Thread: Unix Popularity
View Single Post
Old 7th July 2008
ninjatux's Avatar
ninjatux ninjatux is offline
Real Name: Baqir Majlisi
Spam Deminer
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Antarctica
Posts: 293
Default

Quote:
Regarding the earlier comment on stability and API, I've not had any troubles with W2K or XP stability, and by and large they are more stable than my FreeBSD desktops. There is one glaring exception: XP crashes when you use a network printer, and you lose a connection anywhere along the way. I had a dodgy network cable, and rather than store the output until the device becomes available, the computer crashes. That ins mind-numbingly stupid. On the BSD side, the system itself is very good (if you overlook the early 5.x releases). However, X11 recently has not been particularly stable, and Wine causes occasional crashes. Other things do too. It is not particularly heinous, and it recovers gracefully, but it really is less stable than my W2K development box, which has never, ever crashed.
Wow, just wow. There's no arguing with that. Windows 2000, XP, and Vista have all been unstable for me. Some Linux distros were horribly unstable, but the BSDs are rock-solid.
__________________
"UNIX is basically a simple operating system, but you have to be a genius to understand the simplicity."
MacBook Pro (Darwin 9), iMac (Darwin 9), iPod Touch (Darwin 9), Dell Optiplex GX620 (FreeBSD 7.1-STABLE)
Reply With Quote