41–50 of 107 posts
"This means that somewhere, this instance needs to be connected to a proxy server, which assigns a 10.x.x.x address to the “Windows” machine, and then forwards the connections through. Basically, world’s weirdest, most hipster ISP on the face of the earth." I wonder if there will ever be a business case for things like this. I sit across the hall from a startup that sells mp3 gramaphones, etsy is a huge success, ther…
They don't make nostalgia like they used to.
with a playable demo of doom here: https://jsdosbox.appspot.com/
I recall running Windows 3.11 on a Mac using the earliest versions of Connectix Virtual PC in the late 90s. It was so slow as to be unusable. And today we can run Windows 3.11 in a browser. Mind-boggling.
Although Connectix also sold a playstation (original) emulator for mac that worked pretty well. Connectix was embroiled in a lawsuit with Sony, till Sony ended up buying it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connectix_Virtual_Game_Station
Part of the problem I think with some emulation speed has to do with bit order of the original hardware (or endian order) which makes emulators do a lot of memory moves.. We ran into this a little when looking into migrating software from PA-RISC to X86..
It's impressive and convenient that this runs in a browser, but does itreally change anything about emulation? We've had this capability for windows, mac and Linux for years which covers about every platform with a browser. I suppose it's convenient if you wanted to emulate windows 3.1 on your iOS device.
If anyone is interested, I just wrote a simple guide on how to get your own DOS programs up and running with em-dosbox: https://csl.name/post/em-dosbox/ Em-dosbox and emscripten are really amazing projects. An emulator is cross-compiled to JavaScript, which is then JITed in your browser's js VM. It's not only amazing that it works, but also that it runs pretty well (compared to native dosbox, it's only a little bit s…
how do you think em-dosbox compares to jsdosbox?
Here's a guide I hacked together a couple of months ago for comparison: http://atechdad.com/how-to-jsdosbox/
Imagine if they get to windows XP and ie8. We will never get rid of them!
They should try getting a more modern browser on there. If I remember correctly, while running my hand-me-down Gateway 2000 with Windows 3.11 in 1998, I managed to get Internet Explorer 3 or 4 installed after I downloaded it at a friend's house.
I went through the period of nostalgia and fascination the author exhibits years ago with Amiga, c64 and dos emulation and virtual machines. It's impressive and convenient that this runs in a browser, but does itreally change anything about emulation? We've had this capability for windows, mac and Linux for years which covers about every platform with a browser. I suppose it's convenient if you wanted to emulate wind…
Yes, but that always required installing emulation software, tracking down the necessary ROMs/disk images, etc. If it's running in the browser, the site admin can do all that once for everybody rather than every user having to do it for him/herself. All the user has to do is open a URL.
K so JS is the new de-facto interpreted machine-Latin. The lingua franca. Is there something else I'm missing here? We've known that there is a decent mapping from X86 assembly to a subset of javascript for a number of years now. You can even run the entire OCaml stack in the browser, or Doom, or Quake... etc. What's next? Wordperfect in the browser? Visicalc? This is clever and kudos to the guys, but how is this adv…
> It turns out a number of fundamental aspects of The Web have changed since this time. I wish they went into more detail what exactly changed and why these browsers no longer work, unless it was the PPP protocol they mentioned that is causing the issue.
Original author of the hack here. Several changes: 1) HTTP 1.0 vs 1.1 and lack of the Host: header, as you've all deduced 2) Additional encoding info tacked on after the Content-type causes parsing issues 3) Many sites now redirect to HTTPS by default. While Netscape 1.0 and Mosaic 1.0 both support HTTPS, it used SSLv1, and well, remember POODLE? :P Newer versions of these browsers tend to work in native DOSBOX but p…