Yep, and my guess it is us - letting them do so. If enough of us pressed hard enough for a solid, capable, stable system it might be different.

Cheers,

Jim N

>Hi Jim,
>
>Understood. But something is driving MS to move on to the next generation of whatever before the current one is truly stable, etc.
>
>Bill
>
>>Hi Bill,
>>
>>As long as we (MS' customers) put up with whatever they throw at us it will for sure stay exactly as it is.
>>
>>And I truly doubt that MS has any serious worries about "or someone else will come along with the new bells and whistles before them and they suddenly face the possibility of being the persuer...". Linux could possibly be said to be one such animal, yet as I understand things its main claim to fame is stability based on straightforward code. In other words, IF Linux makes any serious inroads it will NOT be because of "the new bells and whistles".
>>
>>Cheers,
>>
>>Jim N
>>
>>>
>>>I hear ya. But it would seem that MS could make the OS's that reliable if they could stop with one long enough to "get it right". However, in the overall scheme of things they can't spend the time/effort to get one "right" because they have to be working on the next generation or someone else will come along with the new bells and whistles before them and they suddenly face the possibility of being the persuer instead of the persued. Just IMO.
>>>
>>>Bill