Windows 2000 Special: New dawn or dead end?

In May 1999, Silicon.com spoke to a selection of senior IT professionals to gauge attitudes towards Microsoft's latest operating system - Windows 2000. The general consensus was negative, with many advocating a wait-and-see attitude towards a product that is generally expected to be riddled with bugs. Our studio guests at that time were equally cautious (see http://www.silicon.com/a31004 for a video vox pop published last June).

And while there was agreement the OS will eventually receive widespread adoption, industry experts expect a slow transition rather than instant acceptance.

Now, nine months down the line and with the release date imminent, we asked some of the same IT professionals if their opinions have changed and whether they're ready to take the plunge. Microsoft's marketing prowess is legendary - but has it done anything to allay the fears of our select band?

Frank Coyle, IT director at John Menzies Distribution, said he wouldn't touch it with a barge pole last May. Time hasn't mellowed him.

"It's not a single upgrade, it's a new concept and a dramatic change in direction and this brings more risk." Coyle added he was angry with the constant stream of upgrades from software vendors and said he's happy to sit back and let others be the guinea pigs.

Brian Collins, IS manager at the Royal College of Surgeons, is one of Microsoft's Windows 2000 beta testers. He knows it will take considerable planning to implement Windows 2000, and having extensive hands-on experience of it has not done much to convince him that it's worth the effort. "We're very happy with NT4. It's stable and we are under no pressure to move away from it," he said.

Active Directory, one of the key features in Windows 2000, didn't impress Collins much, who claimed it took "two to three attempts to get it going".

Stephen Spiers, IT and business re-engineering director at engineering group Wagon PLC, said: "We tend to avoid the bleeding edge and let others take the pain first." He intends to delay migrating his systems until he sees the results of the first wave of installation across the industry.

But elsewhere, opinions have changed. Michel Khan, IT director of Specsavers, showed no interest last year, but the company has just started to evaluate the OS. "We have, this week, decided to take a closer look at it [Windows 2000] and will make a decision once we know what costs are involved," he said

But Khan did reiterate his concern that Microsoft still doesn't appreciate the cost involved in upgrading PCs to accommodate the increased memory demands made by the operating system.

Meanwhile Chris Setz, director at the Network Professional Association, is more enthusiastic. "It's their best ever product," he said. He added the breadth and depth of features Windows 2000 has to offer will continue to help the computer "grow up".

"It has mainframe class features in a small box," he said.

Rob Hailstone, research director at Bloor Research, tends to agree: "People will be pleasantly surprised. It looks like Microsoft has got it right this time and put out probably its best product to date."

Last year, David Taylor, chairman of IT directors' group Certus, said Win2000 would be full of bugs - but his mood has mellowed. "The word on the street is that it may not be bug-ridden at all," he said.

However, Taylor did point out another potential headache for Microsoft - namely getting the attention of the end user. He spoke to some of his members about Win2000 and found that a lot of them are more concerned with the non-technical aspects of their job. "Most IT directors are not interested. Their role is changing so much they're more concerned with strategic company decisions than another OS," he said.

There will inevitably be horror stories in the coming months, but once the major creases are ironed out and Win2000 becomes as stable as existing NT systems, corporates will be more likely to move across in significant numbers.

The majority of IT directors still seem to unsure about whether to make the changeover. The industry expects great things of Win2000 and Microsoft has promised them, but the bottom line is that at the moment, there's no good reason to move unless things are going wrong.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

The original analysis published in May 1999, 'War of the Words' can be read here: http://www.silicon.com/a30271