>>>>I know that stability was the #1 priority for Win2K. I heard one of the Windows program managers state that under NT, the development team would turn off the computers at night .. it was never left running for long periods of time. That all changed in Win2K. In some cases compatability was sacrificed for stability.
>>>
>>>W2K is far and away the most stable OS Microsoft has released todate. I've been using it since Feb or Mar (?) and average no more than a crash a week. In an attemp to improve on that I installed SP2, but it seemed to make matters worse. Had Win95 the stability of W2K I probably wouldn't have moved to Linux. IMO, though, Win3.11 for Workgroups was as stable, if not more so, than W2K.
>>>JLK
>>
>>Jerry;
>>
>>My experience with Windows 3.11 and VFP 3.0 was a crash averaging every six minutes. That prompted me to have the client move to win 95 (July 1995) and allowed me to complete the project without going insane. Each newer OS has had real improvements measureable in a number of ways. Combine that with the improvements in the tools we use and live is good.
>>
>>Tom
>
>I never used VFP 3.0. The dev tool I used the most with Win3.11 was Advanced Revelation.
>JLK
Jerry;
Once again our paths have crossed! I used Revelation and then Advanced Revelation (around 1989?). That was going to replace all database tools according to the guy who bought the company (I had a conversation with him at one time at meeting here in Silicon Valley). It had some good ideas but did not have acceptance from IT or clients - sounds familiar!
Tom
Précédent
Suivant
Répondre
Voir le fil de ce thread
Voir le fil de ce thread à partir de ce message seulement
Voir tous les messages de ce thread
Voir tous les messages de ce thread à partir de ce message seulement