Quote:
|
Originally Posted by /dev/niall
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ed Hansberry
I suppose. It just gets old people talking about Windows reliability and basing everything on Win3.1/Win9x code base. NT/CE are very stable products and are no more likely to crash than Unix. We have some NT4 & Win2K servers here that haven't been rebooted in months.
|
I will agree that such jokes can get old, but they're funny for a reason. I'm sure you can remember the pain of blue screens and error dialogs because of odd hardware combinations, bad drivers, etc.  It helps to laugh.
That being said, my Win2k desktop only crashes when I use my Radeon to view television. I have no illusions as to where the fault lies (ATI and it's poor drivers), but why does it need to take down the entire operating system? That's bad OS design, and proof that NT still has work ahead. I've also had my PocketPC hang because of an errant application. That too is bad OS design, and that's why I find things like this funny - I can relate. |
Please read the Microsoft Windows
NT history...
Windows NT 3.1, 3.5 and 3.51 all had Graphics subsystems running in user mode. So in the three first versions of Windows NT a graphics driver couldnt crash the computer.
But that ment that graphics were slower due to the extra layers of protection built in. So when NT 4.0 entered the market, Microsoft made the bold move to move the Graphics drivers into the kernel (Where already all the other drivers where running). This made NT4 quick enough to handle graphics intensive applications (like DirectX) but at the same time made Windows vulnerable to badly written Graphics Drivers.
Now I dont know about you, but I prefer to have quick graphics in my system opposed to absolutely bullet proof OS. Just be sure to get stable drivers and dont upgrade until new drivers get certified through Windows Update.
And yes, only buy hardware from manufacturers that are known to supply god drivers.
End of history lesson.