[July 4th]

Have you seen the one where they talk about the blue screen of death? I've been running W2k for three years, and I have yet to see it...

[Paleo Conservative]

Have you seen the one where they talk about the blue screen of death? I've been running W2k for three years, and I have yet to see it...

I would agree. Win2K is much more stable than Win9X or even Win NT 4. Also Win2K supports modern devices like USB and Firewire. The only thing I like better about XP (on my new laptop) is the independence between screen resolution and onscreen size of fonts, toolbars, icons, etc.

[Mr. K]

me too. I have been running Win 2000 Pro on an old P.O.S. brand computer clone and it has made it run like a new machine- and has never crashed ONCE.

I am a computer software engineer- I work in Linux, NT, Unix, Sun OS, etc. etc. etc.. and I dont care what I use- as long as I get paid. (and I get paid very well)

[jimtorr]

"I've been running W2k for three years, and I have yet to see it..."

I work in an office with nine machines, just one year old, seven running NT 4.0 and two running W2k Pro, one of them mine. I've seen the blue screen of death five times (IT keeps count) in the past year.. I've had the floppy drive replaced, the CD drive replaced, the HD has had to be rebuilt three times and the original HD was killed entirely, and it had to be replaced. The other W2k machine had to have the HD rebuilt this past week.

I can't blame it on a bad batch of PC's, they were purchased at different times from different manufacturers. Mine is Dell, the other is Micron.

These machines are configuration controlled, I can't load any applications that are not on the approved list. Norton anti-virus is updated remotely for our CA office, and the IT folks in CA check all PC's weekly for unauthorized software and disk problems.

[Nick Danger]

I've been running W2k for three years, and I have yet to see it...

Consider yourself lucky. I get three or four a week.