Re: Stupid MS challenge

[Edward Thomas]

Paul Flinders wrote:
> 
> I must admit that neither of these are my experience - I'm stuck with
> NT at work but it quite happily lets me sit running VC 6, Emacs,
> Rational Rose (what a memory hog!), SQL server and a host of also rans
> and I most certainty do not need to reboot every 90 mins, or even
> every day - I treat my machine to a reboot every month or so to clear
> memory leaks (if installing some software or patch didn't need a
> reboot, although that _is_ depressingly often) but otherwise it seems
> basically robust. HP is willing to guarentee 99.9% availability for NT
> on it's PC hardware - that's just 8 hours downtime a year. Mind you
> it's prepared to guarentee 99.999% availability for HP-UX (to get
> things in context).

I use Windows NT a lot at University (they force us, honest :) and while
the box is fairly stable for normal use, there are far too many ways (it
seems) to BSOD it. For example, I was giving a presentation of a program
I wrote in Access (don't ask) for my RAD course, it repeatedly BSOD'd
where it never did it in the other (windows NT) lab. No one knows why.
sililarly, running a simple networking App in borland (within the
debugger) caused repeated BSODs, the program works fine under GCC and
even MSVC++ (it just opens sockets, get a webpage and saves it). No one
knows why...