Debate: Which Windows is most stable?
-
I try to tell my friends which Windows is most stable, and I say XP is not. They say yes, XP is the most stable Windows. .NET Magazine even think the same I do (here they talk about security, but anyway): Remember, Microsoft also promised that Windows XP was the most secure operating system it had ever shipped—and then days later a devastating vulnerability was discovered that was far worse than any previous hole in a Windows operating system So my debate here is about: I want You to tell me if I'm wrong and motivate Why? I also want you to tell me which Windows You say is the most stable? (if you say XP I'll kick ya ass;P) Okay, XP may cause lesser blue-screens, but that doesn't make XP the best and most stable Windows of them ALL! We can exclude these Windows versions: Win 95 Win ME (blue-screen ME) Win 98 Let's dabate about these Windows versions: Win NT (all versions) Windows 2000 Windows XP Windows .NET Server Win 98 SE
So get ready now to write many convincing words!
Rickard Andersson@Suza Computing C# and C++ programmer from SWEDEN! UIN: 50302279 E-Mail: nikado@pc.nu Speciality: I love C#, ASP.NET and C++!
-
I try to tell my friends which Windows is most stable, and I say XP is not. They say yes, XP is the most stable Windows. .NET Magazine even think the same I do (here they talk about security, but anyway): Remember, Microsoft also promised that Windows XP was the most secure operating system it had ever shipped—and then days later a devastating vulnerability was discovered that was far worse than any previous hole in a Windows operating system So my debate here is about: I want You to tell me if I'm wrong and motivate Why? I also want you to tell me which Windows You say is the most stable? (if you say XP I'll kick ya ass;P) Okay, XP may cause lesser blue-screens, but that doesn't make XP the best and most stable Windows of them ALL! We can exclude these Windows versions: Win 95 Win ME (blue-screen ME) Win 98 Let's dabate about these Windows versions: Win NT (all versions) Windows 2000 Windows XP Windows .NET Server Win 98 SE
So get ready now to write many convincing words!
Rickard Andersson@Suza Computing C# and C++ programmer from SWEDEN! UIN: 50302279 E-Mail: nikado@pc.nu Speciality: I love C#, ASP.NET and C++!
Rickard Andersson wrote: Okay, XP may cause lesser blue-screens, but that doesn't make XP the best and most stable Windows of them ALL! Not much to debate IMO: Windows XP has caused the least trouble with me. Had no viruses, no hacks, no corrupt software, no corrupt files, no driver failures, very few network problems, no debugging problems (other than those caused by me not setting .NET up properly), very few blue screens (actually only one caused by UT2003 and me trying to force it too work on a non-3d graphics card.) It is faster to boot up, faster to login, faster to logout. App load times are not noticeably different from W2K. When software has crashed it has not taken out the rest of the system. W2K I would sometimes get this, not often but sometimes. The update feature works smoothly and have had no problems with SP1 (except it locking down IE a bit where I did not want it too.)
Paul Watson
Bluegrass
Cape Town, South AfricaRay Cassick wrote:
Well I am not female, not gay and I am not Paul Watson -
I try to tell my friends which Windows is most stable, and I say XP is not. They say yes, XP is the most stable Windows. .NET Magazine even think the same I do (here they talk about security, but anyway): Remember, Microsoft also promised that Windows XP was the most secure operating system it had ever shipped—and then days later a devastating vulnerability was discovered that was far worse than any previous hole in a Windows operating system So my debate here is about: I want You to tell me if I'm wrong and motivate Why? I also want you to tell me which Windows You say is the most stable? (if you say XP I'll kick ya ass;P) Okay, XP may cause lesser blue-screens, but that doesn't make XP the best and most stable Windows of them ALL! We can exclude these Windows versions: Win 95 Win ME (blue-screen ME) Win 98 Let's dabate about these Windows versions: Win NT (all versions) Windows 2000 Windows XP Windows .NET Server Win 98 SE
So get ready now to write many convincing words!
