×

Announcing: Slashdot Deals - Explore geek apps, games, gadgets and more. (what is this?)

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

Gates Provides Windows Crash Statistic

michael posted more than 11 years ago | from the fasten-seat-belts dept.

Microsoft 984

cybercuzco writes "In an otherwise innocuous article at they NYT (FRRYYY) Bill Gates says that according to error reporting software in windows, 5% of all windows installations crash two or more times every day. Gates goes on to state that Microsoft is looking at charging for some of its software updates that it now distributes for free."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Early Pr0st33Z!!! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6536059)

m4d pr0p3z to the GNAA!!

Love Always,
News For Turds

Fact: GNAA is dying (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6536180)

It is official; Netcraft confirms: GNAA is dying One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered GNAA community when IDC confirmed that GNAA market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that GNAA has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. GNAA is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict GNAA's future. The hand writing is on the wall: GNAA faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for GNAA because GNAA is dying. Things are looking very bad for GNAA. As many of us are already aware, GNAA continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.

gay niggers is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time gay niggers developers Nigger Innis only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: gay niggers is dying.

Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

straight niggers leader Slashdot penis bird states that there are 7000 users of straight niggers. How many users of #GNAA are there? Let's see. The number of straight niggers versus #GNAA posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 #GNAA users. first post posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of #GNAA posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of first post. A recent article put gay niggers at about 80 percent of the GNAA market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 gay niggers users. This is consistent with the number of gay niggers Usenet posts.

Due to the troubles of Slashdot, abysmal sales and so on, gay niggers went out of business and was taken over by Jesusgeeks who sell another troubled OS. Now Jesusgeeks is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

All major surveys show that GNAA has steadily declined in market share. GNAA is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If GNAA is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. GNAA continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, GNAA is dead.

Fact: GNAA is dying

Cash for updates? (5, Insightful)

Burlynerd (535250) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536063)

Bill is becoming the world expert on increasing revenue without providing value to his customers.

Re:Cash for updates? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6536084)

Billy is still taking lessons from the RIAA.

Re:Cash for updates? (5, Insightful)

Laur (673497) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536155)

Bill is becoming the world expert on increasing revenue without providing value to his customers.

I'd have to say that SCO has him beat. At least Microsoft sells products, SCO posted a profit for the first time in years based solely on licensing 20+ year old technology!

Re:Cash for updates? (5, Insightful)

Microsofts slave (522033) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536231)

What Mr.Bill wants us to do is to pay for the updates that are technicly a result of his own screwups. HOw many of you out there think that this is a cash grab? If this backfires, it could end up with thousands of users migrating to somthing that is less costly to keep "Up to date" I personally am a big fan of FreeBSD, however i have tried out windows xp and found that for the most part it is sufficent for the average user. But if this happeness that i have to pay to uppgrade, i dont think there will be many who pay, just pirated copies that will circualate.

skewed statistics. (5, Informative)

vanadium4761 (203839) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536064)

The 5% number is just skewed heavily by the fact that any poorly written app that crashes is counted. Whenever an app crashes the windows error reporting system fires off a log to microsoft regarding the crash. I bet 90%+ of these crashes have nothing to do with windows.

Re:skewed statistics. (4, Insightful)

ejdmoo (193585) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536116)

Maybe it's possible that they didn't count those? The error report is more than just a ping, it actually contains information on what crashed and sometimes even sends a memory dump.

Re:skewed statistics. (3, Interesting)

arf_barf (639612) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536131)

Whenever I close my VB 6 IDE it crashes on my WinXP system, followed by this annoying Bug Report dialog. So, yes, this might have skewed the numbers a bit, but then again it's a MS product :-)

P.S This never happens on my Win2K workstation.

Re:skewed statistics. (1)

theNote (319197) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536135)

Aboslutley.

In fact, I've never had win2k crash on me.
Although, I integrate a product we make with a god awful program written in who knows that consistenly crashes.
Every time I make it do this (which is probably 30-35 times a day) an error report is sent!

Re:skewed statistics. (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6536178)

You Windows defenders disgust me more than the people who post cliche anti-MS stuff.

