SPONSORED LINKS
On Sat, 04 Apr 98 10:11:32 -0500, letoured@sover.net wrote: >I think the cost of Warp Connect vs. Warp 4, would make it more logical to >go with Warp 4. --I've never run Warp Connect, but I've run Warp 3 and >Warp 4 on a DX50 with 16mb. Whether they are tolerable or not depends upon >you've seen either on a faster machine. > >Personally, I would go with Warp 4 and only install the network features >that you really have to have, and look for more memory too. > >FWIW, the minimun ram unsed for networking under Warp 4 are: > >The remote access client, 6mb of ram >File & Print Client, 4 mb >TCP/IP Service, 4mb >Netware Client, 2mb >Newwork & Protocol Services, 2mb >System Management client, 1mb > Plus at least 100MB of HD space for the base OS, and 12MB RAM. I ran for a while on 12MB RAM, but I now have 24, and performance is much better with the extra 16 MB. -- Paul Khoury <pkhoury@loop.com> http://pkhoury.dyn.ml.org Sent from my ThinkPad 701CS running OS/2 Warp 4.0, Fixpack 5 There are 20 Processes with 78 Threads. This machine's uptime is 0d 0h 31m 27s 62ms.