Buying Office 2000 1

[JayE]

Hi,

My company has a 22 computer network running Windows 98 / Office 2000 from an NT Server. I'm responsible for the day-to-day running of the network.

We need to set up 2 more PCs in the near future, and want them to run Office 2000 also, so they're all running the same office suite.

Our IT company says that they may not be able to get hold of Office 2000 for much longer.

Are there still places where genuine copies of Office 2000 (CD & licence or just licence only) can be purchased for, say, the next year?

Before you say it, what advantages would there be in using Office XP over 2000? What additional demands would it place on our PCs?

I look forward to hearing your reply regarding purchasing.

Regards,
Jay

 

[Dreamboat]

Believe it or not, just go to the auctions like yahoo and ebay.

http://www.PiersonTech.com

dreamboat@nni.com
Brainbench MVP for Microsoft Word

 

[msciulli]

You can purchase an Office XP license and install Office 2000 on the PC.

 

[johncurtis]

As msciulli says, you can buy Office XP licences. We run a mixture of Office 97, 2000 & XP all with XP licences.

 

[DieCad]

I have about 22 computers that are hooked to a NT 4.0 server. I have about half on Office 2000 Pro and we are considering putting Office on the other half. Now we have to decide if we should do Office XP or try to find a way to get Office 2000 licences. My concern is if we can all access the same documents in 2000 Pro and XP Pro, particularly a common Access Database that everyone needs to be able to access and update. It sounds like if I set my options correctly XP can act like 2000 and not have to convert the files, this would allow both 2000 and XP users to use the same files. I just want to be sure before I spend all the $$$$$$$$$.

 

[SgtJarrow]

The big M has almost always said you can backward-install any license.....in other words, if you have a license for XP, you can install 97 or 2000 instead. But you cannot go forward...so if you have a license for 97 you cannot install 2000 or XP.

A company I used to work for used a mixed environment of Windows 98, NT, 2000, and XP, and Office 97, 2000, 2002. ALL the machines in the company are installed using the same license code and information......But there was file cabinet that houses all the licenses. Even though we used the same license code on every computer, we had one license for each machine in the company. SO we were covered. It made installation easier beacuse we could use a ghost of the same drive every time and not have to go looking for a license code. We just used the same one and kept track on the number of installations so we didn't go over our limit. If we knew what it was we were doing, it would not be called research, would it? - Albert Einstein

Robert L. Johnson III, A+, Network+, MCP
Access Developer/Programmer
robert.l.johnson.iii@citigroup.com

 

[colcrys]

Hi,
Don't believe any of the hype. The XP family at present is problematic.

Our office has 82 computers and we installed Office XP on several and then foolishly installed Win XP Pro on several in the mistaken belief that the hype about it being suitable for those whose computer knowledge extends as far as trying to send email and access the 'net, and for whom it would be difficult to mess up.

Of course they did. A more buggy piece of Beta-ware I have never seen. I have used freeware off the net with less problems.

We ghosted everything back to what passes for normal.

Do as suggested and go through the auctions and you will find legal and fully functional Office 2000 'shrink-wrapped' CD's.

I estimate that the MS's public 'paid for' Beta test of the XP family will be over sometime in late 2003 - I would have said early 2003 but that is when the 300MB 'Service' patch for Win XP is expected (isn't that indicative of the sorry state of things when a 300Mb patch is needed only a year into the release???) - and that will be the time to update your entire office - just before Microsoft trys to foist .Net off on his unsuspecting public Beta testers. DON'T try to mix things together - you are setting yourself up as Admin for a lot of problems even with only 22 workstations.

One caution, when you do buy even a legal license and shrink-wrapped CD for Office 2000, check the number on the jewel case closely if you can. If the numbers begin with GC6, KY7, Q3P, H3X, P2K - and probably others - you will not be able to apply the SR1a update without once again going through Product Activation. Not your fault of course but those are the common numbers of the pirated copies and a blanket MS 'intifada' against these numbers has been applied.

