The Blue Screen gives a complete stack dump at the time of the BSDO, the name of the kernal module executing when the error occurred, values of varous CPU registers, and a STOP code inidcating why the kernal decided that it was unsafe to continue. Then using the i386KD in WINDBG debuggers, you can load the dump file and symbol files, and see what was happening symbolically. In terms of providing data about the system status, the BSOD/Dump file + debugger is as good as any other O/S I have encountered. It's just rather tersely documented, and difficuly to make use of unless you have been on the M$ 'Kernal Debugging' course. Additinally, some folk look at the name of the module that was executing when the BSOD occured, (frequently the NT Kernal) and say haha! that was it! They fail to note that another, probably 3rd party driver executing prior to this trashed some data structure, and the Kernal had to step in and stop the party. Peter Moreton > -----Original Message----- > From: pic microcontroller discussion list > [mailto:PICLIST@MITVMA.MIT.EDU] On Behalf Of John Ferrell > Sent: 30 June 2003 01:33 > To: PICLIST@MITVMA.MIT.EDU > Subject: Re: [OT]: Why MS$ Is Loved > > > True, but the OS is in the best position to be able to effect > a recovery or > at least point in the general direction of the problem. > The Blue screen says "Broke" and nothing more. > > John Ferrell > 6241 Phillippi Rd > Julian NC 27283 > Phone: (336)685-9606 > johnferrell@earthlink.net > Dixie Competition Products > NSRCA 479 AMA 4190 W8CCW > "My Competition is Not My Enemy" > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jake Anderson" > To: > Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2003 8:09 PM > Subject: Re: [OT]: Why MS$ Is Loved > > > > sorry but saying that an OS can make up for faulty hardware > is plain and > > simple crap. > > > > baring fantastic measures (eg those used for satellites > where they expect > > solar proton events) no OS will make up for the CPU > spitting out the wrong > > answers. > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Peter L. Peres" > > To: > > Sent: Monday, June 30, 2003 4:19 AM > > Subject: Re: [OT]: Why MS$ Is Loved > > > As to clocking down, scores of people run dual boot > machines and the > *nix > > > variants almost never need clocking down to make them work. It is > entirely > > > possible to write software (esp. io and interrupt > related) that pushes > the > > > hardware or latency tolerance so far that it needs > clocking down to make > > > it work. On *nix those code parts are usually extremely > well written and > > > debugged. > > > > -- > > http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us! > > email listserv@mitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body > > -- > http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us! > email listserv@mitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body > -- http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList mailto:piclist-unsubscribe-request@mitvma.mit.edu