Rickard Andersson@Suza Computing C# and C++ programmer from SWEDEN! UIN: 50302279 E-Mail: nikado@pc.nu Speciality: I love C#, ASP.NET and C++!
I can't believe you have Win 98 in the list! Yikes! The question is about stability - and in my experience, XP Pro wins I'm afraid! One of the reasons is that it has much more reliable hardware support than W2K - as a laptop user, I found W2K good, but not perfect. XP has improved things. Unfortunately, you also need a stable development environment - I am using VS.NET and the IDE/debugger is SHITE - I have had more hangs and crashes in VS.NET than any other development environment I have EVER used (including Borland C++ 5.x which was a DOG). So, swings and roundabouts. An XP user with VS.NET may have a more unreliable system than a W2K user with VS6, and vice-versa, but for general day-to-day OS reliability, XP wins for me.
When I am king, you will be first against the wall.
-
I try to tell my friends which Windows is most stable, and I say XP is not. They say yes, XP is the most stable Windows. .NET Magazine even think the same I do (here they talk about security, but anyway): Remember, Microsoft also promised that Windows XP was the most secure operating system it had ever shipped—and then days later a devastating vulnerability was discovered that was far worse than any previous hole in a Windows operating system So my debate here is about: I want You to tell me if I'm wrong and motivate Why? I also want you to tell me which Windows You say is the most stable? (if you say XP I'll kick ya ass;P) Okay, XP may cause lesser blue-screens, but that doesn't make XP the best and most stable Windows of them ALL! We can exclude these Windows versions: Win 95 Win ME (blue-screen ME) Win 98 Let's dabate about these Windows versions: Win NT (all versions) Windows 2000 Windows XP Windows .NET Server Win 98 SE
So get ready now to write many convincing words!
Rickard Andersson@Suza Computing C# and C++ programmer from SWEDEN! UIN: 50302279 E-Mail: nikado@pc.nu Speciality: I love C#, ASP.NET and C++!
Only OS's I have had experience with are Win95-2,98,98SE,and Win2000. Out of the lot, Win2000 is definately the most stable. If an application decides to do something naughty, W2K, like all NT systems, recovers gracefully and manages to stop explorer fouling itself in the process. VC6 and Win2000 is the ultimate developer combo. Never had a single problem.
Simon Walton
Sonork: 10024P
-
I try to tell my friends which Windows is most stable, and I say XP is not. They say yes, XP is the most stable Windows. .NET Magazine even think the same I do (here they talk about security, but anyway): Remember, Microsoft also promised that Windows XP was the most secure operating system it had ever shipped—and then days later a devastating vulnerability was discovered that was far worse than any previous hole in a Windows operating system So my debate here is about: I want You to tell me if I'm wrong and motivate Why? I also want you to tell me which Windows You say is the most stable? (if you say XP I'll kick ya ass;P) Okay, XP may cause lesser blue-screens, but that doesn't make XP the best and most stable Windows of them ALL! We can exclude these Windows versions: Win 95 Win ME (blue-screen ME) Win 98 Let's dabate about these Windows versions: Win NT (all versions) Windows 2000 Windows XP Windows .NET Server Win 98 SE
So get ready now to write many convincing words!
Rickard Andersson@Suza Computing C# and C++ programmer from SWEDEN! UIN: 50302279 E-Mail: nikado@pc.nu Speciality: I love C#, ASP.NET and C++!
-
I try to tell my friends which Windows is most stable, and I say XP is not. They say yes, XP is the most stable Windows. .NET Magazine even think the same I do (here they talk about security, but anyway): Remember, Microsoft also promised that Windows XP was the most secure operating system it had ever shipped—and then days later a devastating vulnerability was discovered that was far worse than any previous hole in a Windows operating system So my debate here is about: I want You to tell me if I'm wrong and motivate Why? I also want you to tell me which Windows You say is the most stable? (if you say XP I'll kick ya ass;P) Okay, XP may cause lesser blue-screens, but that doesn't make XP the best and most stable Windows of them ALL! We can exclude these Windows versions: Win 95 Win ME (blue-screen ME) Win 98 Let's dabate about these Windows versions: Win NT (all versions) Windows 2000 Windows XP Windows .NET Server Win 98 SE
So get ready now to write many convincing words!
