3 ms·
I hear this claim occasionally but it doesn't match my experience. The very first time I used Windows NT 4 (probably 1997 or 1998), I couldn't figure out how t
by ken 7y ago
I hear this claim occasionally but it doesn't match my experience. The very first time I used Windows NT 4 (probably 1997 or 1998), I couldn't figure out how to log out, so I chose Start -> Help to look it up. Bluescreen.
In the subsequent months/years with NT 4, the situation did not improve. It was a sad day when they replaced the HP/UX section of the lab with more NT machines. They were faster but they crashed a lot. It really took until Vista before NT was reliable.
- jacques_chester 7y agoWindows NT was originally a microkernel architecture. NT4 moved a bunch of code back into the kernel space for performance reasons. Most notably: graphics and printer drivers, which are not typically written the highest standard. Big iron vendors don't really have that problem, since they typically control their hardware as well. Microsoft had to rely on component vendors to provide driver software and couldn't plausibly test all permutations under all conditions (even though they test very, very many).
- slacka 7y ago> windows (3.11, 95) would crash, >> At the same time that you were experiencing blue screens >>> first time I used Windows NT 4 For the 3.11/95 period, I was talking about NT 3.51 not 4. Yes, NT 4 had well known issues with poor quality graphics drivers. For this reason many of us stayed with 3.51 until the graphic driver problems were ironed out. You can cherry pick unstable OS's from any time period. But there is nothing special about today's OS's or programs. I've seen DOS, multiple forms of UNIX in the 80's and 90s that are just as stable as today's Win 10 or OS X.