>PWS 95 and PWS on NT 4.0 are two totally different beasts. The PWS on Win95 is >pretty much the old PWS 1.0/3.0 engine wrapped up with a new interface. It >doesn't support ActiveDirectory Administration (the IIS Metabase) nor does it >support most of the settings that IIS 4 allows (it uses the old IIS 3 settings >in the registry).

That is why I suggested using PWS that is on the IIS disk - not the FrontPage disk...

>PWS on WinNT is basically a full version of IIS with a dumbed down front end
>that doesn't let you do *anything*. You can't administer the interface beyond
>creating virtual directories. However, because it's really IIS under the hood
>all the Metabase settings are available and can be set programmatically
>(or via a metabase editor which is part of the NT Resource kit, but doesn't
>install for me - thank MS).
>
>For basic development either one of the PWS servers will be fine. However,
>I really hate the inability to control settings on these servers. Various
>installs make control settings that you don't have access to (including
>Web Connection it's the only way to do it) visually.

>PWS on Win95 is very unstable in my experience. It crashes constantly and
>is very slow. The UI portion of it is the worst part for crashing.

Yes indeed - that is why I suggested using NT. 95 is nice - if that is all you have. For a learning tool - it is better than nothing. But, you need to be prepared to restart your computer often.

>Finally keep in mind licensing issues. MS is providing PWS mainly as a
>development tool and so you can run Web enabled applications locally, but not
>to let you use PWS as a Web server to server content to other users. Both
>versions of PWS have a 10 user connection limit (in writing, not physically),
>so using it as a public or even department Web server is pretty much in
>violation of the license agreement.

Good point. That is why I suggested using NT server for that type of work.