[A83] Re: Assembly Studio 8x [OT]
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
[A83] Re: Assembly Studio 8x [OT]
> btw, the well known crashing-problem of Win9x sucks, but that's not the
> only thing. Just crawl a bit around in your Windows and win-setup
> directory, read the INF files, read about anything that's readable. I
can't
> imagine that NT5 is that much better without getting major compatibility
> problems for all strange ways you can (and Micros~1 does) use to acces
> anything on the system. Especialy the INF files have much win3.x legacy.
> And the improvement of Win3.x was the graphical interface. What I'm
talking
> about is files and such, so it's probably even from Win2.0... (?1982-85?)
NT isn't unstable. If you have good hardware with good drivers, it will run
for months. One of the big reasons that people have their computer crash
every day is due to bad hardware and bad drives. And installing tons of
programs that make the system unstable. I never have a problem with 2000
that isn't directly related to hardware or something I did.
> Micros~1 is good at recycling old ideas and cut-'n-paste (DLLs with
> hundreds of similar if-then blocks). Linux "is" good at not doing that,
> which isn't always a good thing either. These hundreds of config files
> laying around everywhere in your filesystem... More than 10 different ways
> to add a directory to you path, etc.
Haha. Right. While there is some innovation in the open source world, most
of it is just copying Microsoft and everyone else. How many programs are
reimplementations of closed source programs? Look at KDE, and tell me that
they're not just trying to clone Windows. There are ways to be truely
innovative in a desktop environment (look at BeOS, OS X, NeXT, etc.). KDE
is not one of them.
References: