Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Spoiler alert: you cannot enact a revolutionary or a counter-revolutionary idea with this tack.

What you can do is design web sites to use fewer CPU resources.

This. Exactly. Things will not change, but maybe a small community driven by a desire for a “vintage web” can happen.

And even if this works, taking it to the world and convince them that this is the right way to build a website is a completely different story. And that’s okay. We would still have our old web. You have to browse on your vintage operating system like its 90s again: go to where it existed back then, not to where it did not exist. So no twitter, no facebook, no youtube. It has to be the same experience. I think it’s the right thing to do.

Instead of forcing the old browsers so we can go to Mars, how about using them for what they were really built for? Go back to Moon.
 
Last edited:
I pretty much agree with everything being said about Google here. However, what does a browser using Chromium as an engine have to do with Google or helping Google in any way? Microsoft is about as bad as Google yes. But there are other very decent browsers that use Chromium, such as Vivaldi, Brave, or Iridium. Chromium is just as open source as FireFox, and was forked from Apple’s own Safari webkit.
A browser using Chromium as it’s engine has as much to do with Google as TenFourFox has to do with Mozilla.
I actually really like Vivaldi and it is a very close second to FF. In fact they’re both in my dock on Intel Macs.

With that said I do wish more browsers would pop up with different engines, because it is basically FireFox vs Chromium with different wrappers at this point. I just miss the actual competition.
Google can do this. If anything, when the rest of the web uses Chromium forks, this kind of thing is something that makes Google increadibly powerful.
 
I am testing browservice right now on OS9 and Classilla 9.3.3... Its not perfect, WRP is faster but a bit cumbersome to use. Where Browservice is nearly the natural experience but it only works great on Windows. For Classilla and a few other browsers for OS9, it has a few issues. Like, for example, Classilla scrollbars go crazy all the time. When I click on the scrollbar rendered by Browservice, though, the problem disappears. According to Browservice developer, the fix is apparently to hide the scrollbars, but I got no clue on how to do it. Meanwhile Netscape 7.02 and IE 5.1.7 suffer from the same issues. Except IE 5 is stuck in a constant loop as soon as I access Browservice.
 
Spoiler alert: you cannot enact a revolutionary or a counter-revolutionary idea with this tack.

What you can do is design web sites to use fewer CPU resources.

Also, how you can champion and influence this as praxis is to conduct a thorough, peer-reviewed wholesale resource-based analysis on how much net carbon is consumed unnecessarily by code bloat and tracking resources on web appliance-based applications, versus the same analysis with data recorded ten years earlier, accounting for per capita carbon generation.

With these data and with an analysis methodology that is reproducible and also accounts for carbon-mitigation strategies already in place, one might be able to present a case that code bloat requiring greater computational resources without a general gain of efficiency in delivery of content is generally beneficial to beneficiaries of surveillance capitalism and no one else — certainly not for marginal-case users like ourselves.

Is that work you’re ready, qualified, and willing to do? If yes, then I would love to read your plan.
I think if we eliminate the ads (they Benifit no one actually) and the embedded video, then the internet would be much cleaner - I advocate for an internet without stupid tracking ads and embedded video plus - no JavaScript and a return to normal pre-2010s web. Certainly, if OS 9 browsers - Netscape, Icab, IE 5.1.7 were able to browse the internet with no issues, then it’s possible to reverse all this. That is all I want from the internet and I am sure lot of people here in this forum will agree with me about no ads or embedded videos plus JavaScript.
 
I am testing browservice right now on OS9 and Classilla 9.3.3... Its not perfect, WRP is faster but a bit cumbersome to use. Where Browservice is nearly the natural experience but it only works great on Windows. For Classilla and a few other browsers for OS9, it has a few issues. Like, for example, Classilla scrollbars go crazy all the time. When I click on the scrollbar rendered by Browservice, though, the problem disappears. According to Browservice developer, the fix is apparently to hide the scrollbars, but I got no clue on how to do it. Meanwhile Netscape 7.02 and IE 5.1.7 suffer from the same issues. Except IE 5 is stuck in a constant loop as soon as I access Browservice.
What then is the alternative ? Can Browservice fix these issues ?
 
