On Mon Dec 30 01:15:19 2002 Ian Collier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >On Sun, Dec 29, 2002 at 11:52:17PM +0100, Peter Rasmussen wrote: >> Would you mind telling me why you consider Netscape 4.* your only browser >> apart from Lynx? > >I did explain this in an earlier message. > Sorry your highness, for not remembering.
If disk space is the problem have you tried to use Opera? And if performance is a problem you should chuck any RedHat distribution and go with Slackware. There you will also have the flexibility to install any window manager you feel like. I use fvwm2 myself and glibc-2.2 from Slackware 8.1 on an AMD K6-2 machine as my terminal, so I am not sure it is because you have limited machine power but perhaps haven't investigated your possibilities right? Or do I sense that someone going with RedHat since then aren't up to such a task? >> Even Netscape 6 or Mozilla 1.0 wouldn't be the "latest and greatest". > >True, but my system does not meet their "minimum specifications". > You are right, those are on the heavy side, but take a look at Opera. >> I don't know why you bring viruses and Outlook Express into the picture? > >It was just an illustration of how people do not in general use >"developed" versions of things; the fact that X is no longer actively >developed does not imply that no one uses X any more. > Oh, you are wrong on that one, X is being developed pretty heavily, but it isn't anymore the Open Group that does it, it is XFree86. Take a look at: http://www.xfree86.org/ And you might be surprised. And your analogy is wrong because there isn't anything that replaces X well, but there is a _lot_ that will replace the Netscape 4.* browser. Peter ; To UNSUBSCRIBE: Send "unsubscribe lynx-dev" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
