>>Nothing less than a 386-class processor (for the Intel iteration) would do, and running it in less that 16MB would make for a very sub-par experience – astonishingly excessive for the time.
Considering the 486 had been around for almost 4 years at that point, I really don't think it was that crazy to ask for a 386. Now the 16 MB of RAM was a little on the WTF side, because memory was bonkers expensive back then, but asking for a 386 by 1993 wasn't at all excessive. Especially when considering that NT was marketed for workstations and servers and not for general-purpose consumer level stuff like 3.1 and the 9x versions of DOS-wrapper "Windows"
Just my two cents.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
