I have to say that I can agree with both sides of this issue. From starting out on an old Apple IIc and programming in BASIC all the way until now, I've dealt with computers in general for about 20 years. While XP does have its own quirks and temperament, it is the most stable OS that MS has built to date. The downside is that every new OS that MS has put out has taken more and more input away from the user in the name of simplifying use, which has resulted in a distinct feeling for more experienced users that "Microsoft Knows Best", regardless of what the user wants. ( I, for one, am VERY afflicted by this feeling.) It can get VERY frustrating to know what you want to do,try to tell the computer what to do, and be told that you're not allowed to do it. It is true, also, that over 90% of all system crashes originate in the chair. I work on machines 5 days a week that run XP, and I see the BSOD reboot cycle regularly. What's up with that? If I'm getting a BSOD, then I need to be able to read it so I can address the problem intelligently, not have the machine put itself into a boot cycle from which the only recovery is a complete system restore (can't even get into safe mode or debug mode).
I DON'T however, think that XP is the best OS out. There are others out that, while they DO have a learning curve, ARE more stable, infinitely more flexible and customizable, and not to mention smaller! It's all a matter of what you want or need the computer to do, and what YOU are willing to do to achieve it.
My parting thought is for KISS man.......computers can only do what they're told to do, also known as GIGO(Garbage In, Garbage Out, in case you were wondering)
----- Rick \"Nutcase\" Rogers wrote: -----
Linux is just as capable as spreading viruses as Windows or any other
operating system. The difference is that more of them are written targeting
Windows functions. If you were writing a program for profit, or to attract
(or attack) as many users as possible, would you target Windows, Linux, or
the Mac platform? Kind of a no-brainer there.
Incidentally, there are more security patches for the current Mandrake and
Redhat home-user distributions of Linux than there are for WinXP.
Crashing, by the way, isn't usually caused by the system, it's caused by the
user not properly caring for and implementing the system. Hardware crashes
aren't an OS problem, they are a hardware problem (usually caused by
purchasing cheap hardware in the first place, age, overclocking, or poor
maintenance - mostly things that are, again, within the user's realm of
control).
--
Best of Luck,
Rick Rogers aka "Nutcase" MS-MVP - Win9x
Windows isn't rocket science! That's my other hobby!
Associate Expert - WinXP - Expert Zone
Scott said:
If you mean that Linux is not as capable as spreading virii, then you are
correct. I can do everything I need, could possibly want, and more on Linux
without crashing it 99.99% of the time. Windows crashes more and does less
and generally doesn't work as well.