Re: Running MUD in Windows

From: Daniel A. Koepke (
Date: 06/23/99

On Thu, 24 Jun 1999, Ron Cole wrote:

> Not really a problem... Since I started needing to leave my Win98 box,
> at work, on all the time, I've noticed that it starts to lose time and
> pause periodically for no apparent reason.

I've also noticed this time thing on personal computers (yes, I have a
Windows box) and at work.  It's really rather bizarre, and not very
helpful to me since I'm rather bad with keeping time anyway.  I would say
this trait came from my mother, but, as it turns out, she has a very good
internal clock.  Which makes the fact that she always managed to be late
all the more funny...or disturbing.

> So, to get back to the subject at hand, it would be a bad idea to run
> a mud under Windows unless you're gonna have daily scheduled
> downtimes.  Perhaps NT would work better since its (in theory) more
> stable.

I don't entirely agree.  Win95 is an acceptable platform for running a
smallish MUD on, and I've seen other MUDs running under Win95 that were
fairly popular and they managed to get around these problems.  However,
these seem to be exceptions to the rule.  At work, we run most of the
important services on Solaris, and use NT for the intranet (this is
perhaps because they figured employees would be more comfortable with
Windows, and they never heard of Linux or Samba: unfortunately, in large
corporations, it's usually not the knowledgeable people choosing their

-dak : Why don't more people with VMS penchants use NT?

     | Ensure that you have read the CircleMUD Mailing List FAQ:  |
     |  |

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/15/00 PST