Rickard Andersson@Suza Computing C# and C++ programmer from SWEDEN! UIN: 50302279 E-Mail: nikado@pc.nu Speciality: I love C#, ASP.NET and C++!
XP properly supports two monitors on one video card, but other that that, W2K was better. XP is a bit too flakey for my liking.
"What do you want to do tonight, Bill?"
"Same thing we do every night, Steve. Try to take over the world!" -
I try to tell my friends which Windows is most stable, and I say XP is not. They say yes, XP is the most stable Windows. .NET Magazine even think the same I do (here they talk about security, but anyway): Remember, Microsoft also promised that Windows XP was the most secure operating system it had ever shipped—and then days later a devastating vulnerability was discovered that was far worse than any previous hole in a Windows operating system So my debate here is about: I want You to tell me if I'm wrong and motivate Why? I also want you to tell me which Windows You say is the most stable? (if you say XP I'll kick ya ass;P) Okay, XP may cause lesser blue-screens, but that doesn't make XP the best and most stable Windows of them ALL! We can exclude these Windows versions: Win 95 Win ME (blue-screen ME) Win 98 Let's dabate about these Windows versions: Win NT (all versions) Windows 2000 Windows XP Windows .NET Server Win 98 SE
So get ready now to write many convincing words!
Rickard Andersson@Suza Computing C# and C++ programmer from SWEDEN! UIN: 50302279 E-Mail: nikado@pc.nu Speciality: I love C#, ASP.NET and C++!
Rickard Andersson wrote: Okay, XP may cause lesser blue-screens, but that doesn't make XP the best and most stable Windows of them ALL! Actually, it kinda does. XP does not crash, therefore it is stable. I love my W200, though. IMO they are both stable, XP is just too full of candy floss. Christian No offense, but I don't really want to encourage the creation of another VB developer. - Larry Antram 22 Oct 2002 Hey, at least Logo had, at it's inception, a mechanical turtle. VB has always lacked even that... - Shog9 04-09-2002 During last 10 years, with invention of VB and similar programming environments, every ill-educated moron became able to develop software. - Alex E. - 12-Sept-2002
-
W2K without a doubt is the best. WinXP is funky, but has far too much bubblegum code in it. Cheers, Simon "From now on, if rogue states want to buy weapons of mass destruction, they're going to have to go on eBay," Mr. Bezos said.
SimonS wrote: W2K without a doubt is the best. I like W2K better because it's so unserious XP! If I ask all of you again: What do think about the standard XP GUI? Isn't the big titlebar very TOO BIG? And the Start button too big and not to forget the Start menu? God thanks it's possible to change back to old Windows look! Rickard Andersson@Suza Computing C# and C++ programmer from SWEDEN! UIN: 50302279 E-Mail: nikado@pc.nu Speciality: I love C#, ASP.NET and C++!
-
Rickard Andersson wrote: Okay, XP may cause lesser blue-screens, but that doesn't make XP the best and most stable Windows of them ALL! Not much to debate IMO: Windows XP has caused the least trouble with me. Had no viruses, no hacks, no corrupt software, no corrupt files, no driver failures, very few network problems, no debugging problems (other than those caused by me not setting .NET up properly), very few blue screens (actually only one caused by UT2003 and me trying to force it too work on a non-3d graphics card.) It is faster to boot up, faster to login, faster to logout. App load times are not noticeably different from W2K. When software has crashed it has not taken out the rest of the system. W2K I would sometimes get this, not often but sometimes. The update feature works smoothly and have had no problems with SP1 (except it locking down IE a bit where I did not want it too.)
