On Thu, 31 Aug 1995 09:01:04 EDT John Atkinson <[log in to unmask]>
said:
 
>Steve and  I had talked  and thought it  might be a  good idea to  get a
>sample version to check it out,  although we certainly don't trust it as
>a standard yet.
 
For the  KENTVM workload, I would  definitely use Windows NT  rather than
95.
 
>This is rather interesting.  I'm not sure what good it  would do for us,
>however. We certainly couldn't handle  'our' lists on a Windows machine,
>could we? Or maybe we could.
 
Your workload fits on a 486.
 
>And why would it be free? (And promoted by Eric?)
 
Argh! Shareware is not *free*, you're at least supposed to *pretend* that
you're a honest  guy and you'll pay  for it if you actually  use it, even
though we developers know that it can't hurt to put an annoying banner on
every outgoing message  in the unregistered copy, plus  a one-list limit,
you know,  just in case  people forget  :-) Anyway, I  wouldn't recommend
running the KENTVM workload on Windows  95. This isn't what the shareware
version is designed to  do, and above all this isn't  what Windows 95 was
designed  to  do.  Windows  NT,  however,  is  extremely  robust.  L-Soft
processes 850k  messages a day  on an NT  LISTSERV (although the  mail is
actually delivered on a VMS system).
 
  Eric