1. Re: Excessive crashing in Windows
- Posted by Kat <gertie at PELL.NET>
Dec 16, 2000
-
Last edited Dec 17, 2000
On 16 Dec 2000, at 15:24, Ben Fosberg wrote:
> Personally, after a dozen or more years working in, and occasionally
> programming in, the Win-dos "environment" (social and binary), I couldn't
> agree with you more. But if one looks at the range of "new best things" being
> hyped by the corporate crapmongers, there's not much reason to hope the
> situation will get any better anytime soon. I've grown tired of ranting about
> it; suffice to say that even the hoard of professional liars at M$ have
> acknowledged that Win-dos is "unstable" under any conditions. And unless one
> wants to be progressively cut off from interaction with the rest of the world
> by way of the internet, there's very little choice but to keep downgrading
> one's system with progressively less reliable garbage.
>
> I might note that the phrase "excessive crashing" indicates some level of
> acceptance of the prevailing slovenly software practices. (I was going to use
> the word "standards," rather than "practices," but that sounded ludicrous in
> the context.) I don't hear too many folks debating how much crashing might be
> acceptable with regard to their cars, even though "user error" is almost
> certainly the prime culprit in that "environment."
Umm, if one considers the planet to be the OS, and the car to be an
application in the OS,, then can i point out the damage to the OS that
gasoline and automobile manufacture and disposal has done? The OS is
crashing, Global Warming rather than General Protection Fault.
It's crossed my feeble mind again that maybe Eu can spiff up dos7 or
win3.11 to make it comparable to win95, but without the crashes?
Kat