Paul Watson
Bluegrass
Cape Town, South AfricaRay Cassick wrote:
Well I am not female, not gay and I am not Paul WatsonPaul Watson wrote: Had no viruses, no hacks What has it to do with Win XP? I know it has a built in Firewall that is not to trust, but I think MS has released a fix or they have not. I have read in many magazines that the Firewall is not stable and not to trust as much as a "real" firewall such ZonAlarm! And I trust every single word... :);P Rickard Andersson@Suza Computing C# and C++ programmer from SWEDEN! UIN: 50302279 E-Mail: nikado@pc.nu Speciality: I love C#, ASP.NET and C++!
-
I can't believe you have Win 98 in the list! Yikes! The question is about stability - and in my experience, XP Pro wins I'm afraid! One of the reasons is that it has much more reliable hardware support than W2K - as a laptop user, I found W2K good, but not perfect. XP has improved things. Unfortunately, you also need a stable development environment - I am using VS.NET and the IDE/debugger is SHITE - I have had more hangs and crashes in VS.NET than any other development environment I have EVER used (including Borland C++ 5.x which was a DOG). So, swings and roundabouts. An XP user with VS.NET may have a more unreliable system than a W2K user with VS6, and vice-versa, but for general day-to-day OS reliability, XP wins for me.
When I am king, you will be first against the wall.
Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: . An XP user with VS.NET may have a more unreliable system than a W2K user with VS6 I run W2K Sp2 and VS.NET and it has NEVER crashed for me and I'm causing crashes in my apps day long and memory leaks so god would know (of course I fix them then when I find them:))! Rickard Andersson@Suza Computing C# and C++ programmer from SWEDEN! UIN: 50302279 E-Mail: nikado@pc.nu Speciality: I love C#, ASP.NET and C++!
-
Paul Watson wrote: Had no viruses, no hacks What has it to do with Win XP? I know it has a built in Firewall that is not to trust, but I think MS has released a fix or they have not. I have read in many magazines that the Firewall is not stable and not to trust as much as a "real" firewall such ZonAlarm! And I trust every single word... :);P Rickard Andersson@Suza Computing C# and C++ programmer from SWEDEN! UIN: 50302279 E-Mail: nikado@pc.nu Speciality: I love C#, ASP.NET and C++!
Rickard Andersson wrote: What has it to do with Win XP? Err, one of your first points against Windows XP was a security vulnerability, i.e. something a hacker or virus could exploit. Rickard Andersson wrote: .NET Magazine even think the same I do (here they talk about security, but anyway): Remember, Microsoft also promised that Windows XP was the most secure operating system it had ever shipped—and then days later a devastating vulnerability was discovered that was far worse than any previous hole in a Windows operating system So I mentioned for the record thatI have had no problems along those lines. Rickard Andersson wrote: I have read in many magazines that the Firewall is not stable and not to trust as much as a "real" firewall such ZonAlarm! Damned if they do and damned if they don't. If they integrate a firewall into the OS then they get bitch slapped by the governement. If they don't, they get bitch slapped by us. WTF are they supposed to do? Anyway you asked for some points on why XP is good so I gave mine.
Paul Watson
Bluegrass
Cape Town, South AfricaRay Cassick wrote:
Well I am not female, not gay and I am not Paul Watson -
Only OS's I have had experience with are Win95-2,98,98SE,and Win2000. Out of the lot, Win2000 is definately the most stable. If an application decides to do something naughty, W2K, like all NT systems, recovers gracefully and manages to stop explorer fouling itself in the process. VC6 and Win2000 is the ultimate developer combo. Never had a single problem.
Simon Walton
Sonork: 10024P
Simon Walton wrote: VC6 and Win2000 is the ultimate developer combo. Never had a single problem. The same for me unlike that I run VS.NET besides! Go Windows 2000!!!! Rickard Andersson@Suza Computing C# and C++ programmer from SWEDEN! UIN: 50302279 E-Mail: nikado@pc.nu Speciality: I love C#, ASP.NET and C++!
