computer reliability

In Windows NT 3.5x most of the graphic interface was handled in user mode, causing a lot of slow user/kernel/user mode changes. To improve speed, in NT 4.0, most of the GUI code was moved into kernel mode, but they forgot to add the parameter cheks :-). Just calling some innocent looking GUI routine and passing a null pointer by mistake, where a valid pointer was required could cause the BSOD :-).

NT4.0 SP1 at least added parameter checks.

The situation with NT4 service packs was as bad as with the base operating system version, only every other service pack was usable, since it patched the bugs introduced by the previous SP :-).

Regarding the kernel mode overwriting problems, part of the blame goes to Intel, since the 386+ family only contained write protection on the segment register level, but not on virtual memory page level. Super minicomputers in the 1970's had page level write protection, so this was nothing new when the 386 was created.

If the OS had used sensible code and data virtual address mapping, even the limited segment based protection would have helped a lot to catch bugs.

While handling exceptions caused by kernel mode access is risky in a production system, at least a lot of kernel driver bugs could have been detected during during driver testing, if the driver address space could be limited.

Fortunately, the most recent versions of the x86 architecture will provide some page level protection against illegal memory access.

On a sunny day (Mon, 02 Aug 2010 17:45:43 -0500) it happened " snipped-for-privacy@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz" wrote in :

That is a bit difficult, maybe too high a bar, how about 'as a normal user'. A program running with root rights can destroy anything with a few lines.

Yeah, I figured Creative survives becaue their marketing guys are the one above-average thing in the company: "Soundblaster" is a catchy name, and they took a cue from the home stereo audio designer crowd in making their packaging look "slick."

At the hardware level, sure, but what really makes USB useful is all the "standard" device class protocols so that all keyboards, mice, memory sticks/hard drives, etc. work regardless of the manufacturer. *Many* sound cards and webcams also use a standard protocol, so no special drivers are needed either.

Interestingly, I've been told that there is a USB device class for "USB to RS-232-type serial ports," but that no one uses it. Apparently this hasn't been that big of a problem with the "big three" of FTDI, Prolific, and Keyspan making up the vast majority of all USB to serial converter dongles out there.

---Joel

Bah. I bet that when the Chinese manufacturers started building their own USB driver ICs, they didn't bother with any of that. :-)

The slew rate control is in the standard. But who knows if the Chinese bother with that? Though I suspect they do... USA-branded stuff better pass Part 15... or the Dell's of the world would get their asses kicked. ...Jim Thompson

"Jim Thompson" wrote in message news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com...

Then they probably just copied what was in your patent without bothering to license it. :-)

Does your approach produce any "charateristic look" on the signal (as viewed on a scope) that could be easily used to check for patent infringment?

Nice Gaussian TR/TF/ But Intel owns the assignment. Working with Intel I'd guess they freely license such stuff... they love peripherals :-) ...Jim Thompson

I agree here. In my experience Windows can run very reliably (uptime

Gotta work hard to get their crap paged memory CPU architecture out there in the '80s. On the IBM PC-AT, they nurse the CPU thru reset to get from extended memory mode back to real mode, with a special byte reserved inside the RTC chip to tell the CPU where it's at on reset :) Now, that's a big software fix for an Intel CPU... Fixed that with the '386 and later. Then they got faster than a Z80 8bit processor.

Grant.

and keep it behind a firewall, and understand that in the default configuration, the system can be destroyed by the email or web clients and by actions as simple as inserting an audio CD.

No, because some dozer scriptkiddie neglected to check for an out-of- bounds condition before sending his brainchild off into lala land.

Again, human negligence; whoever bought Windoze SW should be prosecuted - maybe Bill Gates should face murder charges, since it was the failure of his OS that caused the blast.

Thanks, Rich

Cheers! Rich

That still should not hang the OS. The app may crash but that's all.

I think your people should get together with BP's people. ;-)

Pretty much where i found my item. BTW the forum is moderated, but that does not mean that an occaisional lapse does not occur.

Do you truly use anything that is not replicated in another OS?

Just the same, an OS that crashes over that is not worthy of the appelation OS.

Can and usually does are not the same. I would bet that i can run XP for 1 year at a crack so long as i do not do nay updates (which always require a reboot). In linux i have done nearly a year, but power failure got in the way, and i could keep the system completely up to date.

Kind of a clue that some serious things were let to just slide. If i managed a $100 million rig and there was some sloppy and safety critical software like that, the programmer would be on the rig troubleshooting it 24/7. And maybe his boss to boot.

But the software met specifications. Perhaps the team that wrote the specifications should be strung up instead.