View Full Version : Does NOT support Windows 2000?
B Trevathan
2011-05-18, 02:21
Why doesn't Spybot Search & Destroy version 2.0 Beta 1 not work on Windows 2000 I get a error that says "This program requires Windows NT version 5.1.2600 or later." I tried to install it on a fully updated Windows 2000 with Service Pack 4 and with Roll ups [Version 5.00.2195]
Other very good anti-spyware programs work very well on Windows 2000 such SuperAntiSpyware and MalwareBytes' Anti-Malware. I hope you are not forgetting that there are still a lot of computers that are not running the latest wiz-bang version of Windows, Some computers have to use older OS versions because of special proprietary software that will not run on newer versions of Windows.
Hello B Trevathan,
Please see this post by PepiMK.
http://forums.spybot.info/showpost.php?p=404227&postcount=7
Best regards. :)
B Trevathan
2011-05-18, 08:22
Windows 2000 is another story - it's currently prevented by the installer, which is not a bug, but a security precaution. As part of the NT series, we can fully support Unicode on it, it has a security concept, supports system services. As far as we know, it runs, but it's, well, unsupported currently.
Thats like saying yes it will fully run on Windows 2000 but we are not going to let anybody install it. I think thats just mean and its also sad, and to think I used to recommend Spybot S&D to everybody.
Whether we patch the runtime environments in question again is a difficult question. Right now, the focus is on stability, performance and detection power, not on supporting those 0,05% (which still makes me feel sad to not be able to support them right now).
I think the percentage of people using Windows 2000 is far greater than the 0.05% quoted. What was that number based on, the number of Windows 2000 computers that visit this site?
noel-pr7
2011-05-18, 21:31
B Trevathan, Spybot 2.0 beta 1 isn't quite stable enough to use under Win2000. which is why i believe installation is not supported under win2k. there are still several problems found with the current beta release of Spybot S&D 2.0.
you may want to wait for a more stable release of it; perhaps when Spybot 2.0 reaches either release candidate or final release which should support win2000 by then.
otherwise, consider using other anti-spyware tools like SUPERAntispyware, Malwarebytes Anti-malware or Lavasoft Ad-aware; the latest versions of these 3 tools still work under Win2000.
noel-pr7
2011-05-21, 00:18
Why doesn't Spybot Search & Destroy version 2.0 Beta 1 not work on Windows 2000 I get a error that says "This program requires Windows NT version 5.1.2600 or later." I tried to install it on a fully updated Windows 2000 with Service Pack 4 and with Roll ups [Version 5.00.2195]
Spybot 2.0 is still in beta stage, B Trevathan. dont forget that!
just because Spybot 2.0b1 doesn't support win2k doesn't mean it could stay that way in later beta/RC & final releases.
look what happened to Mozilla Firefox 4.0, for example. Beta 1 of Firefox 4.0 worked under Win2000 BUT beta 2 didn't (a google search on "firefox 4.0b2 win2000 (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&biw=986&bih=524&q=firefox+4.0b2+win2000&btnG=Google+Search&aq=o&aqi=&aql=&oq=)" proves this). Mozilla corrected the problem and released FF 4.0b3 & subsequent betas/RCs and Firefox 4.0 now runs on minimum of win2k.
so just wait for either the next beta or the final release of Spybot 2.0 to come out and then check if that one installs & works under Win2000.
bye now, B!
BW~Merlin
2011-05-21, 16:28
I hope you are not forgetting that there are still a lot of computers that are not running the latest wiz-bang version of Windows, Some computers have to use older OS versions because of special proprietary software that will not run on newer versions of Windows.
Well it is time you cough up the cash as Microsoft has dropped support for 2000 last year and Windows XP is headed that way, either way it is going to cost you a bucket load of money at some point in time to move past an operating system that is over ten years old.
I think spybot not supporting 2000 can be used by you to put a business case forward to spend the money that is required to bring your organisation into the modern world or pay all of the spybot teams development costs that are associated with supporting 2000.
If you don't like either option then find a product that does support 2000 and use that and let the spybot team make something that isn't bound by the limitations of a ten year old operating system because your organisation made a bad choice all those years ago and are stuck with it and now you are going to make the whole spybot community suffer by way of makign the spybot team waste their time to fixing your unwillingness to move with the times.
Well it is time you cough up the cash as Microsoft has dropped support for 2000 last year and Windows XP is headed that way, either way it is going to cost you a bucket load of money at some point in time to move past an operating system that is over ten years old.
times.
I know you're just being honest and probably have no agenda over this, but really, I don't care if Microsoft wants to get more money to increase their position in the market. Of course they have to push a new OS every couple of years to keep their billion-dollar profits, but I am not worried about them. They're still pretty wealthy.
I'd rather think about the educational institutions, nonprofit organizations, or the small businesses that struggle to keep on the market, and are still running Windows 2000, because of older machines or because of proprietary software, some of which are tied to even more expensive hardware.
