Mail Archives: djgpp/2000/06/12/20:08:19
On Mon, 12 Jun 2000, Zargon wrote:
> On Wed, 31 May 2000 21:06:09 +0600 (LKT), Kalum Somaratna aka Grendel
> <kalum AT lintux DOT cx> ate too many hallucinogenic mushrooms and wrote:
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Good one! ;)
>
> >Although I am not a fan of windoze Hans, I would like to ask "why
> >shouldn't it not work"...If only programs which are memory hogs (like gcc)
> >and use the CPU at 100% are supposed to crash...then the fact that windoze
> >doesn't crash on the same machine means that windoze code is very
> >efficient and less resource consuming, doesn't it...
>
> I'd be very interested to know just what this vacuous statement is
> supposed to prove. The only time windoze doesn't crash on some machine
> is when that machine isn't running windoze...
I think that our resident guru Eli Z, shares a somewhat different view, he
says that windoze is stable so long as you maintain the DLL integerity,
and don't allow apps with those "superb" installers to overite dll's and
replace them with older version and all that mess to happen.
That view is sound (and I agree to soem extent on it) but it doesn't
explain things like how a "virgin" version of windows milennium was unable
to startup even on it's launch day!
But you have to admit it after say 6 months of installing and uninstalling
software the fscking BSODS get annoying...
Grendel
> --
> "No computer will ever need more than 640K of RAM" -- Bill Gates, c. 1980
> "This antitrust thing will blow over" -- Bill Gates, 1998
a big FSCK YOU to billg and all the others at M$ for there nice comments.
Grendel
Hi, I'm a signature virus. plz set me as your signature and help me spread
:)
- Raw text -