-
I try to tell my friends which Windows is most stable, and I say XP is not. They say yes, XP is the most stable Windows. .NET Magazine even think the same I do (here they talk about security, but anyway): Remember, Microsoft also promised that Windows XP was the most secure operating system it had ever shipped—and then days later a devastating vulnerability was discovered that was far worse than any previous hole in a Windows operating system So my debate here is about: I want You to tell me if I'm wrong and motivate Why? I also want you to tell me which Windows You say is the most stable? (if you say XP I'll kick ya ass;P) Okay, XP may cause lesser blue-screens, but that doesn't make XP the best and most stable Windows of them ALL! We can exclude these Windows versions: Win 95 Win ME (blue-screen ME) Win 98 Let's dabate about these Windows versions: Win NT (all versions) Windows 2000 Windows XP Windows .NET Server Win 98 SE
So get ready now to write many convincing words!
Rickard Andersson@Suza Computing C# and C++ programmer from SWEDEN! UIN: 50302279 E-Mail: nikado@pc.nu Speciality: I love C#, ASP.NET and C++!
There's not much to choose between XP and 2000. Both being pretty sturdy. XP being newer is bound to have a few more bugs than 2000. I use both XP and 2000 everyday and haven't had a crash that hasn't been self inflicted in a long while. Michael Life’s not a song. Life isn’t bliss. Life is just this. It’s living. -- Buffy the Vampire Slayer: Once more, with feeling
-
Rickard Andersson wrote: What has it to do with Win XP? Err, one of your first points against Windows XP was a security vulnerability, i.e. something a hacker or virus could exploit. Rickard Andersson wrote: .NET Magazine even think the same I do (here they talk about security, but anyway): Remember, Microsoft also promised that Windows XP was the most secure operating system it had ever shipped—and then days later a devastating vulnerability was discovered that was far worse than any previous hole in a Windows operating system So I mentioned for the record thatI have had no problems along those lines. Rickard Andersson wrote: I have read in many magazines that the Firewall is not stable and not to trust as much as a "real" firewall such ZonAlarm! Damned if they do and damned if they don't. If they integrate a firewall into the OS then they get bitch slapped by the governement. If they don't, they get bitch slapped by us. WTF are they supposed to do? Anyway you asked for some points on why XP is good so I gave mine.
Paul Watson
Bluegrass
Cape Town, South AfricaRay Cassick wrote:
Well I am not female, not gay and I am not Paul WatsonPaul Watson wrote: WTF are they supposed to do? Protect you! I know, but If we look back and remember that XP was an ultimate choose because a much better handle with multimedia, pictures and bla bla... BULL FUCKING SHIT I say! X| X| X| X| Rickard Andersson@Suza Computing C# and C++ programmer from SWEDEN! UIN: 50302279 E-Mail: nikado@pc.nu Speciality: I love C#, ASP.NET and C++!
-
I try to tell my friends which Windows is most stable, and I say XP is not. They say yes, XP is the most stable Windows. .NET Magazine even think the same I do (here they talk about security, but anyway): Remember, Microsoft also promised that Windows XP was the most secure operating system it had ever shipped—and then days later a devastating vulnerability was discovered that was far worse than any previous hole in a Windows operating system So my debate here is about: I want You to tell me if I'm wrong and motivate Why? I also want you to tell me which Windows You say is the most stable? (if you say XP I'll kick ya ass;P) Okay, XP may cause lesser blue-screens, but that doesn't make XP the best and most stable Windows of them ALL! We can exclude these Windows versions: Win 95 Win ME (blue-screen ME) Win 98 Let's dabate about these Windows versions: Win NT (all versions) Windows 2000 Windows XP Windows .NET Server Win 98 SE
So get ready now to write many convincing words!
Rickard Andersson@Suza Computing C# and C++ programmer from SWEDEN! UIN: 50302279 E-Mail: nikado@pc.nu Speciality: I love C#, ASP.NET and C++!
