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