XP = avoid it like the plague in an office environment unless you intend to update every computer in your network. If you exist in a real-world office environment where some of your computers may have less than the most recent programs and hardware and the majority of your office staff have computer knowledge gained from playing solitaire and occasionally downloading a 'pretty' screensaver - along with sending emails and looking for 'company related' pictures on the 'net - stick with Office 2000 and Win 98.

Of course some will wish to soundly pillory me for impugning XP but I can only speak from experience.

I do concede that there are aspects of the XP family that - once fully functional - should be a major step forward, but for now leave the XP family to the individuals that can afford to risk downtime.

Win 98 and Office 2000 may not be as pretty as XP but darn they do get more work done in an office environment.

For single users I really can't offer an opinion as my home 'puter has purred along nicely for quite some time with Win 98SE and Office 2000 and I have not yet wanted to risk the damage I was witness to in our office network.

If it isn't broke - don't fix it!

 

[dckrowns]

If you don't like MS products, don't use them. You aren't being forced to use them or buy them. Go find yourself an old Osborne or CBM and try to interface them. This is not a forum to bash MS products.

 

[CJTyo]

Actually, colcrys has one excellent point. XP is NOT friendly with other "stuff". I had a client who installed Office XP on their 98 machines (before I started working with them!) and it was the most hideous nightmare to deal with in my 5 years of Sys Admin experience!

The very few good upgrades to the Office Apps that XP has are not nearly worth the headaches I underwent as both the Sys Admin and a user at that company. I finally convinced them to downgrade Office to 2k and there hasn't been a hint of problem since. <whew>

XP is the most unstable Office release since the very first version of 95. Thankfully I haven't dealt with Windows XP at all, yet.

Personally I love Windows and the Office Apps. I also like UNIX of various flavors (especially Linux). You can be a Windows user, even like the products, but you don't have to keep your mouth shut when something isn't working right.

C

*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Insanity is a matter of Perception.

 

[colcrys]

dckrowns,

Your right. This isn't a forum for bashing MS. This thread is in regards to a query from JayE about whether or not he could buy Office 2000 with added questions about opinions on Office XP/2000.

I commented on his query on purchase of Office 2000 and I offered my experience with both to him for his examination as to the worth or non-worth of choosing one over the other.

His question relates to a situation where considerable expense may be in the offing for his firm and deserved - IMHO - as detailed a reply as possible, backed up by enough information to support the opinions noted.

Do you have any useful comments to make to assist JayE in making his decision?

 

[Dreamboat]

I have successfully run 97, 2000, and XP on Win 98 on a network. Of course, there are glitches with which Outlook version(s) you can use. For instance, Outlook 2000 and XP won't run with Outlook 98. But for some stupid reason, Outlook 97 will run fine with Outlook 2000. But who ever uses more than one version of Outlook anyway, except in a support environment.

I currently run same 3 versions of Office, keeping Outlook 2K only on my Win XP Pro at home. Win XP keeps my machine pretty dern stable after Windows 98. But I only paid $30-some bucks for my WinXP 'cause of some kinda promo, or I'd never have it.

I agree about Office XP to some extent. Is it really worth the features? No. Except I'd have to ask that AGAIN of the dozen or so people who's docs and spreadsheets were *corrupt* and opening them in XP restores them. So every company oughtta have ONE PC with Office XP on it.

Access: You shouldn't have any problems 'tween 2000 and XP, except for one I found, and I've never seen it anywhere...When I've opened an XP DB in Access 2K, I cannot get the database properties from the File menu--I get *not available*. Hmmm...

I'd say, all in all, if you've got 2000, stick with it until the next version comes out. And when it does come out, wait 18 months before you buy it so all the bugs are worked out and the SRs have been released.

For me, the real stupidity of Microsoft comes with their versions. I love the answers I get when I ask *what version*?

Oh, I only have 2002. I don't have XP yet.

(or similar) Anne Troy

http://www.TheWordExpert.com

http://www.Brainbench.com