from Bernie:
<<
>Was Arachne ever really going strong?
In it's market it is still the number 1 option. The market in this case is
CLI-mode graphical browser.
>>
Competition is not strong in DOS. What else is there? Net-Tamer? Anything
happening with New Deal browser? Anything happening with Caldera/Lineo
Embrowser? Low prices on RAM and many-GB hard drives are not the way to keep up
the DOS market.
Does anybody know if DOS can access USB devices like the USB Iomega Zip drive
through BIOS support? I could ask the same question re IEEE 1394 (FireWire),
though I don't think Iomega makes a FireWire Zip drive.
Is it possible to make a DOS-bootable CD?
If you turn off images in Arachne, that defeats the purpose of a graphical
browser, though that is preferable to a long wait on an image-laden Web page.
You can still turn images back on when desired.
<<
Clumsy scrolling? It has never been clumsy for me. Internet Explorer on the
other hand is awful in this regard. It isn't any better on this Duron
750MHz (incidently with 256MB) than my old machine.
I use Arachne for these reasons:
1. For my OS of choice (DOS, CLI Linux is also an option for me)
2. Fast when starting up
3. "Banner-resistent", instead of adding *more* banners (Opera), you get
less with Arachne (if you have a registered version).
>>
On the public library Internet computers here, Internet Explorer 4, running
under Windows NT Workstation 4, scrolls quite smoothly. That is my only
experience with MSIE. Library computers are much newer/faster than my current
computer, though I don't know the exact MHz, RAM, etc; Internet connection is
high-speed.
I think Opera is also banner-resistant if you register and pay.
> BTW: Did you notice that QV has come out in a new version, and it's also
> being ported to Linux (CLI of course, no X needed).
What is QV, and where do I find it?
