__/ [ p5000011 ] on Sunday 15 April 2007 05:55 \__
> The banal Richard Rasker scribbled:
>
>> If this isn't a sure sign of how utterly crappy Windows is designed,
>> I don't know what is. And, as usual, all the blame is put on the
>> user, who shouldn't have installed this, or shouldn't have tried
>> that, or should not have followed the "funny link" his co-worker or
>> family member sent him ...
>
> I believe it is worse than what the OP said. It was Gates himself who
> said that all OS's suffer from bit rot [TM Microsoft] implying that
> they all need to be re-installed after a certain amount of usage. In
> his blinkered view of things all OS's means all Windows OS's.
>
> Regardless of system performance it is clear that any Windows OS
> should be re-installed every 6 months or less to minimize the
> problems of bit rot.
6 months is the recommendation I have been told about as well. It doesn't
resolve the issue. It's a superficial threshold that follows gradual
degradation in performance. As I've said, this give an upper hand to
preinstalled software (as if _just being there by default_ wasn't enough of
an unfair advantage).
--
~~ With kind regards
For governments that eavesdrop, here is a quick list of tags: Communism,
Hawaiian shirts, China, Suitcase, Martha Stewart, Encryption, Prison,
Stalin. Thanks for tuning in.
|
|
