mmars wrote:
>
> Correct me if i am wrong, but UNIX is the only OS that comes close to
>true multitasking, as well as WinNT.. correct?? Does the mud run faster/better
>with out as much lag under a multitasking OS as opposed to DOS or Windows 95/98?
>I've used Cygnus' GNU
>
lo,
I'm curious why multitasking is even mentioned here. The post mmars
replied to didn't mention multitasking
and quite frankly, I don't see why it's an issue. I've run a mud on
win95 for over a year now. I've got a
old 486dx 100 with 94meg of ram. The machine is old, yes, but it
handles a daily peak of 60 mud users a day.
Out of those users, I've only gotten a few postings about the system
being slow. Granted it's not using a modem, but then why would it since
it's at my office (local isp company). It does suck up alot of
resources, and yes, doesn't come close to what a typical *nix system can
do...but it serves it's perpose quite well. With a few basic
modifications you can get everything to work quite reliabily. My mud
stays up on average of 8-9 days. Most of the reboots however are me
giving in to the users complaining about the good gear being gone :P.
Oh well. Maybe my post doesn't say all that much, but As mentioned
elsewhere, win95 makes a perfect private site or personal use site. I
just don't see why ppl bash (pun not intended) win95 so much.
Baktor Silvanti
+------------------------------------------------------------+
| Ensure that you have read the CircleMUD Mailing List FAQ: |
| http://democracy.queensu.ca/~fletcher/Circle/list-faq.html |
+------------------------------------------------------------+
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/15/00 PST