That's insanely cool, just for fun can you try and load YouTube and gmail on it.How about a Mac SE/30, Netscape 2.02 via the WRP rendering proxy server?
That's insanely cool, just for fun can you try and load YouTube and gmail on it.How about a Mac SE/30, Netscape 2.02 via the WRP rendering proxy server?
Here:
View attachment 881639
View attachment 881640
But we obviously "ran into some problems"...
Worked only once. Other tries made the proxy crash.
Im a little bit confused. Normally web address and top of the page by unsing wrp look like this:
https://github.com/tenox7/wrp/blob/master/wrp.png
How did you load your page?
I hope you read this:
- Point your legacy browser to http://addressort of WRP server. Do not set or use it as a "http proxy server".
Maybe what confuses you is that i use an older version of WRP, one that doesn't need Chrome, an all Python version. The way i use it is, run the Python WRP on my MacBook Pro, then set the browser on the old Mac to use the MacBook Pro as a proxy on port 8080.You could give Web Rendering Proxy a try
Does YouTube load at all? The home page?I am indeed using a web rendering proxy. Was answering to this Amethyst1 post :
Maybe what confuses you is that i use an older version of WRP, one that doesn't need Chrome, an all Python version. The way i use it is, run the Python WRP on my MacBook Pro, then set the browser on the old Mac to use the MacBook Pro as a proxy on port 8080.
Sorry if i missed these rules...
The http://.... Address is the only one that works for me using this way, using https://... , the browser says he doesn't understand .
Matter of fact, i have to try that newer WRP version using Chrome, looks like its working better.
Does YouTube load at all? The home page?
It would be funny to see it on the SE30, at the time to was made, it would be another 18 years before YouTube existed
That is nothing short of awesomeWeird. Downloading with Safari, I get that .dms file... Thanks, was about to ask the author if he didn't mixed Macs with Amigas...
Anyway, that newer version works better indeed than the all Python one I had. Much more stable.
Trying to run the vid doesn't work of course.
I imagine MAYBE it would be possible to manage a YouTube channel even if it can't play videos. Like changing video descriptions and titles and other basic channel stuff.That is nothing short of awesome
Can you try discord with it next?Weird. Downloading with Safari, I get that .dms file... Thanks, was about to ask the author if he didn't mixed Macs with Amigas...
Anyway, that newer version works better indeed than the all Python one I had. Much more stable.
View attachment 881860 View attachment 881861
Trying to run the vid doesn't work of course.
If I had a dollar everytime you bring up YT...I imagine MAYBE it would be possible to manage a YouTube channel even if it can't play videos. Like changing video descriptions and titles and other basic channel stuff.
I found some free time to try this out, and while I can say it’s a nice idea, it’s still not very practical for real use. The transfer of data is pretty fast, but the poor little Mac plus takes forever to convert the image and put it onscreen. Even though it’s on a 5Mbps+ connection, we are still talking about measuring page load times in minutes, not seconds. In fact, this setup would probably have a hard time keeping up with a dial-up connection.
The way to enter a url is by using url parameters, so it’s pretty obtuse for the average user. Downloaded files end up on the server, and text fields don’t work in Mosaic, so there is no way to login remotely, however if you have already logged in through Chrome on the server and saved the credentials, it will just bypass that step anyway, but there is still no way to post in the forums? and a lot of the web doesn’t work with a B&W screen anymore.
You have to remember, 9” Macs only had 384 vertical pixels to work with, and part of that is consumed by the menu bar, and window chrome, so the banner ads on the top of most sites are taller than what’s left, and much scrolling is involved. Which means rendering more GIFs.
My credits to the author of WRP though, I have to say when I initially made the GIF and webpage for the plus I actually had the idea to make something similar. I guess you could say what I did was a manual web rendering proxy?
The only thing that bothers me is it looks too good! The web would have never looked like this on this machine without WRP. Text formatting and layout is rather primitive in Mosaic, and since the page is actually rendered in Chrome on the mini, it doesn’t even use the classic system fonts. So I also saved the source of the MR home page and hosted it on my server to get a few shots of that too.
View attachment 881721 View attachment 881722
Is it impossible to get an internet browser on the original macintosh?My oldest Mac is a 1983-manufacture Macintosh 128k. There is no way to load MacRumors on it.
I'll have to see if I can get MacRumors to load on my SE, though. It has an Ethernet card and MacWeb 1.1.
Is it impossible to get an internet browser on the original macintosh?
