How to have a stable Windows box

[Simonta]

Hi folks. I'm a *nix newbie (in fact, posted a plea for help in the software forum - hint) but want to give something back. I am most definitely not a newbie with Windows.

Here's how to get stable Windows.

Run Windows 2000 or better still, XP.
Don't use uncertified drivers. I have my XP box set to refuse them.
Set file protection so that installs can't overwrite system files.
Don't log on as admin (same as root) for everyday work.
As far as possible, use hardware on the compatibility list.
Set Windows update to automatic.
Don't futz with the system. Install the apps you need then let it run.
Don't reboot. Use suspend and power saving.

I've got a hand built box with XP. I've rebooted 3 times in 8 months - all for updates. I've never had a blue screen or a hang. the closet I've had is apps crashing because the network drops or I lose my ADSL connection but that's the same for all desktop OSes I've ever seen.

As to security, look at the indepent reports or even *nix distros own lists, I offer http://www.suse.com/us/support/security/index.html as an examle into evidence. It's just as difficult to secure a *nix box as a Windows one. Most exploits can be traced to admin failures. The bugs only provide the key.

IMHO, Windows XP is better in nearly all respects than the Linux distros I've looked at (especially in installation, compatibility, ease of use and stability) with perhaps the expection of window management performance but I spend about 0.1% of my entire time at a PC waiting for windows to open or doing window management so that's irrelevant to me. I've benchmarked file and graphics performance and they're both at the limits of the hardware (I get 22MBS sustained from my main drive).

Cheers

Simon

[MartinB]

Ummm... you think maybe these tips would be more useful for people over at windowsnewbies.org (Or whatever the Windows equivilant to Linux newbies is)? I mean, the vast majority of people here have Linux (Hence the name "Linux Newbies") so I doubt that they have any need for Windows because they already have something that's better. The only reason I keep Windows 98 around is for games that are not available in Linux yet, and that hardly requires an up-time of months.

[Simonta]

Fair play Martin, I should have thought harder :-)

I just noticed that lots of folks seems to have stability problems in Windows and wanted to give some tips. I'm lucky in being, before my grey haired days, a Windows developer so I know it inside out. That helped me to have stability including 98 and ME.

I like helping people but have to admit, to get stable 98 and ME takes significant discipline and geek level knowledge that is beyond a generic post.

That's why I like XP - it's finally killed the geek ghost and the command line (and DOS) are gone forever :-)

BTW (and not for you Martin but for others interested in the thread). The main advice I'm getting for my Linux issues has been based around the command line. As a Windows dev to the Linux folks, that would be my main target for advances. It seems to me like starting a car with a cranking handle. And yes, I'd love to buy "a car with the hood welded shut". I just want to drive it. I don't care how it works or want to change the oil and tune it for another 1/2 a horsepower. That's my current beef with Linux. If you want to beat Microsoft, learn from them - especially for ease of use. Don't berate them, it just turns people off.

PS. I was bought up in Derby...Derbyshire born, Derbyshire bred etc...

[MartinB]

I have to say that I have tried Windows XP. Before I had Linux, I tended to try every new version of Windows that was released, so I've ended up trying Windows ME, 2000 and XP Pro, and out of those, ME lasted the longest before I reverted back to Windows 98, and I still see many people using Windows 98 (I do call-outs for computer repairs, and most of the people's computers I fix are running Windows 98).

For me at least, I use Windows for it's compatibilty - nothing more. When I want stability, speed and customization, I use Linux. When I install ME, 2000 or XP, it takes away much of the compatibility that I use Windows for (Admitibly, ME only prevents me from playing a couple of old DOS games, but as far as I'm concerned, ME is 98TE (Third Edition) with DOS removed (For no apparent reason it seems) and takes up 500MB instead of 200MB, so there's no real advantage to it). So while I admit that Windows XP Pro is quite stable (I've found Windows 2000 to be quite the opposite, though I had the first version released), I just don't see the point of using it if my MIDI sequencer and my games no longer work in it - that's why, despite the all of the problems in Windows 98SE, I still keep it hanging around on my computer.

I see your point about the command line stuff (Actually, the advice I gave you for one of your problems in another thread involved no command line stuff). Linux newbies (and the unwilling-to-learn majority) don't want to see the command line. I personally find learning the command line invaluable, since it allows me to work much faster, especially since there is so much you can do with it in Linux. But that's why companies like Mandrake, SuSE and RedHat (?) work to create GUI programs that allow you to easily configure your system. Most of the time of course, all they're really doing is changing the contents of text files for you. But you have to remember that while DrakConf or DiskDrake might be a solution to you, it won't work for someone who isn't using Mandrake, and that's why people generally give solutions based on command lines - They work for the majority, regardless of which distribution you have. (Also, someone who's not using Mandrake may not know about Mandrake's configuration tools)

Of course, the GUI configuration utilities that you get are by no means perfect and can't do everything, but I don't believe that the demand is catching on from the mainstream quite yet who would require such programs. That's why companies like Mandrake and SuSE, and also the developers of desktop envrionments like KDE and GNOME are working to create them and make things easier for newbies; as Linux reaches the more "technically unaware" of the population through places like Wal-Mart selling PC's pre-loaded with Mandrake, people will start to demand such things and the distribution companies are just now starting to create them, tweak them and getting them working right so that people can easily use them without having to open a terminal. That's

All in all, it's really up to the distributers and the desktop environment developers to make Linux accessable, not the developers who work to improve Linux and the essential programs that are used in it.

