Quote from: RobertM on 2007.11.02, 02:41:15Unless you're using Windows 98, this is the exception rather than the rule. When I retired my P4 in January it had been running the same Windows XP install since early 2003. Four years on one install and never a blue screen, never a crash, never a quirk, and this PC was typically on 24x7 running any number of intense games or apps. In the 'old days' it was common for Windows server operators to schedule periodic reboots.. They don't do that so much anymore. Windows 2003 boxes can run for months and months without issue. If Windows is not playing nice, 9 times out of 10 it is a sure sign there's something legitimately wrong with the hardware.
(1) I find OS/2 to still be more stable than Windows. While GUI hangs are an issue with OS/2, tools like CAD help eliminate that issue (comes with eCS). In addition, even IF Windows was more stable when initially installed, it degrades severely over time, which OS/2 isn't prone to do to nearly the ame degree.
Quote from: RobertM on 2007.11.02, 02:41:15OS/2 can be a good server if you have hardware it likes, the software you need, and nobody touches it. Meeting all of these requirements may be tricky depending on what you want to do. Bolting on *nix ported things like Apache and Samba are nice, but if you're at that point just to get the functionality you want, why not just run *nix? They make VERY lean Linux distributions these days. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Damn_Small_Linux ). The benefit of OS/2 in this case again, is that it's virtually unhackable unless someone exploits a weakness in the the *nix-based code that happens to exist in the OS/2 port.
(2) OS/2 still can serve more traffic than Windows on less resources (making it an ideal server solution).