In message <4AEE3169443CDD4796CA8A00B02191CD031D6E20@win-msg-01.wingroup.windep
loy.ntdev.microsoft.com>, "David Lawler Christiansen (NT)" writes:
>
>Much as I hate sounding like a marketer, I must add that it *does* say
>something if XP, a home OS, is more stable than NT4 or especially
>NT3.51, particularly if it maintains compatibility with the dreaded
>Win9x line. 
>
>Not trolling; just correcting.

I installed XP on a family computer in our house.  It is indeed more 
stable -- much more stable -- than Windows 98.  Mind you, that doesn't 
make it stable by, say, NetBSD standards -- and it's slow enough that 
it isn't clear if there's a net productivity win from many fewer 
reboots -- but it is a lot better.

		--Steve Bellovin, http://www.research.att.com/~smb
		Full text of "Firewalls" book now at http://www.wilyhacker.com