Best web browser for windows 95.

tuxy wrote: »

You know a browser like lynx will work just fine for reading boards

I see the OP probably needs to keep on to win95 for some reason. If you want speed then the win32 version of lynx will do the job. Perhaps someone else knows of other lightweight browsers that provide more junction.

The PC is obviously working fine at its intended function so why scrap it?

If the OP needs to keep Win95 around for some reason (specific software/hardware support, for example) that's one thing.

There is no sane reason for putting that system on the internet at large without taking a substantial number of precautions to prevent the many, many vulnerabilities that would be exploitable in the OS from being used by bored or malicious attackers for fun, profit or mischief. And that's without even discussing the horrendous experience of getting any current software to run on Windows 95 unless it's been written expressly for that.

The way I see it, one of two situations apply:
a) the machine and OS have to be retained for some non-trivial reason (controlling hardware, running specialist software etc). In which case, fine, but keep the damn thing offline; or
b) the machine and OS have been retained for no real reason and the only use of the machine is web browsing - in which case the electrical power inefficiency on the system will alone mean that it's likely the most expensive way of doing very basic web browsing available.

Why scrap it? Because unless it's doing a very specialised job, it's the Cro-Magnon man of computers and will cost far more in terms of time spent maintaining it (or just waiting for it to do stuff) than the cost of a basic contemporary replacement.

Jesus, I can't believe I'm actually having this conversation.

Edited to add:

tuxy wrote: »

How power hungry is it?

For a Win95-era machine, you're talking the best part of 20 years of degradation of the components (capacitor leakage, etc) as well as hardware which had no real power efficiency to speak of. So while the actual processing power available would likely cost you maybe 30W on modern hardware (or less on something like a Pi), a machine this old and creaky is likely to be using far more than that. Only the OP can answer for sure, but I'd lay odds on it being the least efficient way available of getting that amount of computational power.

Tuxy:

Why exactly are you so insistent on arguing against the good advice re: not networking an ancient, bug-riddled OS that will only run on ancient legacy hardware that has been given in this thread?

I'm not trying to pick a fight, I'm just genuinely curious why you seem to think that it's a good idea when to everyone else (or at least everyone with professional sysadmin experience) it's an appalling idea.

tuxy wrote: »

The system is already networked there would be a reason behind this. Windows 95 is the operating system the OP needs. I'm going on the facts provided by the OP not speculation that many of the other posts contain.

The OP needs Win95.

The OP needs to control some unspecified plant equipment.

We know the OP is asking about browsers, not that the machine is networked or that its primary function requires networking.

Facts you're conveniently ignoring include:

• the relatively high power consumption and relatively low computational power present in Windows 95 era hardware, compared to modern equivalents
• the high number of unpatched vulnerabilities in Windows 95
• the consistency of professional advice from various posters including myself regarding the relative sanity of networking such a system

You're entitled to your opinion, just like anyone else. All I'm saying is that you're basing it on a highly selective (and IMO silly) set of facts rather than all available information. And, yes, I'm inclined to think you're trolling at this stage.

Edited to add: You do realise the OP hasn't returned to this thread since starting it nearly 2 years ago, yeah?

tuxy wrote: »

It can't become an argument until we debate which browers are the best for the win 95 operating system. I've already segessted Lynx win32 out there, does anyone care to discuss its merits or limitations? Possible replacements?
Can we find something with Low memory and CPU usage but some kind of java support? Is Java support even necessary?

Your argument is entirely predicated on the unsubstantiated assumption that the OP needs rather than wants network access.

We know he needs the computer to keep equipment running; we've got precisely no info on what web-based services (internal or external) he's accessing. Which means that any and all advice on which browser to use is worthless.

Funny you'd bring up Java of all things; as if a Windows 95 install by itself wouldn't have enough security vulnerabilities :rolleyes: