Hans-Christian Andersen
hans.andersen at phulse.com
Mon Jun 4 11:23:40 CDT 2012
This is true. In all my experience, Windows Server has been fairly solid and does not run up into the same issues that regular desktop users do. However, Windows Server would also be useless to most ordinary users, let alone prohibitively expensive to buy as a regular user. If you only use Windows for Office and Outlook and only have experience within an office environment, then you might not be able to understand the much larger consumer market and how regular users use their computers. > > If the OS that you use, is run in the way it was built for, there are > usually a limited number of problems. If you start trying to hack a system > this is where problems start. Install enough junk-ware on any system and it > will not be long before its crippled. If someone deliberately hacks away at their system and installs junk ware, then its their fault. But, the problem with saying this is that one mans junk ware can be another mans Photoshop. It almost sounds like you are suggesting that one should not install additional applications on Windows? "An operating system (OS) is a set of software that manages computer hardware resources and provides common services for computer programs." Hans On 2012-06-04, at 8:59 AM, Jim Lawrence wrote: > Hans: > > Problems with Windows are not as dependant on the OS as its environment. If > you have a well built piece of hardware, 90 percent of your problems are > gone. PC and Desktops have always been a problem; I just have not figured > out how to take the users out of the equation. > > In a work environment, windows has been very stable. That is because the > users ability to add, change and delete things is limited. > > It is hardly fair to compare the stability of servers to that of the desktop > PC. Servers by their nature and users, generally an expert, seem to always > just run. They never stop, need nothing but minor maintenance and can run > for years until their capacity and speed retires them. > > I have many clients who have servers (small local companies usually have > Windows servers) which are 8 to 9 years old and my job is always to get > another year out of them. I personally have a very old server, at eleven > years old, runs 24 x 365 and only because many failing pieces of hardware > will it need replacing. It ran Windows server OS 2000 for a few years and > then in 2003, was replaced with a freshly minted 2003 server piece of > software which has run successfully ever since. > > I have replaced hundreds of PC, especially from banks, investment houses and > insurance companies. The PC on which the user works are locked down tight, > the boxes are some of the cheapest pieces of junk that have ever graces a > desktop, but they run without incident for their years (two to three) and > when their lease expires, they are replaced and the cycle continues. The > support IT guys rarely have PC issues, other than hardware failures. > > If the OS that you use, is run in the way it was built for, there are > usually a limited number of problems. If you start trying to hack a system > this is where problems start. Install enough junk-ware on any system and it > will not be long before its crippled. > > Jim > > -----Original Message----- > From: dba-tech-bounces at databaseadvisors.com > [mailto:dba-tech-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Hans-Christian > Andersen > Sent: Monday, June 04, 2012 1:33 AM > To: Discussion of Hardware and Software issues > Subject: Re: [dba-Tech] So long, Norman > > Gustav, > > Where do I even begin? It is entirely possible that either you have been > blessed or I and those close to me personally and professionally have been > cursed, but I have never known a Windows system to be stable for very long. > Usually after 6 or so months it starts developing "quirks". The occasional > slowness or crash or not being able to connect to some device properly etc. > Something just feels off. Then, after that, it's just a question of eventual > disintegration. There are no obvious hints as to what the problem is. Your > anti-virus software manages to find some ugly tracking cookies, but nothing > beyond that. Your hard drive seems fine and SMART doesn't flag anything. > Your system is all up-to-date and you aren't running out of disk space and > memory seems fine. After a while, sleeping/hibernating your computer returns > it to a very slow system where Windows just seems to frequently stare off to > space occasionally for no reason and your USB device (i.e. mouse or whatnot) > refuses! > to connect. No applications are running and so you shrug your shoulders > and figure a clean reboot is the best option. This is often the best > solution, returning your system to its normal speed and state, but for how > long? > > Granted, if you only install a minimum amount of applications and do not > surf the web, you can probably keep Windows pretty stable, but you would not > be the ordinary Windows user then. Most users will be installing many things > over time: applications, games, etc and all the DLLs & other dependencies > that come along with that. Windows is a fickle beast to such users. It works > well for a while, but just the slightest thing will push it over the > critical edge and you never know what that might be. > > If this does not ring familiar to you, then I don't know what to say. This > has been my experience personally and through people who needed technical > help with Windows, including managing a corporate Windows network and > terminal services on Windows Server 2008. The smartest thing you can do is > take a snapshot of your newly installed system with something like > DriveImage XML, making sure to keep your data on a separate partition from > your system partition, and restore your system ever so often. I'm not saying > this as a newcomer to Windows. I've been a PC users since the days of DOS, > but personally decided to jump ship before Vista came out. Saying that, I've > still been managing Windows machines since, so I am familiar enough with > Vista and 7. > > Speaking of terminal services, I've currently got a system with 25-30 or so > connected users, which has a WINSXS folder filling up like crazy with > multiple copies of the same darned DLL files over and over again to the > point where it fills up 15 gigabytes. This server is static in the sense > that no new software has been installed in over a year or two, yet this > directory keeps growing all the time for whatever brilliant reason. My guess > is that Windows Server just keeps on thinking that its probably best to play > safe and duplicate DLLs every single time the same application (office, > firefox and IE) is launched (remind me again what a DLL is for? <sarcasm>). > > Does anyone if it is safe to simply wipe this directory? And do you know why > this is happening specifically? > > Hans > > > > > On 2012-06-02, at 11:52 PM, Gustav Brock wrote: > >> Hi Hans >> >> I don't get it. I've never had the need to reinstall a workstation. Except > once, where multiple local SQL Server installations completely messed up > themselves on my four year old Vista. Which learned me to not install any > SQL Server other than SQL Server Express locally. >> >> /gustav >> >> >>>>> hans.andersen at phulse.com 01-06-12 19:03 >>> >> >> Congratulations on the upgrade. :) >> >> And just in time to dodge the incoming Windows 8 debacle as well. >> >> I remember that feeling of liberation. It totally changed my outlook on > computers. It was back in the days of XP, when Microsoft announced that > Longhorn was going to be called Vista and they were going to cut out all the > best features that they had been touting and promising for years. I switched > over to OpenSUSE back then, but it was still early days for Ubuntu and Mint > didn't exist yet. I remember being amazed having a laptop that had new life > breathed into it. It was stable and fast and didn't need reinstalling every > 6 months to a year. After being a heavy Windows user since 3.11, this was a > new experience for me. :p >> >> By the way, don't under-estimate how powerful WINE is at being able to run > Windows applications on Linux natively. It's not perfect, but it's able to > handle quite a lot of applications rather well. So, if there is any > particular application or game that you miss from Windows and would > frequently use, give it a try. >> >> - Hans >> >> _______________________________________________ >> dba-Tech mailing list >> dba-Tech at databaseadvisors.com >> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-tech >> Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com > > > _______________________________________________ > dba-Tech mailing list > dba-Tech at databaseadvisors.com > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-tech > Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com > > _______________________________________________ > dba-Tech mailing list > dba-Tech at databaseadvisors.com > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-tech > Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com