On Fri, 08 Aug 2003 08:56:44 +0900, Kali Mclaughlin wrote: > On Wed, 06 Aug 2003 15:39:50 -0500, Sam Ewalt wrote:
>> On Sun, 3 Aug 2003 14:04:21 -0400, Roger Turk wrote: >>> We NEED secure shell capabilities AND javascript capabilities in >>> Arachne as soon as possible. > Yes, it would be nice, but a big ask it seems. > I have been rather depressed about failing to get any way of connecting > a computer to my mobile phone, even to the extent of contemplating > running a cut back Windows 98 as a vehicle for a driver. Maybe you should think about getting a new make and model of cell phone. My Nokia 7160 works like a real external modem, needs no drivers, and it works with all of my DOS-based internet applications and it works also with Windows 95 and even with an obsolete hand-held computer running version 1 of Window$ CE. As an operating system I find Window$ CE almost good. I wish they would make such a small compact version of Window$ available for old desktops. It would be a great boon for those who like to do Window$ and who are looking for a version that is almost good. The only new versions they are finding nowadays are the very bad ones that are much worse than the version they had. <snip> > HOWEVER, the shocking thing for me is to find that moderately new > Netscapes have trouble also!! > Netscape 4.08 running on Win3.1 with Win32S loaded is a complete dog > compared to Arachne on the same machine. And it cant negotiate these > SSL demands either! Forms wont submit, JS complaints occurr etc. I have found that browsers have a problem with all of their security certificates periodically expiring. That is the reason why they can't negotiate the SSL part when they get old. The browser companies won't offer a simple patch for updating the security certificates. Instead they offer only the whole nine yards of their latest and greatest versions, which include of course the new security certificates. The reason why JS complaints occur is that many webmasters are in cahoots with the bloatware browser companies who reward them for writing so called JavaScript that will work only with bloatware browsers. If they were to write only kosher JavaScript it would be digestible by all JavaScript capable browsers. BTW, I have heard of people successfully suing restaurants for serving meals advertised on the menu as being kosher and which fail to meet kosher standards. I wish they would sue webmasters, or at least fire them, for claiming to write kosher JavaScript which fails to meet the specified standards. Sam Heywood -- This mail was written by user of The Arachne Browser: http://browser.arachne.cz/