A quick question first: which of those operating systems have you used exhaustively in your day to day work? :~
David Wulff http://www.davidwulff.co.uk
"Life, as well as software, has bugs." - Roger Wright
-
SimonS wrote: W2K without a doubt is the best. I like W2K better because it's so unserious XP! If I ask all of you again: What do think about the standard XP GUI? Isn't the big titlebar very TOO BIG? And the Start button too big and not to forget the Start menu? God thanks it's possible to change back to old Windows look! Rickard Andersson@Suza Computing C# and C++ programmer from SWEDEN! UIN: 50302279 E-Mail: nikado@pc.nu Speciality: I love C#, ASP.NET and C++!
Rickard Andersson wrote: If I ask all of you again: What do think about the standard XP GUI? The standard skin is ok. Not fantastic, but ok. Works well for non-techy users. But then if you count this against XP then really, come on. BMWs suck cause they come in pink :rolleyes: Just get a nicer skin, watercolor is brilliant. It is basically W2K look, but with a softer, slimmer feel.
Paul Watson
Bluegrass
Cape Town, South AfricaRay Cassick wrote:
Well I am not female, not gay and I am not Paul Watson -
I try to tell my friends which Windows is most stable, and I say XP is not. They say yes, XP is the most stable Windows. .NET Magazine even think the same I do (here they talk about security, but anyway): Remember, Microsoft also promised that Windows XP was the most secure operating system it had ever shipped—and then days later a devastating vulnerability was discovered that was far worse than any previous hole in a Windows operating system So my debate here is about: I want You to tell me if I'm wrong and motivate Why? I also want you to tell me which Windows You say is the most stable? (if you say XP I'll kick ya ass;P) Okay, XP may cause lesser blue-screens, but that doesn't make XP the best and most stable Windows of them ALL! We can exclude these Windows versions: Win 95 Win ME (blue-screen ME) Win 98 Let's dabate about these Windows versions: Win NT (all versions) Windows 2000 Windows XP Windows .NET Server Win 98 SE
So get ready now to write many convincing words!
Rickard Andersson@Suza Computing C# and C++ programmer from SWEDEN! UIN: 50302279 E-Mail: nikado@pc.nu Speciality: I love C#, ASP.NET and C++!
Rickard Andersson wrote: Windows 2000 W2k is more stable and don´t have that XP´s TeleTubbies interface... Mauricio Ritter - Brazil Sonorking now: 100.13560 MRitter "Th@ langwagje is screwed! It has if's but no end if's!! Stupid php cant even do butuns on forms! VISHAUL BASICS ARE THE FUTSHURE!" - Simon Walton
-
Rickard Andersson wrote: Windows 2000 W2k is more stable and don´t have that XP´s TeleTubbies interface... Mauricio Ritter - Brazil Sonorking now: 100.13560 MRitter "Th@ langwagje is screwed! It has if's but no end if's!! Stupid php cant even do butuns on forms! VISHAUL BASICS ARE THE FUTSHURE!" - Simon Walton
-
It's Fisher Price actually - with a default Teletubby background image... :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: It does grow on you. I recently tried the Classic style (i.e. W2K) and it's really boring! :eek:
When I am king, you will be first against the wall.
Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: tried the Classic style (i.e. W2K) and it's really boring But it's not Windows if it's not the classic style! :rolleyes: Rickard Andersson@Suza Computing C# and C++ programmer from SWEDEN! UIN: 50302279 E-Mail: nikado@pc.nu Speciality: I love C#, ASP.NET and C++!
-
A quick question first: which of those operating systems have you used exhaustively in your day to day work? :~
David Wulff http://www.davidwulff.co.uk
"Life, as well as software, has bugs." - Roger Wright
I am still in school and use Windows 2000 day long. I tried XP one day and it made me sick! Rickard Andersson@Suza Computing C# and C++ programmer from SWEDEN! UIN: 50302279 E-Mail: nikado@pc.nu Speciality: I love C#, ASP.NET and C++!