No kidding, reminds me of the NT "user adjustment" that required a reboot
every 45 days. Sheeez, the only adjustment a user should have to make, is
to upgrade periodically as the developers squish bugs (ie this one).
--- Pierre Fortin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mark,
>
> [At the risk of starting a thread that won't die...]
>
> With all due respect, your comments really puzzle me... especially in a
> Linux
> forum... Extending your argument, why was it ever necessary to make
> Linux so
> reliable? Users could just "dump and restart" it too...
>
> Just as I hate reboots, especially unplanned ones (including power which
> is why
> all my systems are on UPSs), I too hate browser crashes/restarts.
>
> "Why"...?
>
> Because it destroys my workflow, negatively affects my thought patterns
> and
> forces a [partial] cranial restart too (lost time). Many of us have
> multiple
> browser windows open because we too are multitasking. By your argument,
> why
> bother having business meetings that build on the previous meetings;
> just "dump
> and restart" all the data, knowledge and decisions as one goes from
> meeting to
> meeting...
>
> Linux, and almost every other non-M$ OS, have over the years proven that
> OS
> crashes are unnecessary and that crash avoidance actually improves
> productivity;
> why should that not apply to applications too...? I suspect you've
> never had a
> browser crash while in the middle of a stock trade during a volatile
> trading
> day... many of us have.
>
> And NO! I don't think it is responsible of developers to expect the
> user to
> make "adjustments" just because they can't get it right. In fact, this
> does
> *not scale*... every bug or misfeature which requires user awareness,
> *multiply* reduces productivity, *multiply* impacts thought processes,
> etc. etc.
>
> We don't need, nor want unplanned application restarts any more than we
> want OS
> reboots.
>
> Hope that answers your "why"... :^)
>
> Regards,
> Pierre
>
> PS: I'm retired and still feel this way... Why? 'cuz my life
> expectancy is
> surely now shorter than yours... :^)
>
>
> Mark Weaver wrote:
> >
> > While I understand this to be a desire of many who use the browsers in
> > this manner, I don't understand "why" this is. The browser was never
> > designed to do such a thing. Why would one want it to? Why not just
> kill
> > the browser now and then, dump the cache and restart the browser.
> Since
> > linux memory management is already good enough to handle running
> > non-stop without trouble it would appear that users, rather then the
> > software would have to make an adjustment here.
> >
> > Mark
> >
> > Bill Barnes wrote:
> > >
> > > Well, part of the rush is for what is hoped to be an
> > > acceptable browser.
> > >
> > > Opera, Netscape6, Netscape 4.76 inevitably crash about
> > > the time you get a decent mix of websites up. I
> > > expect the browser to be up 24/7. Maybe Konqueror
> > > Final can do this.
> > >
> > > -Bill
>
=====
^C
quit
:q
exit
?
help
shit
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
