a wa
      • My worry in taking an NT4 box to 2000 was the worm of the week. I was in no way eager to screw around with something that is working. I count on patches, backups, antivirus, and other measures to protect me from having a bad day. There won't be anymore patches for NT4. It's wormfood.
    • are you saying that linux does nto have regualr forced updates? did you forget the whole libpng3 vs 2, glibc vs libc , xvid vs divx fiascos? I wont even get into the change in binary formats. Every having used linux since the mid 90's i've seen my share of painful forced upgrades. Forced in the sense that people just stopped writing apps for the old system. I think that is the way it should be. Without the forced upgrade to XP, something like ME would be the standard.

  • Now is the time to gain ground! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by MarcQuadra ( 129430 ) * on Tuesday January 11, 2005 @10:19PM (#11330624)
    right now is THE time to move in on all those businesses still running NT 4 and sell Linux/SAMBA boxes.

    Use the line:

    It'll be an even better domain controller, and if a user comes in with an exploited laptop you can be safe knowing that your PDC isn't hosed by it.

    I've been using SAMBA as a windows PDC for several years now, I had one setup that was so sucessful that I started charging them for all the months I didn't come and fix it (it was so reliable I had to switch from a charge-to-fix to a service contract).
    • Use the line:

      It'll be an even better domain controller, and if a user comes in with an exploited laptop you can be safe knowing that your PDC isn't hosed by it.

      I used the line:

      You can avoid Active Directory.

      That worked.

      -dameron

      • Right. So you want to *avoid* a system that makes centrally managing users and machines much easier ?
        • NDS is many leaps and bounds better than active directory.

          I am still puzzled why America chose a bloated and buggy Microsoft implementation that if I recall created 20x as much data and caused synchronization nightmares without serious lan upgrades. Of course my knowledge is from 99/2000 in a novell shop so it may be outdated.

          I do not like supporting Samba because it gives Microsoft the advantage.

          Why do you think corporations love IE despite security concerns? Its because you can do things like integrate
        • Well AD has it's ups and downs. Where I work we're finding that a lot of the appliances and databases we want to use would work much better if we used OpenDirectory from the start, Active Directory is great because it's a 'turnkey' solution, but when you need flexibility, seek something else.

          Also, I think Windows is a total PITA to run in the server room, it really isn't a good server platform from my experience. My experience with Linux and BSD involves a lot of -waiting- while Windows seems to involve a

  • Clarification for the vagueness (Score:5, Informative)

    by Rick Zeman ( 15628 ) on Tuesday January 11, 2005 @10:20PM (#11330643)
    That's NT 4 Server. NT 4 Workstation was EOL'd over a year ago.

  • Makes Sense to Me. (Score:5, Informative)

    by MBCook ( 132727 ) <foobarsoft@foobarsoft.com> on Tuesday January 11, 2005 @10:21PM (#11330660) Homepage
    Windows 2000 was released on Feb 17th, 2000.
    Windows 2003 was released on Apr 24th, 2003.

    A replacment to NT 4 was released, followed by a replacment to THAT, and NT 4 has still been getting support for a year+ after that. I'm a bit suprised that NT was still supported without needing those special contracts up untill now.

    For reference, 2K will get "mainstream" support (cost-per-incidient, free hotfixes) untill Jun 30 of this year, and "extended" stupport (hourly cost, pay for hotfixes) untill Jun 30, 2010. Hotfixes are free for everyone untill '07. I can't find End-of-Life dates for Windows 2003.

  • New machines still being built to use NT4 (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 11, 2005 @10:25PM (#11330682)
    We are still building new servers at work (a bank) to use NT4. By the time we are finished certifying Win2000 for internal use it will be 2007 at least. We still have a few dinosaurs running Solaris 2.1 (!!!) and no one wants to upgrade them because they run mission critical applications which don't allow for any downtime.
  • I guess I look in the closet/garage/trunk/any other weird place/ and see if I have a registered copy of NT that I really care about. You know.... I I cared about any of that crap I would know where it was.

  • end of online support 2007? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Doppler00 ( 534739 ) on Tuesday January 11, 2005 @10:38PM (#11330807) Homepage Journal
    "January 1, 2007 Online support is no longer available."

    What do they mean by this exactly? Does this mean they pull the website for Windows NT 4.0 and deny that it ever existed? I know a many companies still run Windows NT boxes stand alone (in a lot of industrial control systems), denying access to existing patches or online help for this OS doesn't make too much sense. I could see many Windows NT boxes still running for the next 10 years or so.
    • Likely this means the end of knowledge base updates to it. The info will still be there, but it will be static (unless of course, some third party takes up the job of maintaining the knowledge base)
    • Or, Windows NT 4.0 *networked* (in an industrial control system), as is the case with a couple of machines I have to support at work--need to be able to efficiently move AutoCAD drawings to the things.
      Upgrading these isn't really an option--upgraded OS will usually require very expensive upgraded controller software. Doesn't make much business sense when what you've got runs the machine just ducky.
      I keep trying to tell myself that OS variety is a good thing (and in general, it is, my home machines run Linu

  • All in all .. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by bizitch ( 546406 ) on Tuesday January 11, 2005 @10:43PM (#11330846) Homepage
    I know the obligitory jokes and MS bashing will now commence - but IMHO this platform represented a major breakthrough for MS. It was the first truely "ready for prime time" platform from Redmond.

