On Tue, 26 Mar 2013 05:05:26 +0100, "Anthony G. Atkielski" <anth...@atkielski.com> wrote:
>Dan (I think) writes: > >> Because, up until today, windows time did what I needed it to do. It may >> still, if the fault turns out to be network related. >> >> In reality, it's more software to learn to administer, and setup and run >> on bunch of PC's. As a time nut, I know exactly how much time I need for >> all of my other hobbies, since there's never enough of it... :) > >I've been using the standard NTP client in Windows XP for ages, and it >works just fine. I tried third-party stuff. It was just more work for >no apparent gain. The XP desktop is synchronized with my NTP server >perfectly within the limits of my perception, so there is no reason to >go further. Microsecond accuracy is not necessary because I have no >way of testing accuracy with that resolution, nor do I have any >application that requires it. I'm mainly concerned with long-term >accuracy, not short-term accuracy, so it's more important to be >correct within 1/100 second over a period of years than to be correct >within 1 microsecond over a day. I have had trouble with the built in XP NTP client where it fails silently so I usually install Tardis which keeps an easy to read log which includes performance data. _______________________________________________ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.