[MxCl]

To create stability in Windows98 I suggest removing Internet Explorer. My win98 install (which I still use occassionally) is very stable and only significantly so because I removed MSIE. I did this using 98Lite: http://www.litepc.net (I think).

There are issues with removing IE, that is you won't be able to use some software eg. MS Office. Most Linux users won't find this an issue though I imagine. For me I only use Windows for games and EAC.

I heartily recommend either ierad.inf (free) or 98lite itself (costs money). 98Lite removes (or re-adds) more than just MSIE, it makes just about everything in Windows optional which is a bonus in itself.

I have also been in discussion with the author of a 98lite type program which is free and can be found at: http://www.beta10.com. The program is called oppcom and sounds very promising, however I have not tried it.. I don't boot Windows often enough!

[Dutch_64]

the most stable windows is the one that stay's on the cd ;)

[LrngTheHardWay]

Originally posted by MxCl
To create stability in Windows98 I suggest removing Internet Explorer. My win98 install (which I still use occassionally) is very stable and only significantly so because I removed MSIE. I did this using 98Lite: http://www.litepc.net (I think).

It used to be: http://www.96lite.net/
but has gone over to: http://www.litepc.com/

Free downloads are at:
http://www.litepc.com/download.html

I'll second the assertion that all versions of Win-whatever are both stabilized and sped up by the complete removal of IE from the installation. (I do love it that Bill perjured himself in court on the issue of Windoze dependency upon IE. ("Removing IE would completely break the OS.")

Originally posted by Simonata
IMHO, Windows XP is better in nearly all respects than the Linux distros I've looked at (especially in installation, compatibility, ease of use and stability) with perhaps the expection of window management performance but I spend about 0.1% of my entire time at a PC waiting for windows to open or doing window management so that's irrelevant to me. I've benchmarked file and graphics performance and they're both at the limits of the hardware (I get 22MBS sustained from my main drive).

Frankly, I see little rational basis for offering (particularly in this venue) what amounts to hyperbole, false information and nearly C&P'd Micro$oft ad copy...unless this is a deliberate attempt at trolling of course.
Uh, you wouldn't happen to be Rick Segal in disguise--carpeting the Internet with AstroTurf-- again, would you? ;)

I never cease to be amused by the number of times that a supposed MCSD posts information that is contrary to my many years of experience--as a card-carrying MCSE--with M$ offerings.
The natural implication of such postiongs being, "I'm a developer. I have secret knowledge that you can't possibly have, and contradicting me will only end in public humiliation and loss of credibility for you." Interestingly enough, (nearly without exception) those same postings advocate the purchase of "non-dead" M$ products--even though some of the so-called "dead products" are available and more appropriate to the task.

On the other hand, if it takes a developer cert to keep M$ from throwing BSODs five times a day, then M$ isn't as easy to use as claimed. Obviously, the hood isn't truly welded shut on your car.

Originally posted by Simonata
Don't berate them, it just turns people off.

Or, in other words, "Let's not confuse the discussion with the facts." For those, you might want to take a look here (http://www.****microsoft.com/content/whatsbad.shtml).

I will allow you this: XP is (in addition to being ridiculously expensive at all distribution and licensing levels) far more stable than previous iterations of Win-whatever. Sheesh! It sure took 'em long enough, and it remains to be seen what strangeness is yet to emerge from XP.
It is, however, no more secure than any other M$ offering, and is too chatty for my comfort. You may want to fire up a packet sniffer to get a look for yourself.
M$'s draconian licensing strategy is sufficient to keep me from ever recommending the platform for any of my customers; most of whom, once M$'s licensing strategy has been honestly laid out before them, decide that Linux is the way to go.

In the end, the most stable Win-whatever system will be the one you leave unplugged--at all times.

BTW: You obviously have your Devleoper Certification Card handy (right over your heart, I'd imagine)....how about posting your MCP ID# so some of us can do our homework on you? ;)
(It looks like the attached file....)

[LrngTheHardWay]

Oh yeah, the attached file:

[gritseater]

I've been reading about the new plans for windows and .net. It seems the next major release will feature subscription software. If you need it, you buy a temporary license. The rationale being that the average user would plop their credit card number into Microsoft Wallet and as they use an application the credit card would be billed. More money for Microsoft over the long run and upgrades would be automatic.
My complaint is that who has control of your computer? Microsoft, the government, the Republicans (Democrats would NEVER do that sort of thing). What if I'm broke? When I'm broke now I can at least sit home and play computer games or write letters to the editor.
As far as Windows XP, I prefer 98 since I can use my 4 year old printer and my 13 year old daughter has to learn patience and tolerance whenever it locks up. Linux has a learning curve but so did driving-now I'm the best driver on the road!