[MUD-Dev] Preference for host OS

[Jon Lambert]

Brian Hook
 
> I don't want this to get into a religious war, but I'm curious
> about anecdotal data when it comes to the preference in hosting
> operating systems.  I'm doing some preliminary research right now,
> and the obvious candidates seem to be:
 
>   - Windows NT/2000 Server (expensive)

Personal anecdotes follow:

I use NT 2K primarily for it's performance, stability, and available
tools and third party support.  I still have boxes running NT 4.0
and Win 98 though.  For my mud, having mature thread support was
critical, as well as having a fast TCP stack that was supported
reentrancy on all functions.  Third party vendors' library and tool
support is also very good.  On the other hand there is no universal
C/C++ compiler that has a monopoly on this platform.  There are at
least 4 vendors producing "competitive" C++ compilers with a host of
also rans.  As a consequence a lot of vendor libraries are compiler
specific.  On the bright side it's good to have a choice here for a
particular set of performance characteristics, vendor added
features, or just having the latest ANSI compliance working right.
Applied maintenance tends not to break the OS.  Unfortunately
security and configuration options tend to be the weakest on 2K,
although they are a lot better than they were on NT 4.0.

- Other operating systems

  No anecdotes, other than Open VMS would also be a great platform
  (albeit expensive) to run a mud on.

--
--* Jon A. Lambert - TychoMUD        Email:jlsysinc at ix.netcom.com *--
--* Mud Server Developer's Page <http://tychomud.home.netcom.com> *--
--* If I had known it was harmless, I would have killed it myself.*--
  



_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
https://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev