In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.19961211212721.0073da88@easystreet.com>
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII



	Rex Ballard - Director of Electronic Distribution
	http://cnj.digex.net/~rballard


On Wed, 11 Dec 1996, Bob Poulsen wrote:

> At 12:56 PM 12/11/96 -0600, you wrote:
> >I'm curious what experience other sites have with Java statistics.
> >
> >I was just looking at stats from yesterday's logfile, and 40 percent of
> >visitors to the Purple Page ( http://www.startribune.com/vikings ) used 
> >Java-enabled browsers.

Java is getting very popular.  It is easier to write for than C++, and is
great for writing distributed applications for LAN/WAN.  It also
eliminates the problems of hardware/OS dependency.

> This doesn't necessarily give the market usage numbers for Java.  For
> instance, I use Netscape 2.02 which is Java-enabled, but I always browse
> with both Java and JavaScript disabled.

Many of us who have older machines (I'm running LINUX on a 386SX/16) don't
have the horsepower to handle lots of graphics, never mind the JavaScript
animations that Netscape insists on sending to 3.0 browsers.

IE 2.0 didn't come with Java, IE 3.X and beyond does.  Of course to get
internet explorer, you need to run Win95 or WinNT.  Interesting that
people are still aren't stampeding to get NT 4.0 or Win95 upgrades to
existing machines.  Many new CPU vendors are offering "Bare Bones"
machines with Win3.1, and the facilities to add Linux or OS/2 Warp.

I've been using the latest version of Red Hat 4.0 Linux.  It's very
impressive.  It is a little tedious on my 4 MIPS machine with 8 Meg of
ram.  I did install the MetroX server this time.  The good news is that
The Red Hat Distribution is easier to configure and install than Windows
NT 3.51 and almost as easiy as Win95.

I was running it on a 486DX/100 and later a 586/133 with a Diamond Stealth
video accelerator.  That was a nice engine.  Even on a 14400 modem through
a local ISP (vs. the SLOW X.25 Pads the national chains use), I was
getting good throughput.  At $500 for hardware and $65 for software,
this makes a Nice Appliance computer.  I've been looking at a $460 laptop
with visions of slackware or RedHat dancing in my head :-).

> This has actually caused some problems for me, since some sites determine
> that I can accept Java and display only info accessible to Java.  I have
> disabled Java, so I'm left in limbo.

The only thing worse is leaving Java enabled on a Windows 3.1 machine with
netscape 3.x and a slow machine.  You literally have to wait 5 minutes for
the start button to quit.  I had to fall back to an old netware 2.0
version.

> I don't like Java because I want to be in control of my browsing session
> (and my computer!) at all times.  Once in a while, if I'm at a page where I
> trust the designer, I will re-enable Java and reload.  But then I'll disable
> again as soon as possible.

Java is at least somewhat responsible about not sending code to reformat
your drive.  Appearantly some unix sites are posting an activeX
application that reboots your machine when you select the "Why You
Shouldn't use ActiveX" line.

> After searching a lot of new technologies the past few weeks, I'm putting my
> money on Shockwave.  Using the Lingo language, built into Shockwave, a
> developer can call information off the Internet, go to other Web pages, and
> include forms to be filled in by the user.  I think Shockwave will be
> included in Netscape 4.0 and IE 4.0 -- anyone know for sure?  Also,
> Shockwave files are compressed -- meaning both fast loading and obscuring
> the source code.

The important thing about any media used over the internet is that
the protocol be publicly documented.  There also needs to be a reference
model available in General Public License.  It's important to remember
that system admins and traffic managers get very upset when "mystery
packets" start swarming their boxes.  If you want to protect your content,
use encryption.

> Besides, with Shockwave you can play really neat games -- like "Boris
> Yeltzin's Operation" at the Comedy Channel site.

Adobe's formats are nice too, so is Word.  They are not suitable for the
internet because they can't be monitored.  A user could upload a vicious
word document that includes objects that do cute things like rename all
your files to the same name, reformat your disk drive...  There was some
cute e-mail that you could send to Exchange and other "AutoUnwrap" mail
readers that could do nasty things.

> Regards,
> -Bob Poulsen
>  Ecola


From rballard@cnj.digex.net Fri Dec 13 02:38:00 1996
Status: O
X-Status: 
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.os2.apps,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy