Error - template LAYOUT-DATA-WRAPPER not found

A configuration error was detected in the CGI script; the LAYOUT-DATA-WRAPPER template could not be found.

Error - template STYLE-SHEET not found

A configuration error was detected in the CGI script; the STYLE-SHEET template could not be found.

Error - template SUB-TOP-BANNER not found

A configuration error was detected in the CGI script; the SUB-TOP-BANNER template could not be found.
Subject:
From:
don penlington <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
PCSOFT - Personal Computer software discussion list <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sun, 8 Jul 2001 01:33:50 -0600
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (60 lines)
Michael writes:

<<Is there any hard evidence about the relative stability of
the different Win OS's? >>

I doubt it is possible. Suppose there were only 1000 pieces of software,
and a like number of pieces of hardware.  The possible combinations would
be practically infinite. Any such report could not possible cover even a
tiny fraction of the possible permutations, and wouldn't have much
relevance in real-world terms.  And it would have to depend on which, if
any, patches and updates had been applied to each version and in what order.

Chances are, after a while, each and every one of our computers is unique,
unless you've never touched any setting since it came out of the factory,
which would be unusual.

No OS, in my opinion, is inherently unstable. The way we use them is the
most critical factor, followed by the individual setup, configuration, and
combination of software/hardware.

Your working methods are likely very different from mine, and I doubt that
any two registries would be identical.  As the registry is the heart and
brains of Windows (all versions), no real comparison is viable.

Any such report as Michael seeks would necessarily be entirely subjective,
depending absolutely on the state of the system being tested and the
combination of software. It is likely have little relevance to one's own setup.

Having said that, it does seem that Win 95B is one of the most stable and
reliable versions of Windows (NT excepted, albeit for different
reasons).  It is also a lot less complex than later versions, therefore has
certain limitations.  Personally, I'm not in the least tempted to move from
Win 95B.  I guess you pays your money and you takes your chances.

But that, of course, is purely anecdotal and subjective. Just my uneducated
and uninformed opinion.  Moreover, I'll stick my neck out and say that
most, if not all, instabilities are operator-induced (in the broadest
sense). Very rarely, one may get a bad piece of software, in which case it
should immediately be rejected, before it gets a chance to do real damage.

New computers are highly complex pieces of equipment.  Few of us really
know how to operate them optimally. The miracle is that they work as well
as they do.

Don Penlington








Free computer tutorials at: http://www.geocities.com/donaldpen/
Also Fractal Galleries,  free icons,  poetry,  and beautiful Queensland beaches.

                         PCSOFT's List Owner's:
                      Bob Wright<[log in to unmask]>
                       Drew Dunn<[log in to unmask]>

ATOM RSS1 RSS2

LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by LISTSERV