There is a very good reason to "talk" about it and that reason is to get to get a handle on what you are doing. Just because it looks like it works OK and has been stable for a day/week or whatever, does not mean that it is stable. Try it and see is not good enough. You need to understand what you are doing especially if you are doing something contrary to the vendors advice. Personally I couldn't care less about Windows priorities as I run Linux. If I had reason to, I would use "nice" or "renice" to fiddle with process priorities. But I don't have any need to. Since Unix SVR4, most *nixes have a real time scheduling class, but nobody ever uses it. Now why is that ? No desktop operating system by default gives real time priority to user applications. One should not confuse "real time" with "fast". They are very different things.
Dunno, but software, especially at the O/S level is pretty "dumb" i.e. doesn't know what your app is really doing, or how many messages are hitting it, etc. Well, it may keep track of certain stats, but it surely doesn't have the logic to generate a dialog box saying : "Hey, app XYZ is processsing 10,000 message per second which is above normal, do you want me to increase it's priority ?" When O/S's have an integrated AI overlay built into them, maybe then they can make useful suggestions like that. BTW: Your Linux probably doesn't need tuned or to use realtime priority because it was architected to be so efficient. That's not the case with Windows, especially XP.