Get back under Bill's desk, boy.

Re:skewed statistics. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6536138)

Isn't the OS supposed to prevent the app from taking the entire system down? We are talking about OS crashes, not application crashes, right?

Re:skewed statistics. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6536184)

No, Bill was talking about app crashes, not bluescreens.

Re:skewed statistics. (1)

supremebob (574732) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536181)

Also, don't forget that most older Windows OS's do not have the error reporting system installed, and that most of those crash logs are coming from Windows XP and Windows Server 2003 systems.

I'd bet that the 5% number would be much higher if Windows 95 and Windows 98 systems had this crash reporting software installed, because those OS'es were far less stable than Windows 2000 and XP.

Re:skewed statistics. (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6536205)

Uh, No.

The statistic is highly scewed because most people don't send the crash report to Microsoft.

Re:skewed statistics. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6536210)

You are so right. A program crash that causes the whole system to crash has nothing to do with the underlying operating system. And when you ring a bell angels get their wings. /sarcasm

Re:skewed statistics. (5, Funny)

The Masked Fruitcake (630078) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536218)

You're absolutely right. I've found that by not installing or running any software, I can dramatically improve the performance and stability of Windows.

Re:skewed statistics. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6536223)

Actually, programs running at a normal level of privilege should not be capable of crashing the system. A system crash usually indicates kernel or driver problems.

Re:skewed statistics. (2, Insightful)

homer_ca (144738) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536226)

I think the Windows error reporting service can only handle application errors and non-fatal system errors. If there was a BSOD or a hard freeze, the service wouldn't be running any more to report the crash, although theoretically it's possible for the service to check for a BSOD crash dump file and send a report after rebooting.

As far as the 5% have apps that crashed twice or more a day. That's not hard to imagine:

"'random shareware app' has generated errors."
WTF? Run it again.
"'random shareware app' has generated errors."
There you go. 2 crashes.

Old versions of Yahoo Messenger crashed like that all the time, and Mozilla 1.4 still crashes like that, usually when I'm closing the app. And I turned off error reporting for privacy purposes.

Re:skewed statistics. (1)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536229)

Just FYI, under XP you can turn off the error reporting function so you just get the regular Win2K-style "your app is toast have a nice day" GPF dialog that we've all come to know and love.

Re:skewed statistics. (5, Interesting)

JanneM (7445) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536238)

The numbers they quote are system crashes, not application crashes. An operating system that allows a user-level app to cause a system crash is poorly designed. It doesn't matter if the fault originated in the OS itself or not.

Re:skewed statistics. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6536239)

You're right. I have seen plenty of program crashes under Windows XP, but I have never seen a BSOD.

WOW. (3, Insightful)

michrech (468134) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536065)

5% may sound like a small amount, but considering HOW MANY Windows boxes exist on EARTH, that is a HUGE number...

Re:WOW. (5, Funny)

JavaTHut (9877) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536150)

5% may sound like a small amount, but considering HOW MANY Windows boxes exist on EARTH, that is a HUGE number...

... which is why we use a percentage

Boy... (5, Funny)

momerath2003 (606823) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536068)

If that's not a conservative estimate, call me a liberal.

Re:Boy... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6536220)

You have posted an anti-MS comment.

Prepare to be attacked from all angles by MS defenders who enjoy having Bill's you know what shoved up their you know what.

Hm. (1)

Elpacoloco (69306) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536069)

Sounds very slippery, as usual.

Any info on WHY they crashed?

Re:Hm. (5, Funny)

Walt Dismal (534799) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536134)

It's not a crash. It's...it's... a programmed REST BREAK.

I haven't read the article (5, Funny)

agrippa_cash (590103) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536072)

I haven't read the article, but I assume that the Poster meant to type 95%. Its OK, we all make mistakes.

Re:I haven't read the article (4, Funny)

lfourrier (209630) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536169)

5% of windows installations that report to redmond crashes 2 or more times a day.
How many of you press cancel when the error report is to be send ?
If user are not completely stupids(did you already read a report and understood all what to be send to MS), 90% of crashes are not reported. And 5% are so crashed they are not in a state to do any reporting. so we now have 100% of all windows installations.

