Post by thread:[OT] RE: Serious complaint about VIRUS ATTACHMENT

Imre, the main focus of my message was about the 'fool' word and I thank Mike about his last clarifiying email. Personally I think that when comparing two OS bugs you have to consider also this parameters: * Number of installations (problems increases proportionally with them) * Number of technologies inside the OS (TAPI, Directx, ADSI, (D)COM, Speech SDK, ....) * Large support for locales The instability of Windows 95 has been requested by users. The main target was the portability of the old DOS/Win16 apps. This feature cannot live with a stable Kernel. (You can read all the details in "Systems Programming for Windows 95" by Oney). Windows NT is a completely different thing since the target was a new redesigned operating system. (You can read details in "Inside Windows NT" by Solomon). My personal opinion is that open source model could not lead to all this number of technologies. Win2000 is really an innovative product (more than 1 year of beta testing at the moment), and since life is short I prefer to see the new stuff as soon as possible. Thanks to all the technologies in the OS, software applications can be cheap (i.e. in DOS you had to develop your own video driver). Thanks to a leading OS, software applications can be cheap because we don't have to develop applications for 3, 4 or 5 OS. Sorry fot this long OT. Raffaele Rialdi {Original Message removed}