On Tue, Apr 01, 2003 at 07:10:07AM -0800, Randall R Schulz wrote:
> Thorsten,
>
> At 06:42 2003-04-01, you wrote:
> >* Hannu E K Nevalainen (garbage mail) (03-04-01 11:30 +0100)
> >>>
> >
> >> IMO the sense of it is still there, even in NT. Can't tell about XP -
> >but I
> >> would be surprised if the changes were that many.
> >
> >XP is the first rocksolid Windows OS.
>
> Hardly.
>
> NT 4 and 2000 have always been perfectly stable and reliable for me,
> running for days and weeks on end without trouble. They have additional
> (subjective) benefit of not having garish, cartoonish GUIs, though 2K
> shows some tendencies. Fortunately, most of the silly stuff can be turned
> off.
NT4, 2000 and XP are all moderately stable, but none of them is what I
would call "rock solid". I've only had XP for less than a month, but
I've hung the OS several times, and hung Explorer, which is really
interesting. It's certainly possible to do this with NT and 2K also.
I don't consider any of these to be nearly as robust as *any* of the
*nix systems I'm familiar with, including IRIX, Solaris, and DEC Ultrix.
--
--------
Peter Davis
Funny stuff at http://www.pfdstudio.com
The artwork formerly shown as prints
List of resources for children's writers and illustrators at:
http://www.pfdstudio.com/cwrl.html
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