You mean... (1, Funny)

mschoolbus (627182) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536077)

5% of all windows installations crash two or more times every day

I think you meant "5% of all windows installations crash two times a day every day"

So? (3, Insightful)

Dthoma (593797) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536079)

There's no way to be sure that it's necessarily Windows that causes the crash; it could be some badly installed rogue software, viruses, crappy system administration, or all of the above. Though no doubt the reflexive Microsoft bashers will blame Microsoft anyway.

Re:So? (5, Insightful)

Dr. Zowie (109983) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536108)

It doesn't matter what "causes" the crash. The OS should be essentially crashproof. That's what an OS was for, and it was why Apple got such a drubbing before OS X finally came out (twelve years later).

Re:So? (1)

Dthoma (593797) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536141)

The operating system can't protect against all possible software vulnerabilities and misconfigurations.

Re:So? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6536214)

The operating system can't protect against all possible software vulnerabilities and misconfigurations.

Right, but an operating system should do a lot better than Windows does. Which of course was the whole point ot the comment you replied to.

I really hate it when people reply with something that sound like a counter argument, but really doesn't say anything at all.

Re:So? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6536237)

"Right, but an operating system should do a lot better than Windows does. Which of course was the whole point ot the comment you replied to." Unfortunately, the statistics given are too nonspecific to actually be meaningful. The sample is self selecting, and likely wildly inaccurate in either direction (but we can't tell which) and some versions of Windows are orders of magnitude than others.

Re:So? (1)

Fred IV (587429) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536158)

I believe the article was refering to program crashes that triggers the error reporting software, not OS crashes.

Re:So? (5, Insightful)

KrispyKringle (672903) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536110)

And of course there are plenty of people who choose not to send the crash report to MS, or, even more likely, do not (*gasp*) have always-on-connections and cannot send the report to MS. The vast majority, for all we know, go unreported. This is, after all, hardly an accurate means of statistical sampling.

Mod Parent Up (0, Offtopic)

Fred IV (587429) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536130)

Not a troll, just say no to zealotry.

Re:So? (1)

Liselle (684663) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536165)

I don't know about that. You would think that a solid OS would not only be stable, but would help to prevent the sort of crashing that poorly-written programs are capable of.

Rogue Program: "Time for an illegal instruction. BSOD, here we come."
OS: "Nope, sorry. Won't let you do that."
Rogue Program: "Curses, foiled again."

Compare Win2k to WinME, for a good example.

Re:So? (1)

Dthoma (593797) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536189)

The problem is that the problem isn't just poorly written programs.

Re:So? (1)

danlor (309557) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536222)

There is no love loss between me and MS, but my XP machine EASILY "crashes" 5-10 times a day. What triggers these you might be wondering? Internet Explorer. Every couple days I have to reboot the machine because explorer will refuse to go any further

I find it very rare that anything else on my machine dies.

Skewed polls? (1)

Cyberia (70947) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536080)

That's assuming that your workstation is up long enough to make it through the on-line poll.

DIRECT LINK! (comments) (4, Informative)

calebb (685461) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536087)


HERE IS THE DIRECT LINK [nytimes.com] : (Doesn't require you to log in!) Thank you, Google News! [google.com]


My favorite part: Last week, Microsoft raised its revenue forecast for fiscal 2004 by about $1 billion. At the same time the company also said it had no plans to spend any of its $49 billion cash on major acquisitions or increase dividends, despite recent rumors.

Now, If I'm reading this article correctly, they are indirectly affecting their positive cashflow 'problem' by increasing R&D. The article says that Microsoft expects revenue to increase 6-9% (of total revenue) in 2004; They are going to spend 8% more on R&D (8% more than R&D expenses in 2003)... So this looks like one way that Microsoft is going to slow down their positive cashflow. I can't see anything bad coming from Microsoft spending more on R This should be beneficial to end-users as long as MS doesn't spend all this additional research money finding better ways to make it difficult to pirate Windows.

