View Full Version : running arachne browser on XT clone

Mike Chambers
November 14th, 2006, 11:15 PM
wow... molasses in january has nothing on this!

if you ever want to commit suicide via boredom, try running arachne on your 8088. :(

November 15th, 2006, 01:30 AM
I tried running executor on a 386 once. The 15 minute trial was over before the opening screen.

Mike Chambers
November 15th, 2006, 09:40 AM
I tried running executor on a 386 once. The 15 minute trial was over before the opening screen.

lol! i've used that program before... it was a long time ago. i remember it running great on my 486 i had at the time.

it's amazing difference between processor generations. from 8088/86 to 286 to 386 etc... you really can't appreciate it until you mess around with the older systems again.

just absolute lol @ 8088 vs. athlon 64

the xt guy
November 15th, 2006, 02:13 PM
Molasses in January??? Think molasses at the north pole! I tried running Arachne once on an XT clone as well (10 mhz. V20 chip, SCSI hard drive, 14.4K modem, VGA video) and it was like watching a glacier move. It took about 5 minutes just for the opening screen of Arachne to display (and I could never figure out what the graphic was supposed to be, it was just a bunch of green, gray and magenta blobs with intricate outlines that looked like a view of stained cell tissue under a microscope).

I did connect to the Internet and access pages but it was uselessly slow, over 5 minutes for a page, and none of the graphics would display. Seems if you are running a 16-bit video card instead of a 32-bit, there is some extra software you have to run that modifies Arachne. Well, after I downloaded that and ran it, then Arachne wouldn't connect to the Internet at all, giving me error messages such as 'packet driver not found'.

It was obviously so uselessly slow on even a fast 8088, that I just deleted the whole mess. I remember a few years ago on the Uncreative Labs site, somebody said that they tried running Arachne on a 133 Pentium and it was slow on that.

I have connected to the Internet on an 8088 using Bobcat (text browser only, no graphics) Expecting an 8088 CPU to handle graphics on top of Internet is just too much.

The version of Bobcat was pretty buggy, it took about 1-1/2 to 2 minutes to load a reasonably sized page of text. I was even able to post a message over on the old Uncreative Labs site when they were on Bravenet!
(It won't work on sites like this, where you have to log in as a member and then post, as there is no provision for cookies).

The Bobcat browser had a external DOS program installed with it called 'lxpic' that would show graphics (as a link where you would view the graphic on a seperate page). If you used a VGA card that was VESA compliant it would try to show the graphic in 256 or more colors. I remember looking at the "PC-XT" review on the Uncreative Labs site, the pictures looked pretty good for an 8088.

Nothing like reading an Internet article about the XT computer with an XT computer!

For a large page of text, there was no scrolling, with a press of the 'page down' button the screen would quickly jump to the next portion of the webpage.

If the webpage was over about 100K, the computer would run out of memory and a line on the bottom of the screen would read "Memory exhausted, will interrupt transfer!"

Other than the general bugginess of the software, not enough memory was the other limitation.

Terry Yager
November 15th, 2006, 02:43 PM
My earliest experiences with the Internet were sometimes disappointing. I remember when my I-net access was via a shell account on Detroit FreeNet in the early nineties. I was in Flint, about 100 miles from Detroit, but the net-lag was so bad that I couldn't even use IRC. If I tried to type-in sum'n, the screen would freeze up for awhile, then suddenly scroll up 2 or 3 screenfuls at a time, so interactive chatting was impossible. What pizzed me off the most was that my friend in Detroit (about a mile from the physical location of the server), could use the IRC just fine, even though he was running a Tandy 1000 with a 2400bps modem, vs. my '386-16 with it's shiny-new 14,400 Zoom modem.