The most stable operating system ever

[JasonPC]

More than likely it's the ram that's hurting him the most. 1 GB is just not enough to both run windows 7 and game. 1 GB is pretty much just enough to run office apps and surf the web. Though isn't DDR400 a little costly these days?

I've only had 1 BSOD in Windows 7 and it was due to a bad overclock. I never really had stability problems in Vista either.

[Redeemed]

Originally Posted by JasonPC

More than likely it's the ram that's hurting him the most. 1 GB is just not enough to both run windows 7 and game. 1 GB is pretty much just enough to run office apps and surf the web. Though isn't DDR400 a little costly these days?

Yup- it is.

[Sazar]

Originally Posted by Zelda_fan

You must have some faulty hardware. I'd had Win7 64 since the beta days and I have never had one BSOD.

+1

I've had apps die on me but the OS would not crash, it would just work on closing out or killing the failed component so I could keep working.

Error reports are also very useful and the stability testing wizards are relatively useful

That said, Vista was also very stable for me, only ever died on the nvidia driver issues that apparently still plague systems. Win 7 build has been very stable for my HTPC.

[Drolfrawd]

Originally Posted by Sean_W

Drivers have always been a problem on Windows and continue to be, so nothing has changed.

It's the same old story, blame drivers, and hardware and if people still don't have a clue, it must be the users fault because true Windows experts don't have such noob issues.

You Sir are....correct

[Sean_W]

Windows usually takes longer than three months before it starts to crash and burn after official release.

Personally, I think Windows 2000 was the best Windows version for stability.

[Redeemed]

Originally Posted by Sean_W

Drivers have always been a problem on Windows and continue to be, so nothing has changed.

It's the same old story, blame drivers, and hardware and if people still don't have a clue, it must be the users fault because true Windows experts don't have such noob issues.

Let they're a cakewalk under any Linux distro!

Had a heck of a time getting my dual 640MB 8800GTSs to work (SLi)... Took merely a few clicks of the mouse and a handful of minutes under Vista Ultimate x64 and I was up and running.

I did have that occassional crash that plagued nVidia drivers but at least I could use the system and have proper SLi functionality.

Part of the problem was I didn't have the time to learn the Linux command prompt. Hopefully this year that can change- get a rig dedicated for just Linux. Will be awesome.

[Sean_W]

Originally Posted by Redeemed

Let they're a cakewalk under any Linux distro!

Had a heck of a time getting my dual 640MB 8800GTSs to work (SLi)... Took merely a few clicks of the mouse and a handful of minutes under Vista Ultimate x64 and I was up and running.

I did have that occassional crash that plagued nVidia drivers but at least I could use the system and have proper SLi functionality.

Part of the problem was I didn't have the time to learn the Linux command prompt. Hopefully this year that can change- get a rig dedicated for just Linux. Will be awesome.

Well, if you was to use something like OpenSUSE, they have a one-click install which adds the NVIDIA driver repos. Opensource Linux distros cannot include proprietary drivers by default, but some distros do have an easy way to get the NVIDIA drivers installed within a few clicks(Ubuntu/Kubuntu has a hardware manager for that, which is purely GUI and is as easy as Windows update).

Never used SLI so I cannot comment on it.

[Redeemed]

Originally Posted by Sean_W

Well, if you was to use something like OpenSUSE, they have a one-click install which adds the NVIDIA driver repos. Opensource Linux distros cannot include proprietary drivers by default, but some distros do have an easy way to get the NVIDIA drivers installed within a few clicks(Ubuntu/Kubuntu has a hardware manager for that, which is purely GUI and is as easy as Windows update).

Never used SLI so I cannot comment on it.

I was using Ubuntu at the time, even tried Kubuntu. No go.

[Sazar]

Originally Posted by Sean_W

Windows usually takes longer than three months before it starts to crash and burn after official release.

No. My previous Vista build was, outside of a couple of Nvidia driver related bsod's, stable for over 1.5 years, till I flipped to Windows 7.

My HTPC at that point had my old ATi card, no stability issues in well over a year and half there too

The OS is only as stable as the end-user allows it to be the vast majority of time and while the new OS's are pretty darn good at fixing ID 10 t errors, it's not 100% fool-proof.

Personally, I think Windows 2000 was the best Windows version for stability.

Error handling is far superior with Vista and Windows 7. It takes a hell of a lot more to get the OS to crash now, especially with Windows 7.

Win2k was fantastic for it's time and quite stable because of the kernel it was built off of, but it had far more points of failure than Windows 7 based items.

[Sazar]

Originally Posted by Redeemed

I was using Ubuntu at the time, even tried Kubuntu. No go.

Heh, you're not the only one.

Had a lot of trouble getting my stuff working exactly how I wanted it to be. I finally got it the way I wanted but... it took a while.

[Redeemed]

Originally Posted by Sazar

Heh, you're not the only one.

Had a lot of trouble getting my stuff working exactly how I wanted it to be. I finally got it the way I wanted but... it took a while.

Yeah- that's what I have a hard time with Linux... I just haven't had the time to sit down and learn it properly.

Hopefully that will change this year.

[Sean_W]

That's assuming you can even install Windows 7. According to Microsoft, the biggest issue with Windows 7 was and is, install failures.

To me Windows 7 is no more stable than any other Windows OS. I've never had to worry about stability in Linux and have had years and years of solid stability from it.