🚀 go-pugleaf

Michael David Scott wrote:

> CMT OSes are not immune from crashes.  Believe me I've crashed OS/2
> many a times, Unix stations and NT (which is such a bitch when it crashes).

1. OS/2, NT and UNIX is not CMT, they are fully PMT OSes.

2. I admit that OS/2 has crashed for me, but it's very uncommon to happen
   in contrast to MacOS or Win3.

3. I have only once crashed Solaris 2.4, never more.

4. NT has never crashed for me, and I have runned it daily for almost
   two years now.

5. I haven't runned FreeBSD 2.1 for very long, but so far it has never gone
   down.

> I won't even mention 95 since it is not a CMT OS.

It's true that it's PMT, but I still don't think the multitasking is as stable
as in OS/2, NT, Solaris and FreeBSD.

But I agree that it's miles better than macos and win3, even if I prefer better
alternatives.
 
> Yes, I agree, multiple OS's is nice, but many perfer the ease of the mac and
> reliablity.  It's an easy machine to use when you have work to get done.

It's a machine who frequently crashes and destorys my work. Highly unproductive!

For me, other machines/OSes gives me a much more productive environment.

Best regards,

m a r t i n  n

-- 
Martin Nisshagen          martin@mts.se (MIME 1.0)    "verdi + callas = 
MTS Technology, Sweden    http://www.mts.se/martin     100% pleasure..."