Adam Turoff on Thu, 17 Feb 2000 18:25:10 -0500 (EST) |
Tom wrote: > I'm sorry Adam (and everyone) for prolonging this silly thread, but truth is, > Win2K is going to give the Linux community a real mark to strive for. That's fine. Mike and I are tired of senseless ranting and raving, not worthwhile discussions of commercial software. > I've been > using it on a few machines for several months, and have had a shipping copy > running now for nearly a month. It's not the greatest in many ways, but it is > stable. Linux has been stable for years. Uptimes of 700-1000 days are not unheard of. (Same for *NIX, *BSD*, etc.) The only Win* boxes I've seen be able to come near that are boxes that have been set up to run only SETI@Home for a few years (and even that can be problematic). > None of these boxes have ever needed a reboot since installation -- no > blue screens, no this-or-that-faults, no problems. Here, Microsoft is coming from behind because they have a long history of shipping shitty software that crashes almost on command. I'd consider this an overdue resolution of a long-standing problem over "innovation". > Before you turn on your flame-throwers, by "mark to strive for" I'm talking > about: > 1. number / diversity of applications; > 2. handling of wierd hardware / plug&pray; Noteworthy. Everyone else will always be coming from behind in this respect. > 3. compatibility with the rest of the world; Please be more specific. > 4. Stability and robustness. More stable than *NIX? More robust than *NIX? Or simply better than previous MS offerings? Z. ______________________________________________________________________ Philadelphia Linux Users Group - http://plug.nothinbut.net Announcements - http://lists.nothinbut.net/mail/listinfo/plug-announce General Discussion - http://lists.nothinbut.net/mail/listinfo/plug
|
|