Stupid Platform Wars - Yucck! [Was: O/S superiority [was: RE: XP andFrame]]

[Dov Isaacs <isaacs@xxxxxxxxx>]

Bodvar,

My comments were NOT meant to start one of these stupid,
non-ending platform wars!

The issue was that of "upgrading" from Windows 2000 to XP
and the relative stability of XP.

Please understand that we have quite a bit of experience with
not only the old MacOS versions, but MacOS X as well. I run a
system with MacOS X and a whole shipload of applications in my
office. However, I don't delude myself into making believe that
it doesn't freeze and/or crash on occasion. And my experience
is not unlike that of others at Adobe. Its much more reliable
than MacOS 9 and earlier, but hardly bulletproof. There's a
reason why the MacOS X System Update control panel seems to have
a critical operating system update, including security update, 
for me to download and install ever few weeks. And much of the
work that goes into the MacOS X "dot" and "dot dot" releases
is associated with fixing bugs including OS hangers and crashers.
And that it is good that at least Apple internally hasn't deluded
itself into thinking that its product is anywhere near perfect. 

Similarly, Windows 2000 and XP are much more reliable than the
Windows'9x/Me systems. And there is a steady flow of fixes for
them, as well. One of the bigger challenges that Windows has
is that it is not as "closed" a system in the sense that many
thousands of companies provide peripherals for Windows-based
systems and correspondingly, must provide drivers for same, making
it more difficult to control the all the variables caused by
flaky peripherals and even flakier device drivers written by 
the providers of said-peripherals.

I try to take a dispassionate view towards computer "platforms."
I don't worship my computer, its operating system, the company 
that produced either, or the founder(s) of same. Maybe that's
why I don't foam at the mouth and go into trances when describing
my computing experiences. I haven't and won't turn it into a
religion and/or personality cult.

Enough with this mishagoss already! I will not discuss platforms
on any of the Framers lists anymore.

        - Dov


At 12/9/2003 01:48 AM, Bodvar Bjorgvinsson wrote:
>Dov,
>
>Please be more accurate in these delicate matters. ;-)
>You have the greatest authority on the list, I would say, and that means you must be accurate not only in the Frame matters, but also in the matters of the O/S's.
>
>I have found that you have a great knowledge about the M$ O/S's, much more than is ususal with the average IT people, but do you have that with the other O/S's?
>
>Of course, everyone is happy that the M$ O/S's improve. It was about time, but it is wrong to say that XP is "no less stable" than these. The fact IS different. I have found XP crashing on me for no apparent reason. So have many other XP users.
>
>Going directly to a pro Microsoft website,
>http://www.ntcompatible.com/story20583.html,
>you find this:
>
>"Survey Finds Windows XP Boosts Reliability"
>
>linking you again to this article:
>http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,4149,1185057,00.asp,
>where it says:
>
>"The stability of Linux and Mac OS may have also helped with the rise of overall user satisfaction. These OSs, our readers say, crash even less often than Windows XP."
>
>'Nough said.
>
>Bodvar

*

>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Dov Isaacs [mailto:isaacs@adobe.com]
>> Sent: 8. desember 2003 19:12
>> To: Framers List
>> Cc: Framers List
>> Subject: Re: XP and Frame
>> 
>> 
>> We know of no situation in which "Windows XP corrupts 
>> FrameMaker files."
>> Windows XP is an exceptionally stable operating system and in terms of
>> file system integrity is no less reliable than Windows 2000 or MacOS X
>> or for that matter, many of the UNIX variants.

*

At 12/9/2003 04:36 AM, Thomas Michanek wrote:

>It's quite interesting to check the results of this survey:
>
>"[his] story is one of more than 18,000 we've collected in our 16th annual
> Service and Reliability Survey."
>
>Question: First-year desktops: does your OS freeze?
>
>Mac OS X:   Never ~53%, rarely ~42%, frequently ~ 5%
>Windows XP: Never ~43%, rarely ~44%, frequently ~13%
>Windows 2K: Never ~39%, rarely ~54%, frequently ~ 7%
>Windows NT: Never ~27%, rarely ~63%, frequently ~10%
>Windows 98: Never ~17%, rarely ~66%, frequently ~17%
>Windows ME: Never ~ 7%, rarely ~66%, frequently ~27%
>
>All others: Never ~43%, rarely ~52%, frequently ~ 5%
>
>Diagram at:
>http://common.ziffdavisinternet.com/util_get_image/2/0,3363,i=25924,00.gif
>
>"Fewer than 1 percent of the desktop PCs in the survey are running Linux,
> and fewer than 2 percent are running Mac OS."
>_____________________________________________
>Thomas Michanek, FrameMaker/UNIX/MIF expert


** To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@omsys.com **
** with "unsubscribe framers" (no quotes) in the body.   **