4 ms·

I know a few old time Windows IT people, when they mention NT it's usually in the same sentence as a cuss word.

by jiggy2011 14y ago

astrodust 14y ago
For a long time, NT stood for "Not Tested". Remember that Windows NT used to crash after 49.71 days when the uptime counter overflowed. Most people never noticed this because the server would crash for other reasons long before that.
- venomsnake 14y ago
  It was windows "No Thanks" in my circles. But win 2000 was a gem - I liked it much more than XP back in the day.
  - waterlesscloud 14y ago
    Win2k was as good as Microsoft got. Reliable, stable, functional. Happily that was the last Windows platform I developed for.
    - astrodust 14y ago
      Apart from the fact you had to reboot to change just about anything and there was no USB support, it wasn't bad for the era. Stable where MacOS at the time was anything but, with the no-nonsense Windows 95 theming. As far as a desktop operating system, it was a pretty good package. You didn't have the command-line tooling of Linux, but at least you could install it on your computer without having to dive into X configuration hell.
      - jiggy2011 14y ago
        Pretty sure Win2k did have USB support, though you may have needed to install a SP.
        astrodust 14y ago
        At the time the "service pack" was called Windows XP. Maybe they added it after XP came out, though.
  - jksmith 14y ago
    This is like reminiscing over days that seemed better but probably weren't. NT was fine, though I did get more bsods with it than I did with OS/2 during the time I used it. Wrote a lot of fun code using Windows 95 and 2000, but wrote a lot of fun stuff using DOS as well. Made about the same money with all of them.
kls 14y ago
Well it's kind of double edged, there where a lot of people who where forced to move from Unix workstations to NT because it supported some windows apps and companies wanted to standardize on Windows. Those people generally cuss the advent of NT. On the other hand people that where forced to try to maintain a all Windows shop with only 3.11 and 95 hailed it as a saving grace as trying to serve a Workgroup from 95 or 3.11 was an exercise in frustration so was any serious workstation type work.

I know a few old time Windows IT people, when they mention NT it's usually in the same sentence as a cuss word.

For a long time, NT stood for "Not Tested". Remember that Windows NT used to crash after 49.71 days when the uptime counter overflowed. Most people never noticed this because the server would crash for other reasons long before that.

venomsnake 14y ago
It was windows "No Thanks" in my circles. But win 2000 was a gem - I liked it much more than XP back in the day.
- waterlesscloud 14y ago
  Win2k was as good as Microsoft got. Reliable, stable, functional. Happily that was the last Windows platform I developed for.
  - astrodust 14y ago
    Apart from the fact you had to reboot to change just about anything and there was no USB support, it wasn't bad for the era. Stable where MacOS at the time was anything but, with the no-nonsense Windows 95 theming. As far as a desktop operating system, it was a pretty good package. You didn't have the command-line tooling of Linux, but at least you could install it on your computer without having to dive into X configuration hell.
    - jiggy2011 14y ago
      Pretty sure Win2k did have USB support, though you may have needed to install a SP.
      - astrodust 14y ago
        At the time the "service pack" was called Windows XP. Maybe they added it after XP came out, though.
- jksmith 14y ago
  This is like reminiscing over days that seemed better but probably weren't. NT was fine, though I did get more bsods with it than I did with OS/2 during the time I used it. Wrote a lot of fun code using Windows 95 and 2000, but wrote a lot of fun stuff using DOS as well. Made about the same money with all of them.

kls 14y ago

Well it's kind of double edged, there where a lot of people who where forced to move from Unix workstations to NT because it supported some windows apps and companies wanted to standardize on Windows. Those people generally cuss the advent of NT. On the other hand people that where forced to try to maintain a all Windows shop with only 3.11 and 95 hailed it as a saving grace as trying to serve a Workgroup from 95 or 3.11 was an exercise in frustration so was any serious workstation type work.