From: lcs Mixmaster Remailer <mix@anon.lcs.mit.edu>
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 04:39:13 +0800
To: mgering@ecosystems.net>
Subject: Re: GPL & commercial software, the critical distinction (fwd)
Message-ID: <19981005094001.10355.qmail@nym.alias.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain





Matthew James Gering wrote:
> 
> Jim Choate wrote:
> > I'd say the obvious one, the Unix code tree is more stable
> > than the MS tree.
> 
> Sure, but does that mean the MS platform was less suitable than Unix, or
> their MS platform programmers were inferior to their Unix counterparts.
> I believe Netscape outsourced the Unix development, at least initially.
> I would blame insufficient SQA at Netscape, and from what I've heard
> that claim is justified.
> 
>         Matt

My impression is that the instability described is due to fragmentation of the
virtual memory space, which happens faster on NT than Unix because of 
the relative immaturity of NT memory management. The side comment about
Mac's being even worse would support this hypothesis (as Mac memory management
is a joke).

The Netscape SQA theory doesn't explain why other products also become 
less reliable on NT (and worse again on 95).