On Sun, 10 Sep 2006 11:36:52 -0400, Phil Smith III <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >... XP is an order of magnitude more >stable than 2000 which was an order of magnitude more stable than 98 >which was an order of magnitude more stable than 95 which was an order >of magnitude more stable than 3.1....
You are saying that XP is four orders of magnitude more stable than 3.1? That means on the order of 10,000 times better. It's not. Or to put it another war, if 3.1 crashed, on the average, after an hour, for each to be an order of magnitude better than the previous, 95 would crash twice a day 98 would crash twice a week 2000 would crash 5 times a year and XP would stay up for two years Tom Marchant ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
