News

Microsoft Releases AD Client Extension

Microsoft has developed an extension for Windows NT 4.0 that allows this platform to take advantage of Windows 2000 Active Directory (AD) features.

Microsoft has developed an extension for Windows NT 4.0 that allows this platform to take advantage of Windows 2000 Active Directory (AD) features. The “Active Directory Client for Windows NT 4.0” extension enables:

  • Site awareness (log on to the domain controller closest to the client in a network, change passwords on any Win2K-based domain controller)
  • AD Service Interfaces (allow scripting to AD and provide a common programming API to AD programmers)
  • DFS fault tolerance client (provides access to Win2K distributed file system fault tolerant and fail-over file shares specified in AD)
  • AD Windows Address Book property pages (enables changing of properties on user objects)
  • NTLM v.2 authentication (client extension takes advantage of NTLM v.2 authentication features).

For more information on the NT 4.0 client extension and to download, go to www.microsoft.com/windows2000/news/bulletins/adextension.asp.

Microsoft Corp., Redmond, Washington, www.microsoft.com.

comments powered by Disqus

Reader Comments:

Mon, Jul 15, 2002 CDSuperG San Jose

I think this has split into two separate threads. As far as Servers go, 2000 is stable and reliable and I think continued effort should be put into this product to make it better but making new versions instead of upgrades is preposterous. Things like total headless operation would be nice but I don’t need a full new version for that, do I. On the desktop side, those that done like XP, don’t have XP. Being that I work with computers all day long, my friends and family expect me to know haw to help them fix their problems too, I have finally gotten to the point where I just tell them to upgrade to XP or I cant help them any more (I went as far as to purchase XP Home for a good friend of mine from Amazon and shipped it to her). Remote assistance and event logs (like what we have had in NT for years) make 9x/ME seem feeble and useless. But consumer products and business products are not necessarily the same or we would not need so many emotional testimonials from Apple converts about how bad Wintel PC are.

Tue, Jun 11, 2002 Aris Athens, GR

Anonymous, from Anonymous,
The best OS I used from Microsoft, is Win2k. XP is STILL very immature.

Cheers.

Tue, Jun 11, 2002 Aris Athens, Greece

All the same story, I am afraid, I am into computing for 17 years, I 've been doing administration, programming, databases, and with Microsoft it's all the same story(!). Microsoft SQL Server 7, is not the same with 6.5, and not the same with 2000, same story with WFW and 95/NT/2K/XP (and so on) and so on. Microsoft has its way to keep us on our toes (big grin inserted here) and will do that I am afraid. Do I like it? No, but then, don't forget, we're into IT business, we're the people that are always into learning NEW technologies. Now, putting it into support-wise aspect, this is hell. Always having to either find new people or train the existing one... but that is microsoft. Do you drop Microsoft?.. yeah right;)
Am I sarcastic? Follow the whole story with DOJ. Need I say more?
Nope.

Have a good day people and cheers :)

Mon, Jun 10, 2002 anonymous anonymous

SuSE 8.0

Thu, May 2, 2002 Anonymous Anonymous

XP has no 98 code base at all Tony from Anchorage...

It is derived from Win2k, and enhanced -and it is a point release in reality - NT 5.1

Get your facts straigh before you make nonsense posts like these. XP Pro is by far the best workstation OS I have ever used from MS.

Thu, May 2, 2002 Anonymous Anonymous

XP has no 98 code base at all Tony from Anchorage...

It is derived from Win2k, and enhanced -and it is a point release in reality - NT 5.1

Get your facts straigh before you make nonsense posts like these. XP Pro is by far the best workstation OS I have ever used from MS.

Thu, May 2, 2002 Anonymous Anonymous

XP has no 98 code base at all Tony from Anchorage...

It is derived from Win2k, and enhanced -and it is a point release in reality - NT 5.1

Get your facts straigh before you make nonsense posts like these. XP Pro is by far the best workstation OS I have ever used from MS.

Tue, Apr 23, 2002 Leander Nelson Van Nuys

I am very happy with Windwows 2000, I think it is a very good system and the performance is good. My only complaint is that the windows operating systems upgrades and change too often. I had completed the MCP exams and was going
for MCSE exams, but decided not to go forward because microsoft change operating systems too often for my budget.
economically it do not benefit me.

Mon, Mar 11, 2002 Tony Anchorage

I like to look at the mixture of 9x and NT/2000 code bases into a single technology (i.e., XP) like this: If you've got one glass full of really good hot chocolate, and a second glass full of gutter sewage, and you poured them both into a third, larger (bloated) glass, would you be willing to drink it?

***k that. Don't converge the code. Leave XP as a media playhouse and 2K as the business choice.

Thu, Mar 7, 2002 Shane Australia

I agree with Simon of OZ, I undertaken MCSE in Win2k and it has taken me the best part of 18mths to fully understand it,
now MS is going to update again, Puts a lot of strain on IT professinals to keep up

Thu, Feb 28, 2002 Kim Arlington, Texas

One of the earlier comments talks about the absence of need for a desktop OS past Windows 98. I would beg to differ. W98 was a good operating system based on the hardware available at the time. Since then, hardware capable of bringing a real 32 bit linear memory addressing model has become affordable. Windows XP is 20 times more stable than Windows 98. It is NT like in its composition, great at multitasking, and one sloppily written application will not crash the system. Combine that with the bells and whistles of XP, and you have a bargain, and OS worth upgrading to. People should adapt to Windows XP. It is what desktop computing should be.

Thu, Feb 28, 2002 Barry UK

Simon made a very good point about MCSE qualifications. Gaining a full enough understanding of the latest OS while preparing for the exams is a painfull and time consuming business if you want to do it properly and not be classed as a paper MCSE, and yes they are still around. The MSCE qualification is fast losing its credability as no sooner is it achieved MS bring out another OS and its back to the drawing board again to plan how you study all over again. IT managers become frustrated with staff constantly having to be on courses to keep up with these changes and costs escalating both in books, course and exam fees. Come on MS think about your customers and army of MCP's and MCSE's and ask them what they want in an OS (stability, bug free, no security holes, the list goes on) and how long they think the shelf life of a product should be and stop putting profits as the number 1 priority when designing future products.

Fri, Feb 22, 2002 keegan Atlanta, GA

I was very slow to adopt Win2K. I was a very happy NT4 SP6 user and only moved up to Win2K this past August when my boot drive crashed. The wait was for three reasons: 1) I did not want to obsolete my application software; 2) I did not trust the early release of Win2K -- waiting for the first service pack or two is always advisable; 3) I did not want to obsolete the knowlege of the UI and organization of the operating system I had built-up over the years of using NT4. These, I beleive, are Microsoft's major sins, as all three reasons point to increased expenses to the end user as a major cost when upgrading a MS OS. Where is the incentive to fork over the $200+ for an upgrade license for my OS, then have to fork over several hundred more dollars for software that must be replaced, then fork over dozens of hours (read hundreds of more dollars) learning where Bill Gates, in his infinite wisdom, decided to hide all the functionality I used to get to so easily for several years? I have zero incentive to move to WinXP in its current state. The license lock-down, the snooping of my activities, the yet-another-major change in the UI and application organization all add up to "No way!" when it comes to that upgrade.

Fri, Feb 22, 2002 Todd Florida

I appreciate MS need for profit. However, I think their RETAIL mentality is the problem. Sell us a product, charge for annual maintenance and MAINTAIN the product, ENHANCE the product, but don't throw the exiting stable product out the window just to get more profit.

I suppose that .NET is where that was heading, but I don't like the "connection oriented" state that .NET is going. I've learned not to trust to leave what I do alone.

Thu, Feb 21, 2002 djs Anonymous

If Microsoft was only trying to build an OS, I think they'd agree with all the comments here. However, they are trying to build a candy store of APIs to lock in developers. They want to blur the lines between the OS - which should be able to remain stable for long periods of time - and middleware services and applications - that way you have to upgrade all three anytime you want to upgrade one.

Thu, Feb 21, 2002 anonymous anonymous

I wonder if this site runs SQL server? Could that be causing the multiple entries that are occuring? Need a service pack?

Wed, Feb 20, 2002 anonymous florida

The problem is not Win2K. It's these clueless Network Services groups that this they can install a Win2K server into an NT domain and now they have access to Win2K functionality. I'm serious. They installed Win2K on a server and then installed Lotus Notes on it and want it to utilize Win2K specific functions...while still in an NT domain. It's not even a domain controller. Can't see the forest for the trees. Fire their asses. Hire the educated.

Wed, Feb 20, 2002 Joe Lunsford Michigan

WIN2K and E2K have been a tremendous help and success in the management of our company. We have a fully integrated AD (native mode finally) multiple E2K servers with a VPN between multiple cities and it all works! Sure the migration was messy (merged 3 domains to one) and we had some setbacks, but now that it is functional - I'm thoroughly pleased our staff took it head on and had it completed by June of 2001. Can't wait for .NET. (Although it would be nice to wait until 2003)

Tue, Feb 19, 2002 Tom Wyrick St. Louis, MO

I agree with Zack Kummer completely. We're getting ready to migrate all of our workstations from NT 4.0 -- and the debate is whether to go to Windows XP Pro (while we're at it), or to just go to Win2K. I'm of the opinion that Win XP doesn't offer us anything but "fluff" and more hassle to lock down the functionality we don't want to give the users. (Employees should not be using Instant Messenger, ripping CDs to MP3, etc.)

