On Tuesday 20 March 2001 09:52, you wrote:
On Monday 19 March 2001 22:07, you wrote:
On Monday 19 March 2001 15:28, you wrote:
"We'd like to bash Windows XP--but we can't. We tell you why."
http://www.zdnet.com/anchordesk/stories/story/0,10738,2697516,0 0.ht ml
I had to upgrade to Win2000 at work because of the frequency of crashes in Win98SE. It's been about 6 weeks. Win2000 crashes a LOT LESS than Win98SE, and seems to phantom reboot a lot more. I discovered a crash counter in the Register and the value was set at 10. I stopped keeping track of the counts after a half-dozen, but I knew there had to be more than ten. Then I discovered another registry entry - Crashcounter limit, which was also set to ten. I guess if you have more than 10 crashes they don't want to know about it. But, Win2000 is a lot more stable than Win98SE, for sure.
Yes...it is, however, it's NO WHERE near the quality of Linux, nor can it even begin to approach the level of stability.
True! Last September, at work, I set up a DELL 200MHz box with two HDs, using SuSE 6.4. It has been running 24/7 every since then and is only booted because the network folks want to run Nortens Ghost to back it up every so often. It has NEVER crashed, or even hiccupped!! The net fols KNOW IT, TOO. The box is right across from the network admins cubical. He sees it every day. And, he and his crew are repairing Win2000s every day too. It's got to be eating at him... He used to razz me a lot about Linux, sometimes mockingly, but that has stopped completely!
Best,
Fred