Por: Bob Arnson
Resumen: Sometimes it takes powerful motivation to overcome an apathetic user's inertia. Does Windows 2000 have the momentum?
Sometimes it takes powerful motivation to overcome an apathetic user's
inertia. Does Windows 2000 have the momentum?
I've always liked new stuff, especially software. The latest and the greatest
bits always have the latest features and the latest bug fixes. (That it also has
the latest bugs is irrelevant and proof you're just trying to burst my bubble.)
I used to sign up for every beta test of any product that sounded interesting
and useful, from operating systems to development tools to e-mail clients.
Perhaps I'm just getting older (and therefore wiser, right?) but I no longer
jump at the chance to beta test like I used to. In fact, I no longer install the
latest and greatest released bits the first day they're available for
download. Let those younger and braver souls blaze the trail while I wait
comfortably behind until the survivors return with their tales of horror and the
first service pack or .01 release is announced. I'm still running Service Pack 4
on Windows NT because I've heard rumors about problems with SP5. I think I'm
suffering from a mild-to-severe case of software apathy.
These days, most of my apathy is toward Windows
2000 Professional, which is currently in beta at the release candidate
phase. It's safe to say that Windows 2000 will be released to manufacturing
sometime this month or next. Microsoft started pushing Windows 2000 months ago,
by making Beta 3 available for purchase as part of its Corporate
Preview Program. For US$69, the CPP gave you Windows 2000 (Professional and
Server), updates, no-fee tech support, and documentation.
I installed Windows 2000 betas, starting with Beta 2 when it was still known
as Windows NT 5.0. I didn't get very far with them, though. They were buggy
enough on my system that I couldn't imagine myself using them anywhere close to
full time. So I returned to the safety and comfort of Windows NT 4.0.
The new features of Windows 2000 just aren't as compelling as previous
versions of Windows. For example, moving from Windows 3.1 to Windows NT 3.1
gained Win32 support (granted, at the cost of a lot of legacy hardware and
software support). Windows 95 gave us a shiny new user interface and brought
Win32 to the masses. Windows NT 4.0 gave us the Windows 95 UI and NT's
stability. Windows 98 gave us more support for the latest hardware standards.
Windows 2000 basically catches up to where Windows 98 brought us a year and a
half ago. Hardware support for things like USB and multiple monitors is
important, of course. I fell in love with multiple monitors on Windows 98; it
makes sense for almost any user but for developers, no single monitor is ever
big enough for all the editor, help, and other windows needed simultaneously.
USB is fairly important now and quickly becoming more so as more peripherals
are coming out in USB versions. Mice, keyboards, Zip drives, scanners, cameras,
and so forth are already available with USB as an option. The new Visor
handheld organizer from Handspring comes with a USB cradle for synchronizing; a
serial cradle costs extra.
Therein lies the key to my apathy. I'm comfortable with Windows NT 4.0 and so
far, nothing has yet convinced me that I'd be more comfortable with another
operating system for my day-to-day work, whether it be Windows 2000 or Linux or
BeOS. Eventually, something -- probably a peripheral I just gotta have
that is USB-only -- will come along to sway me. Until then, I'll just sit back,
play with Windows 2000 and Linux and BeOS, and wait for the ones with arrows in
their backs to report in.
Respuesta del Servidor desde: ETNASC01