I think I still have the disks somewhere.... I just don't have
an Apple-II to use to verify their readability.
It wasn't bad, I rather enjoyed using it (my last semester in
college, Spring '83).
-dq
-----Original Message-----
From: healyzh(a)aracnet.com [mailto:healyzh@aracnet.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2000 11:50 PM
To: classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org
Subject: Re: Why is it that ...
Yes the lack of JAVA, frames, no cookies and
Activex stuff
does limits
sites available and more every day. I'd
think JAVA would
not be that
bad on a smaller CPU tough it may be slow. After
all it's
not that much
different than running UCSD PASCAL (P-system)
P-code on z80 or
6502!
Allison
One of these days I'd really like to play with a UCSD PASCAL
system, largely
to get a feel of how well it worked. From what I've heard
getting any kind
of Java running on a 68k based system is a problem (have we
got anyone still
active with Amiga's around, they'd have a better idea). That
tells me that
a 486 or lower won't really be able to cut it when it comes to JAVA.
It does make you wonder what Sun's minimum requirements for
Java is on thier
machines.
Wait a minute.... I think I had Java running on my PowerBook
520c back in
'95 or '96, and it's a 68LC040 based system, so I guess at
least a 68040 or
486 based system probably can do Java. At least on a
supported OS (which is
the real problem).
Zane