More amunition for Linux fans (2, Interesting)

arf_barf (639612) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536089)

Hmm, I still think that my Linux workstation is less stable then my Win2k Pro.

Anyhow, at least people will be able to reference this article when they boast about their Linux stability :-)

Re:More amunition for Linux fans (1)

advocate_one (662832) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536240)

this topic has just been posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy... let's see the winvocates wriggle out of this one... :)

I'm not going to troll it over in alt.os.windows-xp though... would disturb them too much and disrupt their wibblings about where to look for pron and illegal downloads...

Letter to Mr. Gates: (-1, Offtopic)

RatBastard (949) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536091)

To: Mr. Bill Gates.
Fr: Increasingly Disgruntled Customer.

Mr. Gates,
You can kiss my hairy ass.

The other 95%... (2, Funny)

dark-br (473115) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536095)

crashes more then 2 times ;-)

FUCK YOU ASSHOLE! YOU'RE NOT FUNNY! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6536175)

You're a fucking lamer, if you think you're funny. Microsoft has been busy improving the security and stability of its products while Linux is busy doing nothing except stealing code from companies such as SCO. Get a fucking clue you asshat.

Hrm (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6536096)

5% seems like a lot, but how much of that 5% is because of non-MS applications?

So does that mean.. (0, Funny)

mikeophile (647318) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536097)

95% of Windows installations crash three or more times a day?

Re:So does that mean.. (1)

c4Ff3In3 4ddiC+ (661808) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536213)

If you bothered to read the article you would see that it said:
"Mr. Gates acknowledged today that the company's error reporting service indicated that 5 percent of all Windows-based computers now crash more than twice each day."

(emphasis mine)

Re:So does that mean.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6536235)

If you had bothered to acquire a sense of humor, you would see that the original poster was making a joke.

Update like Apple Os? (0, Troll)

D4Vr4nt (615027) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536099)

Sounds like MS wants to once again jump on the bandwagon of Apple. Perhaps I'm exaggerating but I can foresee MS wanting to charge for updates just like Apple does with its Jaguar, Cougar, Mt.Lion releases ;).

Too bad half the updates I've ever install make my copy of windows worse.

Re:Update like Apple Os? (1)

Burlynerd (535250) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536216)

Re: Too bad half the updates I've ever install make my copy of windows worse.

Thats a good point. Will the money we pay for updates gain us any better quality updates? If not, could we demand refunds if Bill screws up our servers... again?

5% (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6536100)

The other 95% of all Windows installations have the reporting feature disabled...

Uhm.... sure. (5, Funny)

wo1verin3 (473094) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536101)

>>Microsoft is looking at charging for some of
>>its software updates that it now distributes
>>for free."

Buffer ovverflow - $15
Firewall Fix - $45
Service Pack 3 - $300
Knowing that no matter how much patches come out, Linux will be more secure - Pricess

Mod Parent Up (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6536168)

+5 Funny

Thanks for the laugh.

Charging for updates .... (5, Interesting)

taniwha (70410) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536102)

doesn't that give MS an incentive to leave bugs in?

I'm gonna code myself up a minivan! (2, Insightful)

Sagarian (519668) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536145)

Shades of Dilbert

Re:Charging for updates .... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6536187)

It seems to me that they have enough incentive already, whatever may be the source of said incentive.

GNAA !! JOO! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6536105)

GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the first organization which
gathers GAY NIGGERS from all over America and abroad for one common goal - being GAY NIGGERS.

Are you GAY [klerck.org] ?
Are you a NIGGER [mugshots.org] ?
Are you a GAY NIGGER [gay-sex-access.com] ?

If you answered "Yes" to any of the above questions, then GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) might be exactly what you've been looking for!
Join GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) today, and enjoy all the benefits of being a full-time GNAA member.
GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the fastest-growing GAY NIGGER community with THOUSANDS of members all over United States of America. You, too, can be a part of GNAA if you join today!

Why not? It's quick and easy - only 3 simple steps!

First, you have to obtain a copy of GAY NIGGERS FROM OUTER SPACE THE MOVIE [imdb.com] and watch it.

