Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

TzunamiOSX

macrumors 65816
Oct 4, 2009
1,057
435
Germany
Last edited:

galgot

macrumors 6502
May 28, 2015
487
899
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:
  1. Point your legacy browser to http://address:port of WRP server. Do not set or use it as a "http proxy server".

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.
 

Appleuser201

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Oct 12, 2018
401
221
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
 

galgot

macrumors 6502
May 28, 2015
487
899
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

No idea , didn't tried YouTube , and the 150 is back in the closet :)
And I don't have a SE/30 myself...

Btw, I'm trying to install that newer WRP version using Chrome, but the only MacOSX download available is a .dms (!) file. The Unarchiver don't want to open it, and I wouldn't want to install an Amiga emulator just for that.
How do you guys open that .dms please ?
 

Amethyst1

macrumors G3
Oct 28, 2015
9,832
12,246
Firefox 71 downloads wrp-amd64-macos without any extension here and it seems to be an executable binary:

Code:
$ file wrp-amd64-macos
wrp-amd64-macos: Mach-O 64-bit executable x86_64
 
  • Like
Reactions: galgot

galgot

macrumors 6502
May 28, 2015
487
899
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.

George-Hanson-1012191.png George-Hanson-1012192.png

Trying to run the vid doesn't work of course.
 

Appleuser201

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Oct 12, 2018
401
221
That is nothing short of awesome :)
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.
[automerge]1576000177[/automerge]
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.
Can you try discord with it next?
 
Last edited:

WakelessFoil

macrumors newbie
Dec 11, 2019
6
4
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

WRP will work in Mosaic on a Mac Plus!?

I have been searching for a rendering proxy that will either make MacWeb or Mosaic more usable on my macintosh plus for a while now. Did you just enter the server IP and port in the URL field in mosaic? Also how is the plus connected to the network? I have an Asante adapter I can't figure out so I am using virtual dial up through a Dreampi(much slower).
 
  • Like
Reactions: galgot

Anonymous Freak

macrumors 603
Dec 12, 2002
5,605
1,389
Cascadia
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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AphoticD

Appleuser201

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Oct 12, 2018
401
221
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?
 

bunnspecial

macrumors G3
May 3, 2014
8,353
6,497
Kentucky
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.
“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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: galgot

Anonymous Freak

macrumors 603
Dec 12, 2002
5,605
1,389
Cascadia
Is it impossible to get an internet browser on the original macintosh?

I have used MacTerminal and a serial cable to connect it to my Linux box and use the Macintosh as a serial terminal, using Lynx (or elinks, or some other similar Lynx-derived text-mode web browser) in the past; but I don't really count that as "browsing the web" on it. I mean, I could use that method to "browse the web" on an old keyboard-and-daisywheel-printer serial terminal from a 1960s mainframe.

The oldest Macintosh that is capable of running a new enough operating system, with enough memory, to run a web browser would be the Macintosh Plus, which can have 4 MB of RAM and can run System 6, on which MacWeb 1.1 can run.

Note that ironically, the much older Apple II+ *CAN* natively run a web browser - Contiki.
[automerge]1576195361[/automerge]
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.

The big thing is that MacRumors forums use modern TLS https encryption - something older browsers can't handle. There is no method (without proxy) of loading the MR Forums on any 68k Mac. I'm pretty sure Classilla is the only pre-OS X browser that can do it, too. iCab 3.0.5 doesn't load it (last time I checked, anyway.)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: z970

Appleuser201

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Oct 12, 2018
401
221
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).
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!
[automerge]1576546154[/automerge]
“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.

Coming back to this, would there even be any reasons to use an original 128k Macintosh?
 

bunnspecial

macrumors G3
May 3, 2014
8,353
6,497
Kentucky
Coming back to this, would there even be any reasons to use an original 128k Macintosh?
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.
 

Appleuser201

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Oct 12, 2018
401
221
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)
And it does it in style.
 

bunnspecial

macrumors G3
May 3, 2014
8,353
6,497
Kentucky
The SE/30 is still quite useful today as a word processor, calculator, basic games, and as a reddit machine (through WRP)

I can and have done all of that-save for Reddit-on my favorite 512Ke(1mb RAM and an HD20). In fact, mine sits in the back of my office and is connected via a LocalTalk network to a Personal Laserwriter 360. A few years ago, I wrote a decent number of rec letters on it, but virtually all of those have gone to online submission. I still get the occasional request for a paper one, and it's nice to throw a bit of letterhead in the printer and type it up on the 512Ke.

The big advantage I could see for that task for any of the SE series is that I could use it with my preferred AEK or AEKII. The M0001 keyboard does have the same nice Alps switches as the AEK, but the pitch is weird to my hands(it mimics the Apple ][) and consequently my error rate is high. I do have an aftermarket M0001 "telephone plug" keyboard that's more of a conventional IBM/PC style, although I've never used it-it came from the same source as both of my HD20s, a couple of Pluss(including one that's a 1984 "Macintosh" front bucket), and some other oddballs like the scanner that works in an Imagewriter and a graphics tablet for the M0001s. I probably should try that one out.

Of course, the SE FDHD and SE/30 also gives you access to 1.44mb disks. If you're nutty enough to do it, you can put ludicrous amounts of RAM in the SE/30, but good luck using it with System 6 or even bloated up System 7.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Appleuser201

MagicBoy

macrumors 68040
May 28, 2006
3,975
1,060
Manchester, UK
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.

Yeah that was me. I worked for the PC Superstore that sold the vast majority of iMacs. They were permanently sold out for about 6 months - couldn't get enough stock. Apple didn't have their own stores, or sell direct at the time. So it was us or an Apple dealer.

A lot of the people were putting an extra 32MB RAM in them either at purchase or shortly after. The SO-DIMMS were relatively unusual at the time, most laptops were still using proprietary upgrades. A handful of users wanted 128MB which required getting access to the lower slot. Which was a bit daunting as we were untrained! We did repairs on most of the PCs we sold, the Apple gear they sent AppleCare engineers out to the store if the customer wanted us to deal with the repair.
 

Fcr-900

macrumors member
Apr 27, 2020
35
25
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.
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!
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.