> > In the case of servers, if you absolutely need to run Windows, you
> > need to schedule regular reboots, I think there is a utility that
> > will allow you to set up a reboot as an AT job. If you can't reboot
> > frequently then you need something else. Most Unixes are good, they
> > can often run years between reboots, although the occassional reboot
> > is good for any machine.
> I know that windows is the wrong operating system, but the customers
> will not let me use Linux. Reboots are scheduled, but doing it every
> night is not practical, and once a week is a pain. NT4 runs for
> several weeks without a problem, so a monthly cycle is OK.
If the customer want's to pay twice the financial cost, have half the
reliability, and run the risk that either a user or Microsoft will
FUBAR the server, that is the customers problem.
> > In the case of Workstations or stand alones, they should be "rested"
> > at the end of the day, if for nothing else then the fact it reduces
> > energy usage. 20 years ago when computers were expensive,fragile
> > things and energy was relatively cheap, it made sense to let
> > machines run, because the cost of replacing components more often,
> > outweighed the few dollars per year that it used in energy. Now a
> > machine that runs 7/24 can use up more energy in 2-3 years then it
> > costs to replace the entire computer, which is robust enough that
> > obsolecence will kill it, long before the on/off cycle of the
> > components could ever get it.
> Exactly the same comment as above. Our office systems get switched on
> and off each night, but the rail and airport systems never have a time
> to shutdown as the sites never close. Perhaps Microsoft should admit
> that it's software is not 24/7 and then I could convice the customers
> that we need Linux in a few places. I dropped BDE years ago because a
> power blip could scrap the dBase files, now we have UPS and other
> protections, but we still can't rely on the core of the system.
For machines that can be rebooted every day, Windows isn't a problem,
if it needs to be 24/7 then don't use it, Microsoft will never admit
that it isn't 24/7, because they would be in court before the press-
release is dry.
> I have some Windows3.1 systems that have never been rebooted in
> several years - it can be done, so why is everthing just getting more
> and more unreliable!
Yeah, and how come a 1700 MHZ machine takes 7 times as long to boot
as a 6MHz machine? There are so many patches on Windows, that it's
in worse shape then a bicycle tire in a tack factory.