Re: TPALL: NT vs. 95?

New Message	Reply	Date view	Thread view	Subject view	Author view	Attachment view

From: Paul Khoury (pkhoury_at_loop.com)
Date: Thu Oct 29 1998 - 17:12:43 EST

Next message: John Higgins: "(fwd) TP "I" Series reviw (fwd)"
Previous message: Paul Khoury: "Re: FRU's"
Maybe in reply to: Paul Khoury: "TPALL: NT vs. 95?"

Okay, how about a 701 running NT with 12MB of RAM being a Quake 2
server? No, I wouldn't run it on NT on a 701, and yes, I hate having less than 24MB of RAM!

Meaning of life - Computers.

Just kidding. Don't ask me, everyone's idea is probably different...

-- 
Paul Khoury |  <pkhoury_at_loop.com> | Sent from my K5-200
http://warped.cswnet.com/~pkhoury/index.html  |  http://pkhoury.dyn.ml.org (local machine)
Running OS/2 3/4, Win NT 4.0,  Mac OS 7.5.3, Sun Solaris 2.3, Linux 2.0.29,  Newton OS 1.05
ICQ#14582895

Next message: John Higgins: "(fwd) TP "I" Series reviw (fwd)"
Previous message: Paul Khoury: "Re: FRU's"
Maybe in reply to: Paul Khoury: "TPALL: NT vs. 95?"

New Message	Reply	Date view	Thread view	Subject view	Author view	Attachment view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Thu Jan 23 2003 - 09:54:28 EST