Hacker News Reader

Comment by RcouF1uZ4gsC | Hacker News Reader

That's because it was a helicopter and NASA didn't want it to crash.

Quite a stale joke. I can't remember the last time Windows crashed. Windows is probably more stable than Linux at this point, at least from a kernel panic point of view. They do a load of static analysis of drivers and can even reload GPU drivers if they crash without taking down the whole system. That's decades ahead of Linux.

I agree, I can't remember the last time windows crashed. My home PC is a 2014 low-budget build and I don't recall any blue screens of death or freezes.

I often wonder if people run Windows on a potato to account for all the crashes people seem to have.

Anything NT based was a few orders of magnitude better than the old Win 95 systems that gave windows a reputation for crashing. That is what happens when you put some effort into good design. Things have gotten better because Microsoft has learned. Then again, everyone else has gotten better now.

I can't remember either because I'm trying very hard not to have to use windows.

Sadly people are still buying crappy motherboard/laptop that have crappy drivers and blame it on Windows. MSI ethernet drivers sometimes trigger a memory leak that eat up all the RAM in a few seconds. Dell thunderbolt docks are buggy and trigger a BSOD.

> .. I can't remember the last time Windows crashed ..

Short-term memory loss ;]

It’s funny because of the dual meaning of “crash.” It’s possible that OP was not making a literal statement about the reliability of Windows.

If you're some kid running a cracked, stolen version of Windows, on overclocked AMD hardware, sure it will crash a lot. Sadly, that's how many people here on HN experience it.

For grown-ups who stay on the happy path with well-supported hardware and software, it runs very well, and is my primary development environment. When I need Linux, I run it in a VM on Windows 10.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com