>Peer-to-peer doesn't necessarily mean that the file server will have a user working on it as far as I know. I always thought of peer-to-peer as having administrative files (ie. user/password files) on each workstation instead of having centralized administration (ie. domains(s)).
>
>Anyways, I will let you know about my experience:
>

Snips...

I've been using PC peer-to-peer with 95/98 for 3/4 years with no problems, (and Macintosh for too long to comment on) - HOWEVER, that is using one workstation as a 'server': no *user* applications running, so no pesky users shut the machine down. Where I have seen problems is where the 'server' is also used by someone as a workstation, however careful that user is. In other words, IMO, you'd be best using a dedicated machine as a 'server' regardless of whether you are going to use NT, W98/95 or whatever.

I dunno what prices are like where you are, but over here (UK) PC's are selling at very low prices (£399 including sales tax, with network cards, modems, hard disks with capacity measured in acres, you name it) so I'd cost one in *anyway* and then consider your server software as a separate issue.

Just my tuppence worth