Some flavors of Linux might be ideal on these old systems but since this is a Windows forum, I'll answer the questions on which DOS / Windows browsers should be used: 386sx20/8MB RAM/60MB HDD Stick with Bobcat Lynx386 for DOS. Arachne for DOS would be another option if you need graphics, but it obviously won't be as fast as Lynx. I must warn you that most Windows browsers absolutely crawl on a 386. Don't go any higher than Netscape Navigator 2.02 if you insist on browsing within Windows 3.1 (and even that version of the browser may take a minute just to start up on Windows). 486DX75/24MB RAM/540MB HDD Any browser on Windows for Workgroups 3.11 should be fine. Opera 3.62 and Netscape Communicator 4.08 Professional are easily the best browsers and complement each other very well. I even run version 3.04 Gold for some rare sites that don't like Communicator. Opera is lighter on resources and is one of the only 16-bit browsers that supports png images. Netscape, on the other hand, has the best Java support of all 16-bit browsers and has a very good e-mail client (among other things.) If you choose to go the way of Windows 95, you have a variety of options, but at the cost of far less available hard drive space. OffByOne, Lynx, Opera 5 or 6, and Netscape Communicator 4.08 will do nicely. K5-133/64MB RAM/1.2GB HDD Windows NT 4.0 would be ideal. Windows 95 OSR2 would be the next best bet. Windows 98SE is still rather slow here for my tastes (even with more RAM) but 98lite is nice. Opera 6 will definitely run fine. I don't know for sure about version 7, but I suspect it might. Netscape Communicator 4.8 will also work fine. Lynx and OffByOne naturally fly. Duron700/256MB RAM/13GB HDD The choice is yours for OS. A dual boot of Windows 2000lite and 98SElite would be my pick. Firefox is by far the best browser on any version of Windows here. Opera 7.x, Mozilla 1.7x, Netscape 7.x, and any of the previous browsers mentioned will all run fine as well.

0

I agree with post #1, just a little thing to add: Try arachne on the 386, it's a Dos based web browser that should work very well on it. Don't expect lightning speed, but it will do the job. Find arachne in the Browsers section of my reference page: Lightspeed's reference page / Browsers You should use IE 5.5 sp2 on the win 95 machine: Lightspeed's windows 95 page / Browsers Lightspeed.

0

I would tend to agree with the Glitchman, based on running Win9x on some decidedly marginal machines - better to have an OS that doesn't overwhelm the hardware. Sure, 95 will run on a 486, but WfW would run well. 95 would be better suited to the 133 w 64Mb. That 386 is something of a sorry one (20MHz SX), so anything that works at all, go for it. Naturally you can put nearly anything on the 700MHz. I found that Opera7 was pretty boggy, even on a 200MHz - I'd say you'd need something faster. Opera6 is pretty smooth. Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience

0

Stuff M$ Windows, in order would be: MSDOS6 / Arachne PCDOS 2000 / Arachne IBM OS/2 Warp3 with updates / Netscape Navigator v.2 IBM OS/2 Warp4 with updates (or eComstation) / Mozilla or Opera

0

Ok... Now for what's on the machines (all run quite well): 386sx20/8MB RAM/60MB HDD: PCDOS 2K/WfWG 3.11/Internet Explorer 3.03 (not used)/Opera 3.62 (used)/FoxFire (mail client, not Firefox the Browser) 486DX75/24MB RAM/540MB HDD: MS-DOS 6.22/WfWG 3.11/Internet Explorer 3.03/Netscape Navigator 3.04/Opera 3.62/ Eudora Light 3.06 K5-133/64MB RAM/1.2GB HDD: Win95C/Internet Explorer 5.5 (6.0 doesn't work on Win95)/Netscape Navigator 3.01/Opera 3.62/Mozilla Firefox 1.0/Off by One/Eudora Light 3.06 Duron700/256MB RAM/13GB HDD: Win98SE/Internet Explorer 5.5/Netscape Communicator 4.79/Netscape Mail Client Some things I've found: Win98 is way too heavy for the K5-133. Firefox states it needs Win98 or better, but it's fine on Win95 (though slow on the K5-133) 486-DX75 has no problems with IE 3.03/Netscape 3.04, but tends to crash on Opera 3.62 Yes, I've used Arachne before, but changing ISP's a few years ago now prevents me from using it.

