Using MJ on Windows 2000

comconk · Post by **comconk** » Sun Feb 15, 2009 1:12 am

Not supporting Windows 2000 is a huge mistake for MJ. Over 50% of the PC platforms still run Windows 2000 Pro- the basis for XP. This is a significant segment of PC users to ignore. It makes no sense to support MAC OS and not support 2000 since there are more 2000 users world wide than MAC users.
From what I can see- other users of the forum have successfully ran MJ on 2000 with only 5 lines of code in one file.

This is precious little effort and expense for the return it will reap.

Come on -MJ - get smart

TimSH · Post by **TimSH** » Tue Feb 17, 2009 7:31 am

You're kidding, right? Windows XP was released more than 8 years ago. It may be very easy to make it run on Windows 2000, but opening that can of worms creates a support nightmare. They have enough issues dealing with support as it is.

I don't have hard numbers to dispute the 50% figure you state for machines running W2K, but I've been in IT for 20 years and that number is hard for me to believe. I can't think of a single organization that still uses W2K. In fact, most I'm connected with have actually implemented policies banning the use of W2K on their networks for security reasons.

mberlant · Post by **mberlant** » Tue Feb 17, 2009 7:54 am

About half of the enterprises I work with prefer Windows 2000 Pro over Windows XP, and all of them shun Vista. Global integration is significantly less convoluted with 2000 than XP, especially when working with non-roman character sets. I have yet to encounter a single organization that moved from Windows 2000 to XP for security reasons. Organizations I work with remain safe from harm primarily with well managed human-oriented security protections; namely, don't do something insecure or you will be out of a job. It is not particularly difficult to protect against viruses, intrusions, etc., when you employ people who don't require draconian operational constraints to behave professionally.

Windows XP was first released 25 October 2001, which is well more than 8 years ago -- not.

comconk is right on target in stating that the embedded base of 2000 users is too large to ignore. And, considering that 2000 and XP are substantially similar engines, there is no good reason for preventing the installation package from installing on 2000.

Browncoat · Post by **Browncoat** » Wed Mar 18, 2009 7:39 pm

mberlant wrote:
comconk is right on target in stating that the embedded base of 2000 users is too large to ignore. And, considering that 2000 and XP are substantially similar engines, there is no good reason for preventing the installation package from installing on 2000.

I'm with you...I'm an old W2kP holdout primarily due to that activation nonsense.....and with my NFR CD I can load time and time again and there are no restore points for viruses to hide in and it is the same NT5 kernel,as you said. Only recently have I found the AntiWPA patch and am considering the move to XP Pro but W2kP gives me everything I want plus ages ago I accidently discovered that the Plus pack[themes.exe] from my '98 CD worked in 2000.....allowing for the same level of desktop customization,including replacing .wav files for Windows events.
So there is no reason for them not to let MJ work on my preferred OS.

mberlant · Post by **mberlant** » Wed Mar 18, 2009 7:51 pm

There is no technical reason to prevent use on Windows 2000, but there is a huge business reason. MJ have calculated that the vast majority of their target market use Windows XP Home as their OS, and that another large segment have been stuck with (sorry, they enjoy) using Vista Home. By limiting MJ to these two OSes they significantly reduce the information they need to put into the help chat scripts, which significantly reduces their cost of training those people and the price they have to pay for that company's service.

Browncoat · Post by **Browncoat** » Thu Mar 19, 2009 12:23 am

Well, I'm glad I'm reading this forum and one other before I buy...as for
VOIP in Canada Primus has a softphone system for 9.95CDN per month,so its just a matter of seeing the pros and cons before I buy....may still keep the cell so I can receive incoming when the PCs are powered down but I hate Rogers 30cents a minute for long distance on the cell and time overage charges.

mberlant · Post by **mberlant** » Thu Mar 19, 2009 12:28 am

Keep reading here. There are a couple of less expensive Canadian VoIP providers mentioned here within the last few days. One of them reportedly requires a valid PQ or ON address and phone number to get their best deal.