On Feb 12, 2005, at 5:59 AM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
The stabilities of NT-based systems and UNIX are roughly the same when kernels are compared.
How exactly does one do this when the NT kernel code isn't available for perusal?
Other than, of course, just running both and assuming that because neither happens to crash running a screensaver, that they must be roughly the same. That's a marketing comparison which has no value.
After taking out all the kernel level stuff for the GUI and other performance enhancements that MS has made for the gamers and other people, I would say that it is probably true that the NT kernel and the BSD kernels are in the same order of magnitude of stability. Dave Cutler and his crew from DEC did a good job with VMS and VAX/ELN and RSX-11M and I would assume that they would do the same job in their kernel design and implementation for M$. However, since that happened MS has dumped a ton of crap into it.
Chad
disclaimer: I have not seen the source to NT but I do know the reputations of the implementors and designers of (at least the original) NT kernel.
ex-DECcie
_______________________________________________ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
