On Wed, 30 Oct 2002 18:20:54 -0800 Salman Khilji
But what I find interesting and disturbing,
at work don't crash. I work with scientists. And they never say their machines crash. They are doing constant scientific data analysis, and technical document preparation. I should ask more of them if their machines crash. But so far, I have been very disappointed to find, of the three guys that I talk to regularly about
machines run for weeks without crashing. This disappoints me because I can't honestly argue to them that Linux is more stable. In fact, with the instability of the flagship Konqueror,
is that out Windows machines this, that they say their that they would most
certainly encounter if they tried a modern Linux, while clearly it is not representative of the stability of the underlying Linux, they would likely get a bad taste about that.
BTW, long gone are those days that Windows machines would crash a lot. Today Windows 2000 almost never crashes in daily work. XP is 2000 based and is supposed to be more stable, so things in this respect don't look good for Linux.
Salman
I did not enjoy the "stability that you have with the forementioned Windows OS'es. With Xp, I constantly get crashes (BSOD) and reboots. All of my hardware is on the HCL too and with the latest drivers. Linux on the other hand tends to play nice with my hardware. Being a former MCSE, I was very disappointed with Xp. As far as 2K, I've seen MAJOR headaches develop with it too! I have done roll outs of 2K and not been too impressed! I have a question for you and not being sarcastic, Why are you still using Linux if your opinion of it is so bad? Marshall "Nothing is impossible, We just do not have all the anwsers to make the impossible, possible."