[rescue] OT: Solaris for Intel

[Loomis, Rip]

> Although I have to admit, I think it's WinME, not 2K. Not
> really sure, though, since I've never actually used it. But 
> you'd think
> they'd be similarly crash-resistant, wouldn't they?

Umm....BZZZT!  Wrong.

Progression is:
DOS -> Win95 -> Win98 -> WinME -> EOL
 (leaving out all the OSR versions)
They're all still running 16-bit DOS
with 32-bit extensions, somewhere
underneath everything.

And the other progression is:
NT 3.5 -> NT 3.51 -> NT 4.0 -> Win2K -> WinXP
 (since the differences between the
  "workstation/professional" and the
  "server" versions are a few registry
  settings and some additional software)
All of these are 32-bit operating
systems that include support for useful
features like discretionary access
control (users/passwords/file permissions)
along with other things that a "real"
operating system should have. 

WinXP will supposedly be the new MS OS
on home systems (WindowsXP "Home Edition"
will be added to the family, with a slightly
reduced feature set from "Professional")
--and even in Win2K some of the security
features can be disabled for home users that
prefer ease of use.

Fundamentally there are still too many ways
in WinNT/Win2K that a misbehaving app can
crash the OS, since the GUI is so tightly
linked into the underlying kernel...but it's
a much more stable platform than Win9x/ME.

I'm just about to finally upgrade my Win98SE
box at home to Win2K Professional, based on
favorable experiences with Win2K on my work
laptop.

--
Rip Loomis
Senior Systems Security Engineer, SAIC CIST
Brainbench MVP for Internet Security
http://www.brainbench.com  [Transcript 1923411]