Windows 2000 is a good operating system and it's still perfectly suitable for a whole lot of works and purposes. Being a simpler version of XP and having most of its inner functionalities, I can't see a reason not to at least try to support it as long as XP lives.
Whatever decision the SpyBot team takes, I'll respect it, because I know this is voluntary work after all.
But isn't it a beautiful thing that extra lines of code can even help slow down the increase of computer-related landfills?
Cheers, everyone.
noel-pr7
2011-07-08, 19:59
I'd rather think about the educational institutions, nonprofit organizations, or the small businesses that struggle to keep on the market, and are still running Windows 2000, because of older machines or because of proprietary software, some of which are tied to even more expensive hardware.
Windows 2000 is a good operating system and it's still perfectly suitable for a whole lot of works and purposes. Being a simpler version of XP and having most of its inner functionalities, I can't see a reason not to at least try to support it as long as XP lives.
Whatever decision the SpyBot team takes, I'll respect it, because I know this is voluntary work after all.
well said, Agent. though the recently released Spybot 2.04 beta 2 still requires XP or higher to install and run. like with beta 1, beta 2 still won't install under Win2000.
there's always alternatives like Malwarebytes Anti-malware and Lavasoft Ad-aware, which the latest versions of those softwares still support minimum win2k.
robotman5
2011-07-08, 22:56
the latest version of spybot works on Windows 2000 i tried it myself:)
the latest version of spybot works on Windows 2000 i tried it myself:)
You mean... 1.6.2 or 2.0.4?
Lone Browncoat
2011-08-04, 09:17
Well, by the date on Tom.K's post this is almost a necropost but I disagree with what BW~Merlin said and many users here would take issue as well:
http://www.msfn.org/board/forum/35-windows-nt420002003/
Been using Spybot since I first saw it at Majorgeeks.com.
Hope support for W2kP continues. I get dismayed when I see good utilities drop support* [almost seems that they're getting orders from Redmond to do so]. Yet I've kept W2k alive through the use of open source software like VLC. This despite going back to Linux after a 15 year absence from it.
*Like the softphone app from freephoneline.ca!
Been unaware though this forum existed....though been too busy elsewhere..only alerted when I just saw the listings at majorgeeks change, mentioning this 2.0 beta.
1.6.2.0 has served me well and I hope it survives the introduction of 2.0.
Hello:
Is support and updates for Spybot S&D v. 1.6.2 to be dropped when the final release of v 2.0.x is made available? I have a Windows XP/ME dual-boot system and was wondering if I will be able to continue to use Spybot S&D v. 1.6.2 (with updated definitions) on the Windows ME drive.
Thanks.
almost seems that they're getting orders from Redmond to do soThey only do so indirectly: In the end it gets to be too difficult to both take advantage of the new features of the API of later versions of Windows while also supporting legacy versions, and once the userbase of the old versions dwindles to near zero, they'll just say the product is unsupported once some build no longer works on the old version.
Hello:
Is support and updates for Spybot S&D v. 1.6.2 to be dropped when the final release of v 2.0.x is made available? I have a Windows XP/ME dual-boot system and was wondering if I will be able to continue to use Spybot S&D v. 1.6.2 (with updated definitions) on the Windows ME drive.
Thanks.
Sorry, but there was announcement that 1.x updates are no longer going to be supported.
Will it still be possible to use the manual updater, or will the updates all move to some format not supported by 1.x? I already have noticed that the old version of the Immunization module does not detect one of the listings for Internet Explorer Plugins that the Beta version does detect...
noel-pr7
2011-08-17, 18:20
Sorry, but there was announcement that 1.x updates are no longer going to be supported.
where, Tom.K? (url or link to that announcement please so that there is proof)
support for 1.x updates should NOT be dropped until after Spybot 2.0 goes final.
It was announced in 2008: http://forums.spybot.info/showthread.php?t=34563
It was announced in 2008: http://forums.spybot.info/showthread.php?t=34563
This announcement was about versions older than 1.6.x.
Support for 1.6.x will not immediately stop when 2.0 final is released.
daemon
:oops:, my mistake. :fear:
Well, by the date on Tom.K's post this is almost a necropost but I disagree with what BW~Merlin said and many users here would take issue as well:
http://www.msfn.org/board/forum/35-windows-nt420002003/
Been using Spybot since I first saw it at Majorgeeks.com.
Hope support for W2kP continues. I get dismayed when I see good utilities drop support* [almost seems that they're getting orders from Redmond to do so]. Yet I've kept W2k alive through the use of open source software like VLC. This despite going back to Linux after a 15 year absence from it.
*Like the softphone app from freephoneline.ca!
Been unaware though this forum existed....though been too busy elsewhere..only alerted when I just saw the listings at majorgeeks change, mentioning this 2.0 beta.
1.6.2.0 has served me well and I hope it survives the introduction of 2.0.
What those citing cost to upgrade from Windows 2000 (W2K) to a current operating system are ignoring is that the hardware originally used to run W2K will usually be unable to effectively run Spybot S&D 2.0 anyway. This is becuase the new version has finally dropped the requirement to support the Windows 9x versions, so it's beginning to fully utilize the abilities of modern hardware, which most W2K systems weren't delivered on. I finally recently dumped my own Windows 2000 based system, which I'd only kept until I could properly remove all important data, since it could barely even run Spybot S&D 1.6.2 with scans taking over an hour.
If you are running W2K on a much newer platform this was simply a bad decision, since a newer more capable operating system was available when that hardware was sold and W2K was for business with consumer use never supported. The only valid reasons for this were either the replacement of a failed motherboard or the issue of archaic software that only runs on an older operating system. In any case, both of these problems are much more effectively resolved by replacement of either the operating system and/or the archaic software. Any business which can't afford to do this, especially education where using outdated software is a disservice to the customer (student), is marginal at best and should be replaced by it's more efficient and forward thinking competitors.
The more important reason that W2K support is pointless is that the platform has a key security issue similar to Windows 9x. This is that Windows XP is the first platform which included the Windows firewall, which was added as part of the core security improvements within Service Pack 2 for XP. This is the major reason that Windows Defender as well as other Microsoft security products have never supported any platform older than Windows XP SP2.
Though it might be considered 'nice' by some for Spybot S&D to continue to support the archaic Windows 2000 platform, as with the seemingly never-ending Windows 9x support before it this has simply resulted in continual foot-dragging and delay in the further development of Spybot S&D itself, due to the excessive amount of resources consumed to continue this support. If you don't believe or understand this, go back and read the post by PepiMK in the post referenced by Tashi above, since this gives a bit of insight into the added work required to maintain an outdated (and unsupported) platform.
Those of you who were wondering why it took so long for Spybot S&D 2.0 to become available even in its current beta form, this is a huge part of the reason. Continuing to support outdated operating systems has badly delayed the forward movement of Spybot and will continue to if those who care about it don't help the Spybot Team make effective decisions. Those few still using an outdated operating system are quite simply creating their own problem(s), so why should everyone else suffer as a result of their bad decision?
Bitman
noel-pr7
2011-10-07, 17:26
:oops:, my mistake. :fear:
understandable error, Tom.
I'm beginning to think that the upcoming RC & final releases of Spybot 2.0 (if and whenever they come out) will no longer support W2K and older [heck, even the newly released beta 4 of Spybot 2 won't install/run under win2000]. no big deal to me anymore as I will inevitably convert old machines that have win2000 sp4 on them to winxp sp3 and my brother has gotten me & the rest of my family brand new laptops/desktops with Windows 7 on them.
what bitman said earlier may turn out to be right in the long run.
and of course, microsoft will drop support for WinXP sometime in year 2014.
Lone Browncoat
2014-08-17, 00:42
The more important reason that W2K support is pointless is that the platform has a key security issue similar to Windows 9x. This is that Windows XP is the first platform which included the Windows firewall, which was added as part of the core security improvements within Service Pack 2 for XP. This is the major reason that Windows Defender as well as other Microsoft security products have never supported any platform older than Windows XP SP2.
Those of you who were wondering why it took so long for Spybot S&D 2.0 to become available even in its current beta form, this is a huge part of the reason. Continuing to support outdated operating systems has badly delayed the forward movement of Spybot and will continue to if those who care about it don't help the Spybot Team make effective decisions. Those few still using an outdated operating system are quite simply creating their own problem(s), so why should everyone else suffer as a result of their bad decision?
Bitman
Necroposting...
Bitman you're wrong.
a. see the diehards at msfn. Using kernels/APIs from XP and later they can keep 2K secure, there's even one who has managed to get 2000 to run on a six-core CPU, as for firewalls, Outpost still works.
Myself I just ran out of the time to tinker, it is not for everyone, you have to know what you're doing.
I've moved to an nLited XP for my HTPCs and Win7 SP1 for workstation use but with Aero turned off and the classic desktop theme "Maple" , the machine runs a little faster without Aero.
b. The Plus! pack from Win '98 still functions in 7, I have my red pointers, not black or white, indeed the core of the old 32-bit OS is still there, for the most part it is just the installers that are
the problem, if the utility vendor has moved to VC+2010 because M$ consciously altered the compiler as not to include code for 2000. Like I said that only affects the web installers.
One can still do a 'hard' installation of the core, again see msfn. As for firewall in 7, in order to have more control I added "TinyWall", see it at Majorgeeks.
Anyhoo....enough for a dead thread.
I will either create a new one for my next concern or join if someone else has brought up the query I want to pose.