[arachne] Re: The future of Arachne

Arachne at FreeLists---The Arachne Fan Club!

On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 11:43:17 +0000, Udo Kuhnt wrote:

> I always thought that most of the people who are using Arachne do this
> because just like me, they like DOS and prefer it over other OSes. I
> thought that just like me, they were accepting the constraints of
> Arachne since they feel that it is better than using a different OS just
> to be able to use Internet Explorer, Mozilla, Opera, whatever.

That sounds like me.

> Now I have learned that most of the people on this list seem to regard
> Arachne as something they toy with because they are bored, or use on old
> machines they are running DOS on because these are not suitable for
> running Windows NT, etc.

"...most of the people on this list..."? I wonder.

> So here is my proposal:

> Instead of keeping Arachne small enough to run on old machines with
> little memory just to please those who are not really interested in it
> because they do not run it on their main machines and thus do not depend
> on it, let's split Arachne into two versions, one for legacy machines
> and one for modern ones.

Yes, that sounds like an excellent idea!

> The "modern" version should be developed to make optimal use of the
> resources of the PC, while the "legacy" version should be optimised for
> speed and a small memory footprint. If a new feature is to be added to
> Arachne that would use too much memory for the "legacy" version or make
> it too slow to run on old PCs, it should only be added to the "modern"
> version.

That's logical. If we want a poll of users on this, put me down
as supporting it.


.   ,-./\      from Greg Mayman, in Adelaide, South Australia
.  /     \     "Queen City of The South"    34:55 S  138:36 E
.  \_,-*_/
.       v     homepage http://users.tpg.com.au/gmone/index.htm
                  Arachne at FreeLists                  
-- Arachne, The Premier GPL Web Browser/Suite for DOS --

Other related posts: