eXPeriences with XP (from a Sysadmin's point of view)

[Statica]

This is in follow-up to a ton of queries that u folks have about Windows XP.
DISCLAIMER: These are just my experiences in analyzing the potential of XP for deployment instead of Win2k on some of our systems where I work and freelance as a sysadmin. This is in no way a complete list of the "features", and is indubitably biased.

One of my Win2K machines crapped out, so I spent the better part of yesterday seriously analyzing XP, with a view to replacing a few Win2K professional machines with the XP Professional. Started about 1600 hrs (wherever I am) last evening.

Its now 0900 hrs, and I type to you from within my Win2k machine and the XP CD is safely stored in the garbage.

From a sysadmin's point of view this OS is the worst PoS to have come out from Redmond bearing the tag of a "Professional"/"Corporate" OS. Let me go through some of the points that have prompted me to do what I have done:

1. Improved interface? Its nothing but a MAC/NeXT/Linux knockoff. The tradeoff in system load makes it such a choice. I'd rather have the traditional look with TEXT than this "fancy" nonsense and Pictures
   
2. The new wizards and babysitting of the user .. I've had it with that! Am sick to h*ll with the system telling me what I need.
   
3. I'd be extremely interested to know if ANYONE out there will use the new START MENU for extended periods of time. Maybe it is conditioning, but that thing was cumbersome .. extra clicks to get to where I wanted to go.
   
4. Hardware support, may be advertised as improved but I find that everything that needs support has Win2k drivers out there.
   
5. Here's the nightmare I faced .. user configuration. Gates and I had a bit of an argument.
   During configuration (mine was an upgrade from win2k->XP) it asks for a user and I gave it, good enough. Then at the end of setup it allowed me to add about 5 more users (a la Linux) and I was pleased and tried 2 more.
   EXCEPT XP CONFIGURES ALL USERS AS ADMINISTRATORS WITH BLANK PASSWORDS BY DEFAULT! That is the most lame bit of security I have ever seen.
   Fine, I tried to convert them to Power Users (w. legacy priveleges), but XP's babying me insisted that I either have it as a standard user or as an administrator. Finally I had to resort to adding users manually into other groups.
   (Oh yeah what is that M$ user doing on my machine??)
   And then it just wouldnt co-operate .. the XP's easy wizard identified the user as an Unknown user! To add any priveleges I had to literally type out the user names manually .. something like OBELIX\user1;VITALSTATISTIX\user2;.... yeah thats gonna sit real well with sysadmins.
   Since I wouldnt use what they insisted I use, I was forced with doing things thus.
   
6. WHERE IS THE ADMINISTRATOR LOGIN? Yeah sure they give you a ton of administrator priveleged users, but where is the Adminstrator login? I cant create an Admin login, it says it exists, I cant change to it because it insists on displaying pictures of users rather than login names. If my OS wants me to use a su then I need to know it first. There was in fact no way I could login as root.This is a very alarming state! Maybe not to the home user but imagine the corporate setup.
   
7. The TCP/IP has improved with firewalling and alternate credentials and bridging, but with all the sockets, I doubt whether that is going to be of any comfort
   
8. The admin tools have grown better, and I had grown fond of the Windows Messenger in the short time I had used it as a desktop (this was prior to yday's installation). Am glad they provided Netmeeting for backward support.
   
9. Trust me when I say that the animations and the pictures grown tired real fast, unless you like having things flashing at you all the time.. I hope M$ paid Macromedia for allowing them to use Flash to design a UI
   
10. the rest of the features are well popularized, and anyways I have begun to lose interest in my rant
    
    I wont be using XP, even though I found its desktop capabilities as organized enough. The kernel itself seems to give the system a lot of stability, but just stability isnt everything, in trying to break the myth of Win9x and ME's instabilities, M$ forgot one thing.. the OS must also be secure and usable.
    I will be using Win2k for a long time to come
    
    Ultimately it will be a choice based on aesthetics vs semantics of using this OS. I dont think that just aesthetics is a powerful enough motive for it to go into the corporate installation.

[Hpro]

You have my vote on that one - you just said what I experienced with XP -..This really makes me feel much better..

[python134r]

Good Post! Im still in the enamored stage but agree with you on much of what you posted. In fact Im gonna read it again. Good Work!

[southrk]

I hate to say it but i love XP, but i did find this, to get xp to work good you MUST do a clean install, none of this upgrading stuff. 2000 is in the trash here, i would take XP over 2000 any day. this is just the opinion of an avid gamer and Java TA.

[Floppyman]

Thanks for the info statica, I'm using win2k as well and after reading your post I see no need to upgrade to XP. I guess I'll still be using win2k for a while and spending some more time learning linux.

[Statica]

I was enamored as well with the Win XP as a desktop OS... its err neat. I'd never seen that grafical an interface with a Microsoft OS. And they did a good job of copying from the best that is currently out there. Yeah the device support out of the box is there .. but that also makes the OS itself very top heavy. Remember folks .. "neat" isnt really something most would want in an OS

southrk:
I understand that you like XP. But look at it from a sysadmin's PoV. FYI: I did try stand alones .. and XP over Win 2K .. XP over Win 98 (for desktop testing) and XP plus Win2K (dual boot) .. there are way too many intrinsic local holes that need to be patched. Doubt whether XP at the current stage of evolution will be a candidate for a widespread deployment.

[moonlight burner]

Have make a couple of installation on Win2k to join domain, didn'nt find any much change as with 9X machines, except for the prompt to enter administrator username and password. It was pretty cool OS. But for XP Pro, didn't even quite install the evalution version , ie still in the garbage.

I did load XP Office Professional edition on Win98SE and had problem shutting down. Tried most of the million things why Win98 can't shut down, and finally got fed up and upgrade Win98 to win2k Pro, and the problem was resolve.

I would agree with Statica, win2k is much better than the XP Pro, at least up to now.

[HAL9000]

Found some new tidbits that may change your evaluation. The so called "administrator" account is not a full admin account. Hit CTRL-ALT-DEL twice to get a new login screen. Log in as administrator with the password that you used during the setup. Now you have access to many more administrator options. Haven't had the chance to check out all the details, but it might be worth a second look.

[cobra]

I just installed XP dual boot on my win2k gamer machine. A lot of eye candy for the masses, but I share the same opinions as you guys, I like mine with useful features not useless garbage.
I think I'll stick with win2k for awhile

[moonlight burner]

Just some side-line infomation, Microsoft is selling Win XP Pro and XP Office aggressively over here, I've attended two seminar on XP products for this month. Yesteday, I got another call, asking me to attend another Window XP Pro on Friday !!! They promised some more demos and tricks, I think Microsoft is pushing it real " close to my face ", everywhere you go and see , they make sure you see "XP", even in your dreams !!!