Second, you need to succeed in posting a GNAA "first post" on slashdot.org [slashdot.org] , a popular "news for trolls" website

Third, you need to join the official GNAA irc channel #GNAA on EFNet, and apply for membership.
Talk to one of the ops or any of the other members in the channel to sign up today!

If you are having trouble locating #GNAA, the official GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA irc channel, you might be on a wrong irc network. The correct network is EFNet, and you can connect to irc.secsup.org or irc.isprime.com as one of the EFNet servers.
If you do not have an IRC client handy, you are free to use the GNAA Java IRC client by clicking here [nero-online.org] .

If you have mod points and would like to support GNAA, please moderate this post up.

This post brought to you by Penisbird [nero-online.org] , a proud member of the GNAA

________________________________________________
| ______________________________________._a,____ |
| _______a_._______a_______aj#0s_____aWY!400.___ |
| __ad#7!!*P____a.d#0a____#!-_#0i___.#!__W#0#___ |
| _j#'_.00#,___4#dP_"#,__j#,__0#Wi___*00P!_"#L,_ |
| _"#ga#9!01___"#01__40,_"4Lj#!_4#g_________"01_ |
| ________"#,___*@`__-N#____`___-!^_____________ |
| _________#1__________?________________________ |
| _________j1___________________________________ |
| ____a,___jk_ GAY_NIGGER_ASSOCIATION_OF_AMERICA_|
| ____!4yaa#l___________________________________ |
| ______-"!^____________________________________ |
` _______________________________________________'
-GNAA member 'penisbird'
P.S. CmdrTaco, you banned my other user account from logging in for some reason. I still get emails from Slashdot whenever a friend writes in his/her journal. I cannot login to disable these emails. This is quite gay.

Re:GNAA !! JOO! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6536176)

P.S. CmdrTaco, you banned my other user account from logging in for some reason. I still get emails from Slashdot whenever a friend writes in his/her journal. I cannot login to disable these emails.

Consider this your just desserts.

Charging For Updates (5, Insightful)

webguru4god (537138) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536106)

Microsoft charging for Windows Updates is analogous to Ford charging their customers extra for basic safety features which should be free in the first place! What if Ford told you that there was a fatal flaw in your seatbelt system that could allow you to be thrown from the car in a crash, and that the problem was a result of poor engineering on their behalf, and that you had to pay out of your own pocket to fix it! If that happened the government would surely intervene and force Ford to provide the fix for free. I can't belive that Microsoft has the gall to even consider charging us to fix the holes in their systems that are there because of their own fault!

Re:Charging For Updates (5, Insightful)

Pieroxy (222434) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536204)

Probably not. See the article mention MS charging for "some" of the updates. I bet the security fixes would be free.

I can't belive that Microsoft has the gall to even consider charging us to fix the holes in their systems

That's good you can't believe it, because nobody said it.

Fuck Bill (1)

intensity (118733) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536109)

Why charge for something they screwed up to begin with? Why use a product if you have to pay for them to fix their own mistakes? I'm going to use an abacus from now on.

Cool... (5, Insightful)

Jaysyn (203771) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536114)

Nothing to push the masses to Linux/Mac like charging for updates & bugfixes.

Jaysyn

Re:Cool... (1)

Pieroxy (222434) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536225)

charging for updates & bugfixes.

Where did you read that? The article doesn't mention anything about bugfixes dude. Your MS bashing fever made you blind!

Charging to Fix Their Own Defective Product? (3, Insightful)

MonkeyCookie (657433) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536246)

So I pay for a copy of Windows and soon I might have to pay Microsoft to fix the bugs that shouldn't have been there in the first place?

I've been considering switching to Linux for a while now and having to pay more money to Microsoft for fixes would cause me to switch for sure. I'm not going to put up with crap like that!

Stating the obvious (4, Funny)

Frac (27516) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536122)

Mr. Gates stressed that the company's biggest bet is on the next version of Windows.

Well duh. The company's biggest bet is always on the next version of Windows!

If they said "Well, we're betting the entire company's future on the next version of Microsoft Bob", they're screwed. ;-P

Re:Stating the obvious (1)

eap (91469) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536224)

They said they were hoping they could get the number up to 10% for the next version, but that it would take some work.