0

Oho - so it was a test(!) Sly Dog I'd dissed the 386 because of its low speed and SX rating, but sure, it surpasses the min req for WfW. Running 98 on an 866MHz machine myself (for the moment) - fairly pleased with the performance. Of course, there are other factors that affect performance, such as board caching, chip caching, video, HDD & RAM speed (configuration too) Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience

0

No, not really a test per se, just "opinion-gathering". This is only just over 1/3 of the machines I have running, and the ones listed are most likely to be "refreshed" soon. BTW-The E-mail client on the 386sx20 is "FoxMail" not "Foxfire"...

0

Also, the Duron700 is pretty much idle... The fastest system I actually have running is a Celery600...

0

Foxmail rings a bell (faintly) I've never really setup anything else but 9x or so for the 'net because of the relative ease & functionality Keep meaning to on one of my many 'toy' machines just for the experience/perspective - that, and try out some non-Windows (or else NT) alternatives. Meanwhile, I have an AMD Duron (1.2G) calling to me ; ) Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience

0

Yes, Foxmail 1.6 was a good choice for your old 386, lightweight yet efficient. I have a question. Did you install the active desktop update on either of your machines now running IE 5.5? Just curiosity... Lightspeed.

0

I mean on the win 95 machine, since the 98se machine already has this update built in...

0

I did on a few (IE4.1) to get the quicklaunch - it did seem to add to the overhead Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience

0

Yes, but it can be done with IE 5.5. Read this jboy, tell me what you think! Active desktop

0

Looks promising - I'd always felt there must be a method involving less rigmarole than the conventional one - and I (now) have the Ie4shl95.cab file. Have to give one of those a go the next time I install 95 thanks Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience

0

T-R-A, what precisely is the prob you have with your ISP and arachne? I used it with mine (hi-speed) with no prob for a year, and then suddenly I too, could no longer connect with it (and have never been able to since).. Repeated requests on these forums have not provided any answers either..just curious...

0

Using the built in Arachne Dialler and similar software in other apps, have found the following works in the UK. ATDT dialling ATZ init string Though have found the LSppp dialer has better compatibility to ISP's: http://www.mwpms.uklinux.net/autoexec.htm http://www.mwpms.uklinux.net/page5.htm

0

Dominicus: With my previous ISP, I had "user defined" IP addresses (i.e. 255.255.255.255). My new ISP uses "server assigned" ISP addresses (i.e. 0.0.0.0) and those settings didn't work in Arachne (best as I remember---it's been over 2 years since I've tried it). I'd like to see it working again, but alas, no combination of settings worked...

0

Lightspeed, WOW!, cool, I didn't know that, I was wishing I could get IE4--just for the Quick launch, now I don't have to, Thank You! Customer: Do you have any mouse pads? Salseman, pointing: Over there. Customer: Great!, will they be comadible with my computer.

0

Some of my comments: My TI486SXLC/16Mb/14.4 based laptop works just swell with IE 3.0.3 running 6.22/3.11 (pen edition 1.0). My P133/32Mb/33.6 laptop works like a champ with IE 5.5sp2 running 98se. That's all just on dial up. The above and my 386-DX33 all just seem to fly on cable. I may be able to make better choices but when something just works well, I leave it alone. I've tried about every browser out there on older systems and althought netscape is a viable alternative, Opera just don't get it. I only seldom use Arachne or Foxmail (not much demand for DOS only stuff) but they do usually work. A couple of additional comments: My 486 above works well w/ 95b/IE4.X but is a little clunky for my tastes. The 133 shows little slow down with a minimal 98se install as opposed to 95b and runs Office97 Pro just fine. Heck of a discussion when all any of us really need is 5.0/3.1/Arachne/FoxMail/Works2.0 to run about any business. Oh, I forgot, a 9pin printer... Skip

0

"when all any of us really need is 5.0/3.1/Arachne/FoxMail/Works2.0 to run about any business. Oh, I forgot, a 9pin printer..." 5.0 ? BTW, I'd take a Deskjet 500 (B&W) over the 9-pin printer...

0

MS-DOS 5.0 Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience

0

My old FX-185 with a ribbon replacement cost of about 12 bucks has watched a steady line of 500, 500C, 550C and 600 series printers bite the dust. Granted, it's a little loud and about the size of a VW but it's never failed to print. Skip

0