🚀 go-pugleaf

 <Nk8NzgRDAMcC091yn@bigblue.no> <5hc5mg$p0o@client3.news.psi.net>
Lines: 80

In article <5hc5mg$p0o@client3.news.psi.net>,
os2@mistik.express.net (Mustafa Soysal MS57) wrote:
>In article <Nk8NzgRDAMcC091yn@bigblue.no>, B. Vermo <bv@bigblue.no> wrote:
>>In article <5h7kkq$69s@client3.news.psi.net>,
>>os2@mistik.express.net (Mustafa Soysal MS57) wrote:
>>|
>>|You would have an axe to gring with IBM if they weren't able to bring
>>|out a stable version that can run more than 24 hours stable (that's the
>>|most stable it got, after dooming the system to do pretty much nothing
>>
>>It must be something you (or your hardware) are doing. I have always
>>been running on a 365 day 24 hour basis. All serious problems up to
>>now have been traced to hardware or experimental software. Warp 4 is
>>not as stable as OS/2 1.3, but then nothing else on the Intel platform
>
>Linux is, and apparently reportedly on os2-l, NT 3.1 is...

Why not compare it to NT 4.0?  Because you know it is not as stable as 
3.51.  At least have the courtesy to compare apples to apples.

>
>>is either. I do an unattended reboot every Sunday night to clean up
>
>Unattended reboots would be a problem since OS/2 isn't stable.  If the
>WPS starts crashing and rebooting over and over, and ends up connecting
>and disconnecting to the ISP, that would cost a fortune.

Odd, I have a machine at work that does unattended reboots.  The 
hardware isn't even all that great, and I wouldn't recommend that 
particular combination to anyone.  Yet, it does work.  It only reboots 
when a specified parameter is given to a specified program under 
specified conditions.  It hasn't needed a reboot in a while, and I was 
recently out of the office for 1-1/2 weeks.

>However, weekly manual restarts would be acceptable, even for ISP use,
>if OS/2 was that stable.  But it is not.  And I cannot be locked in a
>certain selection of hardware, especially if it is not known at any time
>until you tried it since I may need to upgrade for performance reasons.

Yet, you say you did your own research.  Sounds like you made a bad 
decision, and now you are trying to blame anyone but yourself.  Heck, 
I've made a few bad decisions myself.  Deal with it.

>>after any rogue applications. This only takes 20 minutes, and is a
>>sound practice which I also followed with minicomputers.
>>
>
>I wish it was that stable, and I didn't have to write what I write for
>that reason.

*Yawn*  While I was out of the office for over a week, my machine at 
home running OS/2 4.0 was gathering news and mail and never needed a 
reboot.  However, I did my research and picked hardware according to a 
specified criteria.  Most of my components are over 3 years old now, and
still doing quite well.  Again, I did my research and discovered what I 
needed to do.  I bought some bad hardware, and it turns out that the bad
hardware eventually bit me for OS/2, Windows or anything else.  Yes, 
I've flushed some money down the toilet, but I can hardly blame IBM for 
that.  I do blame hardware manufacturers who cut corners, though.

I should mention, also, that my home machine does a lot of beta testing,
including junk I've hacked together myself.  Honestly, I'm sometimes 
surprised it does as well as it does.

All operating systems have their flaws, and all major vendors, including
IBM, have their flaws.  OTOH, the directionless efforts by MS ("What 
are we going to do tonight, Brain?"  "What we do every night, Pinky. 
We're going to take over the world."), the cluelessness of Gateway 
technicians and the strangeness of Seagate products make IBM look like 
angels.

John

-- 
//------------------------------------------------------------------------
// momerath@apk.net                    sevot yhtils eht dna ,gillirb sawT`
// MarchHare@momeraths.org                 ebaw eht ni elbmig dna eryg diD
//                                           ,sevogorob eht erew ysmim llA
//                                            .ebargtuo shtar emom eht dnA
                     In case of stupidity, break glass.