🚀 go-pugleaf

jfreter@triton.unm.edu (The Myth) writes:
> In article <MET.92Jul19191010@pinkie.saber-si.pt> met@pinkie.saber-si.pt (Paulo Loureiro) writes:
> >
> >	Get real. Can you call stupid, launching a program within
> >	windows, (just a double click) just to see the system hang
> >	without even a sigh ? Can you call that stable ? 
> >	Oh, i can see you blamming that particular program, not the os... but
> >	(even ignoring ms-windows is not an Operation System) a REAL
> >	OS protects himself from program crashes.
> >
> >	Consider human error ? Sure! But a well configured OS,
> >	shouln't hang when a program (deep inside a kernel an user is
> >	nothing more than a program) wants to do something that would
> >	break the whole system; it should kill it!
> >
> So, you say that a user is just a program.  And that if a program does some-
> thing stupid, the OS should Kill it.  I think that I'll stay away from any
> OS that tends to kill its users.  We all do make mistakes, right?  Shouldn't
> OS's be much more forgiving and at least give you a second chance before it
> kills you?
> 
> Also, where can I get this OS, so that I could install it on my ex's pc?

Seems a little melodramatic to me.  Operating systems should be designed
to protect their integrity, refusing to do things that compromise it.  All
that is necessary is that the OS deny the request.  It doesn't have to
kill anything.

Vince