quote:
Originally posted by Xyle: iGeek...:
Microsoft must be very proud. they have DOUBLED the efficiency of their flagship product. Wow. Windows must have a fucking amazing development team. I guess i should run out and buy windowsXP right now!!!
jesus. i fucking hate microsoft. That article is funny. i sure wish that my computer at work knew that it was supposed to stay up for 31.4 days. Im lucky to get 2 days.
They state that XP pc's did *not* crash. Now, this may be true or not (I must tell from experience that I find it hard to believe that a battery of serious XP PC's stays up for 31 days collectively) - it implies that the average uptime increases by a magnitude of X {X e R | 2 < X}. So that part of the article is far from bullshit.
The rest is worse however - I'm surprized you guys picked up the wrong objections. Wasn't Win98SE supposed to be stable in his days (according to marketing)?
Not to mention that they stress-test it for 7 days to 'simulate' 31 days, which is of course total bullshit since it leaves out the state-of-the-moon-issues Windows seems to have. If you want to stress-test an OS to see if it'll hold out for 31 days, run it for 31 days. With different loads. It's not a fucking tire.
Third, it is shown time and time again that computers behave very different in the wild than in the lab. Lab-reports are all but useless.