The new GUI doesn't seem to offer any benefits in terms of usability. Our users aren't always very computer-literate to begin with - and every interface change means more training is needed to go with it. Why remove "My Network Places"and "My Computer" from the desktop and call it an "improvement"?

As for NT 4 being "quick and reliable", it is, to a point - but its age is starting to show. When I deploy a Ghost drive image to a new PC, I have a lot of problems with NT 4.

Tue, Feb 19, 2002 Zack Kummer Tampa, FL

Windows XP is not needed in any way, and anyone who buys it instead of Windows 2000 is just waisting money. The only new features that cannot be downloaded for free are an annoying registering thing, some massive security and stability holes, and a GUI that everyone turns off to revert to the classic (and usefull) windows explorer. Operating systems should not be any closer than 4 years, unless they are intended for different market segments.

Personaly, I still like NT4, it is quick and reliable, and it has been around long enough that with a good firewall it is nearly secure.

Sun, Feb 17, 2002 Andrew w sydney au

though another issue is people who like going back in their browser, not refreshing, and hitting submit again, even though the form is a little buggy!
;-)

Sun, Feb 17, 2002 simon canberra, australia

larry b hit it on an important issue when discussing support. i'm currently half way through my W2K MCSE and the way things are going by the time i finish it XP and .NET will be the new kids on the block. how are MCP's or MCSE's supposed to provide quality service in this kind of environment!

Sun, Feb 17, 2002 Robert St. Louis

I believe MS should release new OS versions frequently. However, they should be .x releases not totally new products. Obviously with their crazy year-based versioning, they'll have difficulty naming it. But right now, MS should release Windows 2000.x so that newcomers can get all the security holes and bugs fixed without having to download them and reboot umpteen times. I know MS was supposed to allow admins to create newly installable versions with fixes already present but does a small business (the most likely W2K candidates) have the know-how and does this still really work in the era of weekly security patches?

Sun, Feb 17, 2002 Paul Atlanta

W2K and the AD provide a combination of stability and manageabiltiy that the NT world has never had the pleasure of before. It is not, however, your Daddy's NT. The sea change from the NT/WINS domain model to the AD/DNS based model has exposed how poorly equiped the Technical Analysts out there really are. Many folks are loathe to give up their time honored support procedures that were tuned around WFW/W95/NT. I think the refrain that "W2K isn't ready" was more accurately "we're not ready". Budget concerns are really hard personnel decisions when you strip away the admini-speak. "I'll have to hire people who understand DNS and TCP/IP instead of people who can reboot a desktop." The end result of implementing W2K fully is your IT staff is smaller, but higher skilled. Tough bottom line decisions.

Sat, Feb 16, 2002 Johnathon Chicago

W2k maybe 2 years old but it is only now coming to the peak of its life in development, security, and stability. Microsoft needs to refocus on quality, not quantity. There is no need for an OS every 2 years. I think that a new OS every 5 years would be fine and reasonable. With proper updates and patches, a OS should be just fine for that period of time. It takes the strain off of IT professionals and gives Microsoft the time it needs to build the next OS correctly.

Sat, Feb 16, 2002 Anonymous Anonymous

If new Windows are coming out too often & too quickly, what timing should Microsoft follow?

Sat, Feb 16, 2002 guido elia milano italy

it should be better to continue upgrading win2k and resolving some known issues not only about security

Fri, Feb 15, 2002 oseme nigeria

I agree with LarryB from Oradell, NJ . He has said it all, but i think latecomers to Win2K client should migrate ot XP professional

Thu, Feb 14, 2002 LarryB Oradell, NJ

I agree that Microsoft, in their desire for profit, is 'upgrading' OS and Apps way too often - long before there is a need and long before the product is fully tested. As of today, Win 2000 is well tested and works. There is NO need for an NT product beyond Win 2000. Although it came out about a year too soon, it is now quite stable and should be kept as the NT/server mainstay. There is also no need for client software beyond Win98 for home clients and Win 2000 client for more stable office clients. The fewer the versions out there, the better support that can be offered by tech support, as well. On home/small office basis, support and upgrades are prohibitive in cost. On a corporate basis, although the cost is more feasible, support and upgrades should be kept to a minimum so that the software can actually be used for productivity. There is no need for computer software, esp. operating systems, to follow the '50s automobile model of a new car every 2 years, just to have the newest one. Make it properly, and make it last.

Thu, Feb 14, 2002 TimV San Francisco

I agree with the users that believe that Microsoft is rolling out product too fast, there are a lot of sites that are still working on their w2k migration. To do another one in a year is too large a drain on limited personnel resources. I see companies adopting an every other or every second release adoption strategy.

Add Your Comment Now:

Your Name:(optional)
Your Email:(optional)
Your Location:(optional)
Comment:
Please type the letters/numbers you see above

Redmond Tech Watch

Sign up for our newsletter.

I agree to this site's Privacy Policy.