Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Gates Provides Windows Crash Statistic

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the fasten-seat-belts dept.

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."

5 of 984 comments (clear)

  1. skewed statistics. by vanadium4761 · · Score: 5, Informative

    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.

    1. Re:skewed statistics. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Uh, No.

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

    2. Re:skewed statistics. by supremebob · · Score: 5, Informative

      Actually, the error reporter service is smart enough to handle BSOD's. Once the system reboots, the error reporter notifies the user of the user of the problem (Which is stupid, because most people have a clue that there is a problems if their system suddenly reboots itself!), and gives them an option to send part of the core dump to Microsoft.

      I've found the feature to be really annoying while you're trying to debug the problem, however, so I usually turn it off.

  2. Re:Cash for updates? by sharlskdy · · Score: 5, Informative

    Does this mean we're ever going to see Windows XP Service pack 2? Seriously, is it my memory playing tricks on me, or did or did not Microsoft promise (hah!) to release service packs every six months? SP1 was released Sept 9, 2002. Sp1A was released Feb 3, 2003, with the only acknowledged change being that they ripped out Java.

    Oct 25, 2001 - Windows XP ships
    Sept 9, 2002 - SP1 ships (10.5 months, or 4.5 months late)
    Sept ?, 2003 - SP2 ships (12 months, or 6 months late) Check out Mr. Allchin's comments.

    And, according to this link there are almost 300 issues addressed in this long-overdue patch.

    What exactly are they going to charge for? Fixes, or enhancements? Apple charges for their regular updates - OSX 10.1, OSX 10.2, OSX 10.3, but they are also ENHANCING the product significantly with every release. Is this something MS intends to do, because I certainly don't mind paying for updates to the software as long as it actually ENHANCES things. I'll be pretty ticked off if I have to pay for FIXES.

  3. Major versus minor updates by LionMage · · Score: 5, Informative

    Nice flamebait.

    Each time a major OS release comes out of Apple, they charge for it, yes. So does everyone else. Microsoft does it. SuSE does it. Don't let the version numbering for Mac OS X fool ya, 10.2 was a major upgrade over 10.1, which was a major upgrade compared to 10.0.

    However, Apple doesn't charge for minor point releases. They're up to 10.2.6 right now in OS X, so you can see there have been several point releases since 10.2 was released, plus a smattering of security updates and individual application updates. Those are all free.

    If Microsoft really does start charging for service packs, as the parent article for this thread suggests, their customers are going to revolt. From the Microsoft standpoint, they need a new revenue stream, and they want a way to subsidize the ongoing effort of improving products already in the market (like Windows 2000 Professional, since many users refuse to upgrade to XP).

    I'm willing to pay for a major new OS release once every year or two, if the new features are compelling enough and my hardware can support it. But I'm not willing to pay for the vendor's bug-fixing efforts and minor feature fixes/additions.