Mail Archives: djgpp/2002/02/19/07:00:19
from Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>:
> If we are starting a stability contest, then here's another data point:
> my Windows 98SE system reports an uptime of 41:21:05:49 (yes, that's
> almost 42 days). The previous record was 3 months of uptime, before a
> power outage interfered. Power outages are by far the only reason this
> system ever goes down.
> My other Windows 98 system is tirtured by my kids with all kinds of buggy
> games, but it still stays up for many days on end, and is stable enough
> for me to use it to read email and news groups.
> Evidently, Windows 9X's fragility is greatly exaggerated. It does take a
> bit of setup and vigilance, but so does any other OS out there.
> It goes without saying that a descendant of the NT family is more stable
> than the 9X family. They don't need to maintain compatibility to DOS
> and to 16-bit Windows of the 3.X vintage, so they have less problems.
> But beyond this simple technical fact, I wouldn't be surprised if it turns
> out that the MS hype about XP stability is largely a marketing gimmick.
> In particular, I have no doubt that in a year or so, we will be told by
> MS that XP is crap while the next OS, whatever its name will be, is
> superb as far as stability goes...
You need a UPS so your system would keep running through split-second and other
brief power outages. Power outage at the wrong time can mess up file systems.
Some Linux and BSD users have boasted uptimes on the order of a year.
I guess you are more knowledgeable and more careful regarding email and
newsgroup viruses than the average Windows user. Some Windows users don't even
know the difference between an internal modem and an external modem, this is no
joke.
I've had uptimes exceeding two weeks with DR-DOS 7.03, don't think I ever
approached that with MS-DOS 4.01, 5 or 6.22.
- Raw text -