RE: Windows BSOD vs. AS/400

[mcrump@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]

Walden,

I have to agree with you for the most part.  The problem is that most of our
observations while valid for the environments from which we are dealing with
they are still not empirical.  The only solid evidence I have seen on system
uptime has been from the Gartner group.  As we know the AS/400 blistered NT.  I
do agree that the majority of issues revolve around hardware.  The problem is no
one has yet to ever quantify what percentage of system outages are hardware
related and those that are not.  I would tend to wager the majority of them are
hardware generated.............but we do not know that.

Also, to what level is the OS responsible to handle a hardware problem?  Should
you have to reboot for a soft error?  How about non-responsiveness?  Device
failures aside shouldn't the OS handle errors without causing a complete system
outage????

Not trying to argue (ok to much) just trying to present a different
view.............

Michael Crump
Saint-Gobain Containers





The 400 is a stable machine BECAUSE IBM controls the hardware. Period!






+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---