No third service pack for Windows Server 2003

hmmmm.....

I doubt the wisdom of this move. Given how big a footprint Win2003 still has out there, and how big a leap it is from 2003 to 2008, I have to question Microsofts wisdom.

Not to mention how many post SP2 patches there are.

Another shit decision

When they are going to learn that they CAN'T force users to upgrade by cutting off support of existing ones, if the product are good, we will upgrade without them having to spent a cent on marketing, didnt they learn any lessons with Vista ? many of our home users moved to OSX simply because they can no longer (some didnt know where to look) find XP machines, and many moved AFTER they purchased a Vista machine, freaking idiots running M$ only think of $$$

Microsoft is now...

Bordering on plain irresponsibility, Win2003 is where many people have their "soup". And dammit it is not a bad product.

Lately, seen the Vista debacle It seems that MS doesn´t realize what exactly is people doing with computers and their OS.

Customers do not like playing with the OS they like to work with it, I understand the case for MS trying to get more money out of his customers.

But what is the point of trying to force people out of what works is tried and tested?

By the time they realize what are they doing to their own the penguin will be waiting for them at the door.

Most people I know are already playing with *nix boxes for one reason or another.

Interesting progression.

WinNT 4 got a total of 6 service packs.

Win2k got a total of 4 service packs.

Win2k3 gets a total of 2 service packs.

Win2k8 has a total of 1 service pack so far. (While it's called SP2 the RTM code is Vista SP1.)

Either product quality is going up or MS hates us all.

If everything was still physical servers

Then there'd be little issue to this. You're going to be buying new hardware every four years or so regardless; and your last year or two all server hardware came with 2008 which you simply used downgrade rights to install a working OS.

But see, most organizations have gone the VM route. Which means we don't need to reinstall the entire server when we phase out the old hardware. At least, this is true of the servers that are "commodities", ie those that don't perform a function that requires a physical machine (high end database facilities, PBX servers that use internal cards to support the lines, etc). Most other things like file services, print services, medium to lower end databases, access controls.. err, everything really other than high end data systems I guess.

I can see some serious harm coming to Microsoft over this crap. First, XP is still so successful that nobody's interested in their vista or their Win7 platforms - they're like cheap disease-ridden hookers in some rice paddy out in china somewhere compared to a $1000 a night "escort" in central Manhattan.

2008 looks really cool. Some of it's features are actually quite attractive, and hell I guess 2008-only AD would rock my boat. But is it worth going through the effort of rebuilding all my 2003 servers? Hell no. If you want to really force my hand I guess I'd rather spend the time building out Linux alternatives - everything we need will run on some flavor of Linux or other.

Easier to patch, better support, longer lifecycles.. holy crap wasn't that Microsoft's schtick once upon a time???

Paris, coz she probably knows a few $1000 dollar escorts from her school days...