    NT4 Workstation was state of the art at the time - NT Server 4.0 was pretty damn stable and was the first really big Novell killer.

    Sure it wasn't perfect - Sure it wasn't secure - but give it its props - this was a decent platform

    • Re:All in all .. (Score:3, Interesting)

      by swillden ( 191260 ) *

      NT4 Workstation was state of the art at the time

      Yeah? In 1996, when NT4 was released, I had two workstations on my desk. One was a PC running NT4 and the other was a Silicon Graphics Indy, running IRIX (don't remember the version number). There was no comparison between the two.

      Performance, stability, security, graphics, UI, remote administration, development tools... I can't think of a single area in which NT could have been considered on par with IRIX, much less better. Oh, I guess NT4 did have A

  • Quoth the submitter:

    > This month is the last month that hotfixes for Windows NT 4.0 will be
    > released.

    Microsoft Sez:

    > January 1, 2005 Beginning on this date, Pay-per-incident and
    > Premier support are no longer available. This includes security
    > hotfixes.

    That means it is already toast. Next security bug is end of the road for NT unless you sign onto their 'special migration program' with undisclosed terms and conditions and that go through '06... almost certainly Jan 1, 06.

    Still not e

  • Oh, Great.... (Score:2, Funny)

    by geekfat ( 848401 )
    First the pdp8e and now this! Who can we trust for longterm support anymore???

  • Is anybody reading this using NT4? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Saint Stephen ( 19450 ) on Tuesday January 11, 2005 @11:02PM (#11331010) Homepage Journal
    Just for giggles is anybody reading this currently using NT4?
    • Was using it at my last project (until end of last year). It was hard because we were getting all kinds of minor incompatibilities. The thing is that this was for FX spot/derivatives at a fairly big bank.

    • Re:Is anybody reading this using NT4? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by SmurfButcher Bob ( 313810 ) on Wednesday January 12, 2005 @12:16AM (#11331507) Journal
      I use it exclusively on the back-end I built back in '99. Paying out 1.1 mil for what is in truth just new icon rendering lib and a folder view .dll is downright stupid, especially when there will be *no* change in actual performance or function. Yep, walk the dependancies on why stuff won't run on NTS4 and "requires" 2K+ - 99 times out of 100, it's shell UI crap. 1.1 mil for... exactly what I have, but now with new color schemes and stupid, obfuscating, irrelevent wizards... on rackmounted iron who's KVMs aren't touched but twice a year to see if they work. Thank God 2k3 comes preloaded with AOL, MSN, WMP and Solitare. All of that trash is extremely appropriate in a real production, really.

      So yeah, I still use NT4. I don't upgrade my toaster because a new one comes out, I don't upgrade my car stereo when a new one comes out, I don't upgrade my lawnmower when a new one comes out, I don't upgrade my lightbulbs when a new one comes out, and I don't upgrade a server just because a "new" one comes out.

      Call me crazy, but I only trash these things when doing so will accomplish a measureable objective. I'm also one of the few retards who dares to run NTS4 without a firewall - I've got one that's a quad-homed box, hosting two T1s and a DS3. No firewalls, just straight from the NICs into Adtrans etc. I put it on the line back in mid '99, and to date it has yet to be compromised or faulted, despite hosting both IIS4 and Exch55, and running some rather unique and complex software in each. Why the f*** would I want to swap that out... well, a Linux solution aside, why *else* would I want to swap that out... no "current" MS product is going to do any better than what I've got now, and in fact will probably do worse. Much worse.

      I don't repaint my car every year, I don't replace the doors on my house every year, I don't buy a new bed every f*ing year, and I don't toss a solution that will continue working perfectly unless there's a damned good reason. "New screensavers" and "wizards" doesn't cut it.
  • Looks like it's time for anyone still running NT4 to give these guys [pcworld.com] a call if they need a HotFix.
  • ... my poor customers who can't enter into any kind of support agreement other than me keeping their systems running?

    There is software that won't run on 2k or XP. Some small companies can't afford to upgrade their software, with the economy the way it is.

    At least we have Ghost to take working snapshots...

    Kenny P.
    Visualize Whirled P.'s

Slashdot Top Deals

Every nonzero finite dimensional inner product space has an orthonormal basis. It makes sense, when you don't think about it.

Close