[rc5] MacOS vs. WinNT stability

Robert D. Mosher dmosher at cyburban.com
Wed Jul 30 17:23:06 EDT 1997

Stuart Anthony wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Jul 1997, G. Armour Van Horn wrote:
> > At 23:01 29.07.1997, root wrote:
> > >Brad Spachman wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Perhaps one of the reasons that the Mac clients are moving up so quickly in
> > >> the statistics is that the client is very stable. Rowland's (justified)
> > >> ravings about the 2.000 client aside, I haven't had the v2 clients crash or
> > >> misfire in any way on the Mac once since it's release.
> > >>
> > >> The P5/6 clients, on the other hand, crash with regularity on my NT boxes
> > >> with application exception errors. It seems that half of my NT boxes crash
> > >> each night.
> > >
> > >I think that the stability is related more to the machines than to the
> > >software. Our w95/nt/os2/linux/solaris/freeBSD clients have so far run
> > >flawlessly. We have a mix of v1/v2 on all of these including clients
> > >that are online for 24/7, some dialup boxes, 2 notebooks and some of
> > >Remi's optimized v1 clients running on w95/nt and we have not heard of
> > >any problems after the installation and was completed. The only
> > >frequent prob is users shutting down and then forgetting to restart.
> > >Here we are with a mere 17(I think) machines running. They range from
> > >a 486dx2/66, to 3 p133s, 5 p166s, 2 p200s, 1 pp180, 3 pp200s, a 6x86,
> > >and a sparc box, and we're in the top 100. Heck, when everyone remembers
> > >to leave it running over the weekend(happened only once so far :( ), we
> > >get over 4Mkeys/second out of our hodgepodge little team.
> >
> > I'm getting 2.3Mkeys/second out of my six boxes, but nowhere near the
> > expected number of blocks completed. The NT machines are rock-solid in the
> > face of a host of other programs, but the 2.002 client is not staying up
> > nearly as long as I'd like to see. The Mac clients just keep on trucking.
> Personally, I've been running a client on my NT 4.0 box since the GenX
> days (No, not as long as EA or Tim or Bovine, but pretty close), and I can
> torque it out fairly well.  The only times my machine crashes are in
> extreme circumstances, and usually has some sort of Netscape or IE 3.0 tie
> ins (Last blue screen of death was with 1 Netscape window, 1 netscape gold
> editor window, rc5, F-Secure SSH, Rc5 proxy, ICQ (Which on its own crashes
> often), War FTPD, Cooltalk watchdog, Adobe Photoshop 4.0 & Alien Skin
> Filter, along with 2-3 other little desktop enhancers)... And I think it
> crashes under that load, rather than Rc5...
> Rc5 has been very stable.  Even with the crashy 2.000, it didn't die on me
> once.  Now, I've come across some bugs and been able to report them, but
> at no point has it Dr. Watsoned on me.
> --Pete

The V2.002 client for the Mac seems greatly improved over the V2.0.  i
have been running it on my PowerWave 120 PPC for more than 3 days
continuously now (almost 4 now) with only one incident - I hooked my
Powerbook up to the same phone line and, as chance would have it, both
machines wanted to dialup at the same time.  Other than that my system
has been in operation 3 days without a glitch so far. <KOW>  Even
incoming faxes don't faze it.

Also, many thanks for all the improved menu items.

R. Dale Mosher   Evangelist team
To unsubscribe, send email to majordomo at llamas.net with 'unsubscribe rc5' in the body.

More information about the rc5 mailing list