FUD

[Karl Schmidt]

KRFinch at dstsystems.com wrote:

> 
> 
> 
> win 95 "magnificently stable"?!?  That's rich.

Actually, Win98SE wasn't real bad -  The real problem was the fact that 
it didn't use the MMU and that the number one software package of the 
day was corrupting other program's memory space - AND - that dirty 
program was M$ office. If one did not run M$-office (and you had to 
remove the link in startup), Win 98 was pretty stable if you didn't run 
it for more than a week.

Once people were running Win2000 and could see which program was the 
problem, M$ finally started fixing office.

Win2000/XP is pretty stable - but not stable enough to be used as a COLO 
server. Some COLOs charge more for M$ users as they have to visit their 
server every week or so - the Linux servers are most often only visited 
when hardware fails.

I work in automation and I can tell you that no one uses M$ machines 
with much success to automate factory equipment. (They do use PLC's that 
they talk to with M$ boxes). The stories of people trying to automate 
with M$ boxes and he huge losses involved are common knowledge in the 
automation industry. There are people using Linux with great successes.

As a desktop, win2000 is better than Linux for one reason - the amount 
of supported software, but now that I use Mozilla and OpenOffice the day 
that my Win box (on a KVM switch with a Linux machine) being a secondary 
machine is getting much closer.

-- 
--------------------------------------------------
Karl Schmidt EMail    Karl at xtronics.com
Transtronics, Inc.    WEB http://xtronics.com
3209 West 9th Street  Ph(785) 841-3089
Lawrence, KS 66049    FAX(785) 841-0434

A patent provides one a license to enrich his lawyer. -kps
-------------------------------------------------