[arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- From: Jason Dodd <jasorn@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: arachne@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 14:22:56 -0600
Arachne at FreeLists---The Arachne Fan Club!
Sam Ewalt wrote:
Arachne at FreeLists---The Arachne Fan Club!
On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 08:20:59 +1100, Ron Clarke wrote:
Possibly because it has a very similar "feel" to Arachne, although it is not as
flexible, and certainly not as customisable, as Arachne. When current Arachne
is fully ported to Linux, I think it will make quite an impression.
As it's been said here many times the current version of Arachne for
Linux was only an Alpha "release" of 1.66. That was it. There was
nothing further at all.
To my knowledge there is no one working on any sort of port of the
current DOS version. "When" is most likely never, unless somebody
new steps up and makes the effort.
Sam Ewalt
Croswell, Michigan
USA
Arachne at FreeLists
-- Arachne, The Web Browser/Suite for DOS and Linux --
Yeah, so my beef is the 'Linux' in the tag line. Ok, so not much of a
gripe but it really should be removed.
--
Jason Dodd
jasorn@xxxxxxxxx
618-917-4051
Arachne at FreeLists
-- Arachne, The Web Browser/Suite for DOS and Linux --
- References:
- [arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- From: Sam Ewalt
Other related posts:
- » [arachne] User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- » [arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- » [arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- » [arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- » [arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- » [arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- » [arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- » [arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- » [arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- » [arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- » [arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- » [arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- » [arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- » [arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- » [arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- » [arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- » [arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- » [arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- » [arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- » [arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- » [arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- » [arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- » [arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- » [arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- » [arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- » [arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- » [arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- » [arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- » [arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- » [arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- » [arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- » [arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- » [arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- » [arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- » [arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- » [arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- » [arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- » [arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- » [arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- » [arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- » [arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- » [arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- » [arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- » [arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- » [arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- » [arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- » [arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- » [arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- » [arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
Sam Ewalt wrote:
Arachne at FreeLists---The Arachne Fan Club!
On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 08:20:59 +1100, Ron Clarke wrote:
Possibly because it has a very similar "feel" to Arachne, although it is not as flexible, and certainly not as customisable, as Arachne. When current Arachne is fully ported to Linux, I think it will make quite an impression.
As it's been said here many times the current version of Arachne for Linux was only an Alpha "release" of 1.66. That was it. There was nothing further at all.
To my knowledge there is no one working on any sort of port of the current DOS version. "When" is most likely never, unless somebody new steps up and makes the effort.
Sam Ewalt Croswell, Michigan USA
Arachne at FreeLists
-- Arachne, The Web Browser/Suite for DOS and Linux --
Arachne at FreeLists -- Arachne, The Web Browser/Suite for DOS and Linux --
- [arachne] Re: User-friendliness or lack thereof in Arachne
- From: Sam Ewalt