>>I disagree. From a technology standpoint, NTWS is the same as NTServer. Unless you need to run an app that is Server-specific (Exchange Server, etc.) there's no reason to install NTServer on a small LAN.
>>
>>Running NTWS on all 3 or 4 LAN PCs will give you a more robust and stable network than running NTServer on one and W9x on the others, at less cost.
>
>I disagree with your disagreement. I don't think NTW will run IIS and suppose he decides to host some web type applications on the server using VFP. It is my understanding that IIS is much more robust than PWS. If he, all of a sudden, decides he needs these things, he gets to reinstall if he went the NTW route, otherwise he just adds the services.

That's basically exactly what I said - if you need Server-specific apps, then install Server.

I still stand by my second point, being, that for a stable network, you've got to lose W9x entirely.

IAC, we should be discussing W2K Professional - and I don't know what services it offers, or how it compares to W2K Server. Anyone running it care to chip in?