[A83] Re: [OT] Re: Me so curious

To: assembly-83@lists.ticalc.org
Subject: [A83] Re: [OT] Re: Me so curious
From: Olle Hedman <alh@home.se>
Date: Sat, 14 Sep 2002 17:21:07 +0200
References: <20020909194353.318.qmail@web10002.mail.yahoo.com> <5.1.0.14.0.20020910143044.00a4bb20@pop.snet.yahoo.com> <3D7E57E9.60900@home.se> <000201c25bf6$6daafcc0$080a0a0a@ronald>
Reply-To: assembly-83@lists.ticalc.org
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.1b) Gecko/20020721


Ronald Teune wrote:

>Well, Microsoft, good OSes are there since there were good computers.
>Anyway, is the OS really changed? One day I heard that in windoze all
>programs are hooked in the OS core, so if one program crashes, it takes
>everything down. In Linux everything would be free and not hooked into
>eachother, so if a program crashes, only the program itself crashes.
>Is this also the case in NT/XP? Or is the commercial lying... lie-ing, well,
>I mean "it lies".
>I really had to say this. :-)
>
In Win2k, they have actually managed to get both process handling and 
memory mangamement quite right.
So if one program, or even one service (kernel close programs for things 
like network, servers, devices, all kinds of stuff) goes down, it 
doesn't take the system with it.
Still has problem with faulty drivers/hardware though, but that is hard 
to get around. Linux has problems with that too.
XP is basicly win2k with some paint, and a couple of new boards, and 
some usability stripped away, so its the same.

///Olle

References:

[A83] Re: Me so curious

From: Aaron Ecay <aecay@yahoo.com>

[A83] Re: Me so curious

From: Gavin Olson <gtolson@snet.net>

[A83] Re: Me so curious

From: Olle Hedman <alh@home.se>

[A83] Re: Me so curious

From: "Ronald Teune" <rtwolf@gmx.net>