>> Ron wrote:
<snip>
It probably sounds like heresy (to some) to propose a Window-less IT
environment. The same sentiment gets expressed about every solution
that's the leader in popularity. I hope David strikes a balance that
better suits his company while Thinking Different. Respecting
differences is a nice sign of maturity.
</snip>

Dave replies:

Thinking Different is one of my strong suits, but.....

My intent is to find a computing environment for my home office that Does Most of What I Need, Correctly, Most of the Time - something I have never had with Windows -family OS's.  I spend almost as much time restarting, tuning, fixing, and adjusting as I do on productive work.

As I stated in my original post, I don't mind running Microsoft applications, I just don't want to deal with windows any more - I think that's a Good Balance.

I am not recommending a windows-less environment for large companies. First, NT and 2000 can be stable in a controlled environment where a bevy of trained experts has decided on stable configurations and approved software lists - and are damned difficult about users getting "individual" with their PCs.  My home situation is quite different, if I want to try something new, I don't have an experimental PC to load it on (although that would be a good idea.)

Anyway, I don't hate Windows, I'm just really, really tired of it.  I still cling to the ideal that an OS should be stable - an ideal that I believe everyone shared before Windows came along.  By the way, in early windows, they used to promise that the instability was due to the youth of the product, and that stable release was just around the corner.  I actually had a Win/95 environment once that would run a month without rebooting and remain stable. That went away as soon as I loaded FrontPage/2000 and Office/97 on it.

-dtd

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *