From owner-freebsd-hackers  Mon Aug 12 13:35:22 1996
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id NAA17137
          for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 12 Aug 1996 13:35:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from etinc.com (etinc.com [204.141.244.98])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id NAA17128
          for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Mon, 12 Aug 1996 13:35:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dialup-usr11.etinc.com (dialup-usr11.etinc.com [204.141.95.132]) by etinc.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id QAA17952; Mon, 12 Aug 1996 16:39:22 -0400
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 1996 16:39:22 -0400
Message-Id: <199608122039.QAA17952@etinc.com>
X-Sender: dennis@etinc.com
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 2.0.3
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: roberto@keltia.freenix.fr (Ollivier Robert)
From: dennis@etinc.com (Dennis)
Subject: Re: FreeBSD vs. NT Stability
Cc: hackers@freebsd.org
Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

>According to Dennis:
>> 1) Its rather new...
>> 2) It was written by Microsoft
>
>Blind bashing will never make things progress. 
>
>>From what  I've  heard, NT is probably    the first thing   ever written by
>Microsoft that can be called "Operating System" even if  I don't agree with
>many architectural and protocol choices (but I'm partial to Unix). 
>
>It has flaws and bugs but which OS doesn't ?

Exactly my point. Its a new horizen for a company with a history of a long
learning curve.

Dennis