The slam on Windows is a bit inaccurate. Yorktown was running NT 4.0 alright, but it was a prototype version of the application software that crashed, not NT. It wasn't NT that brought the propulsion system down, it was the propulsion software, and THAT failed because the prototype wasn't validity checking the input, causing a divide by zero. Interested readers can peruse a more even handed article on this issue at http://www.sciam.com/1998/1198issue/1198techbus2.html Please bear in mind that everywhere (even the Navy) there are rarely "discussions" about which OS is best; there are often political turf wars. This incident appears to be one of them, as the main opposition to NT appears to be another vendor who wants to offer a Unix solution. The only reason I care is because I've been the personal target of managers blaming the AS/400 for application software faults. We lost a sale because somebody at the potential client had a vague recollection that "OS/400 sucked at journalling." No data to back that feeling up, but what difference does that make in a religious argument? This'll be my last on the subject, but we'd better learn how to adopt Windows technology _where it makes sense_ rather than mutter about the blue screen of death ad nauseam and show the sign of the evil eye to ward it off. Like it or not, Windows is here and it's not going away. It's on the corporate desktop and in the server farm. They have stuff we can take advantage of, to lever ourselves and our platform into organisations. We are NOT going to do that by making wisecracks about the sysadmin's choice of system to her boss. Isn't that very wisecracking of misinformation what's dogging the iSeries? We'd be better off showing off how well we play with Windows than trying to show how poor Windows is. Just my opinion, and it's worth every penny you all paid for it! --buck
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.