Quote:
Originally Posted by Thad E Ginathom  98 (I think) was suppose to be all-new, because it didn't load dos and run on top of it --- but loading dos was part of the bootup process, you saw the C:\ > prompt. |
No, Win95 was the first one that didn't piggyback on DOS. It was also the first Windows to have networking.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thad E Ginathom Now, having reached stability in 2K and XP, I'm hearing that Vista is new 'from the ground up'! |
Being from the products background, I have to tell you it is a good thing. An older design can only be stretched so long. After that one has to design a whole new framework based on the lessons learnt from the prior designs and future requirements.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyWheels No doubt that Linux and it distros are more stable than any offering from MS - one reason why most of the critical systems are based on Linux. |
Actually, most critical systems won't be based on Linux at all. There are OSes that can blow Linux away when it comes stability, like Stratus VOS, Tandem (now NonStop), etc. Among the Unix flavours, HP-UX that runs on HP9000 and Itantic servers is considered the most reliable. This was according to an independent survey couple of years back, I can't find the link though.
But with all the hoopla of Windows vs Linux, people forget other less worshipped but more capable OSes.
