Bart Silverstrim writes: > Depends on the problem. Windows 98 needed more reboots than NT did on > the same hardware. By your comparison they should be the same in > reliability and performance, no?
No, by my comparison they should experience the same hardware errors (or absence thereof). > But you didn't replace the oil. You replaced the engine and > transmission. The OS is a little more than "just changing the oil" in > car analogies. All the more reason to suspect the OS. > Actually I think he suggested that NT was hiding the problem. Fine. What exactly _is_ the problem? FreeBSD is certainly spewing no end of output to the console about it, but nobody seems to know what it means. > Is anyone on this list running a twenty year old version of UNIX on > their system? Most are running something of at least the 4.x line of > FreeBSD, I thought... Unless 4.x was a total rewrite from scratch with a design completely different from that of UNIX, it's more than twenty years old. > You tried it, you didn't like it, reinstall NT and see if diagnostic > software turns anything up and if not then see if the hardware > continues to run hunky-dory for the next year or so without failing. > No harm, no foul. I didn't say I didn't like it, I said that it has trouble dealing with my SCSI disks. > Usually the first one I've heard is to check the compatibility list, > because that's hardware that it's been tested on. Your hardware is on > the list? Yes. -- Anthony _______________________________________________ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"