On Sun, 20 Jan 2002 07:37:47 -0500 (EST), Thomas Mueller wrote: >> from Sam Ewalt:
>> My pessimistic suspicion is that there will not be another version > of Arachne released for some time, if ever. There's been no > indication that Michael is actually doing anything with Arachne > currently except for his brief mention of the "flowerpot" idea > over six months ago. Yep, would be nice to hear anything about it, even the worst. >> I'd be happy with DOS if Arachne was an effective broswer for > today's web. It isn't and it won't be without a lot of work. I don't know, "webspider" shows the way I think > What happens when ipv6 takes over from the current ipv4? Will all DOS-based > Internet applications fall off the edge of the earth? Intresting question. My "best" hardware are a 486/100 and a 68040/33 so I can't run actual bloatware- May be opera and icab. >> With Windoze and Linux neither of the above will work due to an > entirely different philosophy. Sell them something new tomorrow > AND make damn sure they have to buy something ELSE to run it ! sad but true. > BSD? Mac OS X, which is actually a BSD variant? OS/2, or is that deader than > DOS? Serenity Systems, with eComStation, is trying to revive OS/2 from the > ashes, but from what I'm told, the first release of eComStation is really a beta > cloaked as a release, and installation is a nightmare. But OS/2 Warp 4 can > still run 16-bit OS/2 1.x stuff from years back. The question for me is: would it run on my hardware? Rel. fast? DOS needs about 25 sec. on my 486 to boot and start arachne. OS/2 v.3 was very slow on a 486 with 16MB when I installed it years ago. > Linux, patches to run on newer kernels are freely downloadable, but putting > everything together can still be tricky. ok- if I had newer hardware AND a fast connection to the Internet- not only my modem. all the best sacha -- Arachne V1.66, NON-COMMERCIAL copy, http://arachne.cz/