That's the last straw. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6536123)

Up til now, Microsoft was such a good innovator, and now look! They copy something that Apple clearly was doing before they were.

That's it. I'm moving to CanadaOS, ey.

NYT Hack Still Works (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6536125)

Change "www" to "archive".

Couple of auto-redirects happen. Keep browser window open.

Click on www. link again - no registration required.

Re:NYT Hack Still Works (1)

bach37 (602070) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536191)

SWEET! Thanks man.

-Scott

The other 95% (1)

mummers (253129) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536128)

Crash more often I assume.

Pay up or get Code Red (1)

aardwolf204 (630780) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536136)

Gates goes on to state that Microsoft is looking at charging for some of its software updates that it now distributes for free.
So like, Pay up or get Code Red (green, blue, whatever's next)? Sounds more like ransom to me.

5% seems a bit low... (5, Insightful)

kgarcia (93122) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536143)

that according to error reporting software in windows

yeah, but how many people actually use the "report this error to microsoft" feature?. I know everytime I get a crash, I opt to not send the report, and I know i'm not the only one that does this. Also, the only time this method for reporting error is used at all is when customers are on broadband connections, or in office networks (can you imagine wating for your modem to dial to report an error or a crash?), and what about those times when the crash is so bad your entire system needs to be restarted?. From what I can tell, this error reporting software only sends error reports regarding programs that crash, not the OS itself. So... 5% of windows users, who are on persistent connections, who use the error reporting software, who had a crash on an application that doesn't freeze the entire system, are crashing at least 2 times a day... The real number has to be much higher that that.

-K

-K

More information required (1)

voudras (105736) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536146)

How often are the other 95% crashing?

When did we get crash reports? (1)

Elwood P Dowd (16933) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536154)

If those 5% of users are running Win2K, then this is interesting. If those 5% of users are running Win95... then no one is really surprised.

Which is it? When did we first get crash reporting in Windows? I wouldn't know, I've only run Windows since Win2K.

(I was also crashing more than twice a day for a long while, due to some issues while in 3D mode w/ my GeForce2MX.)

Nothing new (3, Funny)

chrisgeleven (514645) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536156)

Microsoft has charged for updates for years silly. Just look at 98 SE, ME, and XP. Nothing changes this practice, except we can guarentee that service packs are now going to be rebranded as YP and ZP respectively to go along with the eXPerience.

"Crash Reporting" (1)

chickenmonger (614989) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536159)

I don't know about anybody else, but my Windows installation crashes more often at the "Crash Reporting" screen than at any other time. Perhaps this is skewing the results?

Drug Dealer (1)

noz (253073) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536161)

"Microsoft is looking at charging for some of its software updates that it now distributes for free." Bill's missing some key business concepts here.
  • Product Quality. "5% of all windows installations crash two or more times every day." Bill concedes his product is shit.
  • Support. Updates providing new features could be charged for, but certainly not for fixing existing deficiencies (crashes, security) in features the customer has already purchased.
Conclusion, Bill gets home and corporate users hooked on his product: He's the biggest drug dealer on the planet.

Remember 99.999%? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6536166)

Didn't these lying cocksuckers say that Windows 2000 is 99.999% reliable? And didn't they also say that XP is MORE reliable?

Don't tell me that is all the 9x/NT boxes out there.

And fuck them - paying for system updates?

If it weren't for the fact that the fuckers at SCO wrapped up linux in legal limbo - this type of article would have had IT managers running towards BSD in the server room and Linux on the desktop. Oh yeah UNIX UNIX UNIX! Fuck you SCO!

that's sad. (2, Funny)

poot_rootbeer (188613) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536167)


Suddenly, I'm really thankful for my Win98 (1st edition) install -- it only crashes 2 or three times a WEEK!

We see a slightly higher incidence (4, Informative)

Archfeld (6757) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536172)

of mysterious windows crash during system build, BEFORE there are any apps to mess it up. I've heard 10% but never seen that high, more like 8% from my view, and I've built 1000's of pc's and servers, and more using our new image process, so these are similar models, with standard equipment that for some strange reason get a variety of errors during the build process. 99% of those go along there merry after a reboot, and the remaining 1% is almost ALWAYS disk or memory errors.