“Only” system 1 is a stretch-I run system 2/finder 4.2 on mine usually, and a bit newer is possible.Considering how the original 128K Macintosh only ran System 1.0, and the earliest graphical browsers needed at least, if I recall, System 6, it would be impossible.
Is it impossible to get an internet browser on the original macintosh?
I feel like we could now reliably fork this into two threads:
Thread 1: Load the MacRumors PPC forum on your oldest Mac
and
Thread 2: Load the MacRumors PPC forum on your oldest Mac via web-rendering proxy
I’d want to continue following a thread #1, but not so much a thread #2.
Funny this question was asked because at the time I wasn't even expecting anyone to show macrumors on any pre G3, much less a.. Macintosh plus and SE/30!Anyone done it yet on a pre-G3 CPU?
I haven't made it to step 0 yet on my 9600, as the video card doesn't seem to be cooperating(I should probably try shuffling it to another slot-I've that slots can be a bit flaky in this computer).
“Only” system 1 is a stretch-I run system 2/finder 4.2 on mine usually, and a bit newer is possible.
You are cramped by the fact you have to run everything off 400K disks.
A Plus with a hard drive is a lot more comfortable for doing really much of anything.
Funny this question was asked because at the time I wasn't even expecting anyone to show macrumors on any pre G3, much less a.. Macintosh plus and SE/30!
I have mine because I wanted an original 1984 “Macintosh” for my collection(before the 512k came out, the 128k models only said Macintosh on them). Honestly, there aren’t a ton around because they really were useless and both Apple and 3rd parties offered upgrade paths. The 128k couldn’t even do basic tasks like boot from an HD20.Coming back to this, would there even be any reasons to use an original 128k Macintosh?
The SE/30 is still quite useful today as a word processor, calculator, basic games, and as a reddit machine (through WRP)I have mine because I wanted an original 1984 “Macintosh” for my collection(before the 512k came out, the 128k models only said Macintosh on them). Honestly, there aren’t a ton around because they really were useless and both Apple and 3rd parties offered upgrade paths. The 128k couldn’t even do basic tasks like boot from an HD20.
A 512ke is probably as old as you can realistically go to even have a moderately useable Mac. The “e” has 800k drives and can also boot directly off an HD20(the 512k requires using a floppy disk to boot off the HDD). My 512ke has 1mb of RAM and really is a nice running computer. The ubiquitous Plus, with maxed out RAM and a SCSI hard drive(assuming you can get it to cooperate) is the best you can do in the M0001 case. For compacts in general, it’s hard to argue with the SE/30 as the best, but the cheap Classic II offers a lot of bang for the buck.
The SE/30 is still quite useful today as a word processor, calculator, basic games, and as a reddit machine (through WRP)
Not really in my experience. Remember that when these came out, they were a hot item and sold like crazy-a lot to first time computer users. When you add in the fact they were not officially upgradeable by the end user, and even the unofficial upgrades are more complicated than your average home user would want to tackle, they're not terribly difficult to find in as-shipped configuration. Even if they've been upgraded, almost no end users would change the bottom DIMM since it involves removing the heatsink and CPU card, so if you do want to restore it to the original configuration it's generally a matter of popping the out the top DIMM.
Someone on here-I think maybe @MagicBoy -has talked about selling them new and doing in-store RAM upgrades. I remember him talking about changing a bottom DIMM back in the day and being terrified of it at the time.
Most of the G3 PowerBooks are along those same lines. The RAM is a lot easier to upgrade than an iMac G3, but they have the same top/bottom DIMM configuration(on either side of the CPU card) and many users would not have been comfortable with removing the card to access the bottom one.
Just for fun, I’d like to see you all load the Macrumors homepage on your oldest Mac, maybe even a beige powermac.
I know some of you here own beige powermacs, and clamshell iBooks clocked even lower than any of my G3 Macs.
Here I’ve got it loaded (rather slowly but useable) on a late 1999 400mhz DV 256mb Ram iMac G3, grape.
I didn’t think OS9 could browse the web still!Just for fun, I’d like to see you all load the Macrumors homepage on your oldest Mac, maybe even a beige powermac.
I know some of you here own beige powermacs, and clamshell iBooks clocked even lower than any of my G3 Macs.
Here I’ve got it loaded (rather slowly but useable) on a late 1999 400mhz DV 256mb Ram iMac G3, grape.
Sure it can! You just need to be selectiveI didn’t think OS9 could browse the web still!