My Stats (1)

spoonist (32012) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536183)

My own stats on the OSes I run daily:

Linux: 0 crashes per day

OpenBSD: 0 crashes per day

What? (1)

Grimlock88 (687600) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536185)

Why would anyone pay money to have trojans uploaded to their computers? Next thing you know L337 little bitches are going to be sending people bills for "updating" their computers with new DDOS trojans.

Looks at the windows users... (1)

Quicksilver31337 (541929) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536186)

Sucks to be you.

Guess you should have bought a mac, mines been up for almost 3 months now.

But in all serious, I'm sure the number of people who are having crashes is even larger then what MS is reporting as I'm sure alot of people opt not to send the crash report for whatever reason(paranoia or otherwise).

I cant explain.... (1)

soliaus (626912) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536190)

...how angry this makes me right now. First microsoft produces some really buggy software, then charges people to fix the bugs? WTF? This is the exact reason why microsoft will not likely be around in a few decades.

Lets look at Linux crash statistics for a minute. Wait a second, what statistics? LInux doesnt crash if the user doesnt fuck it up, unlike microsoft software which crashes using the default configuration. 5% Is alot of crashes considering that microsoft holds most of the market share.

Whats up with error reporting software? Why do they need it? Because they cannot produce a stable operating system! If they could do "trustworthy computing" they wouldnt need error reporting software.

~Jmd

The other 95% (5, Funny)

eap (91469) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536195)

are still stuck at the "Windows was not shut down properly" screen.

Not clear from article (1)

Glorat (414139) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536200)

5% of all windows installations crash two or more times every day

A very clear distinction is
- Is it the OS falls over two or more times every day (equiv kernel panic)
- A error report is sent to microsoft (so more than 5%)
- Error reports caused by OS falling over?
- Error reports caused by *any* application crashing? (equiv, app seg fault)

I strongly suspect it is the last. I.e 5% of all windows machines send an error report every day that some application or another has crashed. If that's the case, that's not a reflection on Microsoft Windows.

Now another question to ask is (5, Insightful)

falcon5768 (629591) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536201)

Damnit I was beat submitting this story :-P

But on to my topic,

Now how many people crash ONCE a day??? It seems odd that he would pick just twice a day to report, what would have looked more impressive would have been Bill saying "Only 5% of our users crash once or more using all of our operating systems."

I know as all you do it would have been a much more staggering figure since just about any Windows PC I see at work crashes once a day, so I can see why he didnt say it.

Glad my linux and OSX boxes crash on an average of once every 6 or 7 months or so.

I agree with Bill! (1)

teamhasnoi (554944) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536206)

I was thinking about charging for Windows Updates too. That's so weird! We were both thinking the same thing...wow!

Win2K (2, Interesting)

Izeickl (529058) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536211)

Over 2 years old installation, zero crashes. Nuff said.

In other news, Ford adopting similar strategy (1)

GreenCrackBaby (203293) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536217)

In news today, Ford motor company announced a new plan to start charging for certain product recals.

"We expect a large revenue stream from this new strategy. Our newest models include gas tanks that could potentially explode. By charging for a replacement, we stand to make over a billion."

Miscrosoft R&D working furiously... (1, Funny)

leftie (667677) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536227)

Gates is trying to figure out how to charge windows users for the crashes, too.

Linux software does crash too. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6536234)

Always beware a 0.x, x.odd or K* app, for they crash like crazy. Not to mention the fun of CVS. Youre probably going to mod me flamebait for this, but only a select few linux apps are truly stable.

Mr. Gates comes up with another one (1)

sorinm (459727) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536243)

The computer industry "experienced a boom that I don't think we'll see again in our lifetime"

This guy has a problem with evolution (640K memory, etc.).

Sorin M

Paying for updates? (1)

cygnusx197 (606856) | more than 11 years ago | (#6536244)

That's ok... it's not like anybody updates their system anyway.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?