I think if we eliminate the ads (they Benifit no one actually) and the embedded video, then the internet would be much cleaner - I advocate for an internet without stupid tracking ads and embedded video plus - no JavaScript and a return to normal pre-2010s web. Certainly, if OS 9 browsers - Netscape, Icab, IE 5.1.7 were able to browse the internet with no issues, then it’s possible to reverse all this. That is all I want from the internet and I am sure lot of people here in this forum will agree with me about no ads or embedded videos plus JavaScript.

You completely missed everything I was saying. 🤦‍♀️
 
This. Exactly. Things will not change, but maybe a small community driven by a desire for a “vintage web” can happen.

And even if this works, taking it to the world and convince them that this is the right way to build a website is a completely different story. And that’s okay. We would still have our old web. You have to browse on your vintage operating system like its 90s again: go to where it existed back then, not to where it did not exist. So no twitter, no facebook, no youtube. It has to be the same experience. I think it’s the right thing to do.

Instead of forcing the old browsers so we can go to Mars, how about using them for what they were really built for? Go back to Moon.
I agree - let’s start to plan this. besides, those big tech sites never existed in 2000, we don’t need them now and we never needed them then.
 
As a statistician, I know there are lies, damned lies, and statistics.

I have a hard time believing that Yosemite's share is supposedly higher than El Cap's to be honest.
Me too. Yosemite is pretty much just El Capitan but... worse. I'm not aware of any software that requires it, and it's not like upgrading to El Cap is hard. I don't think there are any Macs that will run any better with Yosemite than El Cap either. Kinda strange.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Amethyst1
Me too. Yosemite is pretty much just El Capitan but... worse. I'm not aware of any software that requires it, and it's not like upgrading to El Cap is hard. I don't think there are any Macs that will run any better with Yosemite than El Cap either. Kinda strange.


Perhaps this website may be a bit more accurate. Apologies for not properly vetting my previous sources!

This also includes all the way through to Tiger as well
 
As for why Yosemite-

Just a shot in the dark, but yes it is correct that anything that will run Yosemite will also run El Capitan. The system requirements for 10.8 are the same as for 10.11-in fact I think this particular run may be the long both in terms of version numbers and time in the OS X era where system requirements didn't change(I think 10.0-10.2 stayed the same, but 10.3 deprecated OWR and every version up to 10.8 deprecated something. Everything since 10.12 has also deprecated computers).

With that said, for a really long time now there's been a glitch in the version of El Capitan on the App store, and IIRC it doesn't actually work. There's a link to a good install buried somewhere on Apple's site, but you have to go looking for it. Basically, for several years now, unless you had an "archived" El Capitan installer, you might be chasing your tail for a while to be able to install it.

I suspect a decent number of people starting from "scratch" with a blank computer might find themselves up against a wall and stuck on Yosemite even if their comptuers will support El Capitan.
 
I advocate for an internet without stupid tracking ads and embedded video

So does Mr. Brendan Eich, whom you want to punch in the face for a decision he made 25 years ago. Unlike most people, he's actually taking action to make this a reality with Brave, which is steadily (thankfully) gaining real traction in browser market share.

Meanwhile, Mozilla's Chairwoman and CEO is cutting costs by laying off a majority of their software engineers while increasing her salary by the year, and paying their remaining UX and PR employees to write op-eds like these.

Personally, Firefox has been my browser of choice since at least 2012. That being said, Firefox ESR 78 will be the final version of Firefox I bother with before making the sensible decision in moving to Brave, alongside Min.

-

Which brings me to my next point:

Although I have discovered (with success) that one can feasibly alter their entire perception of time to identically match that of an individual living under any given point in at least recent history, you cannot force the rest of the world to correspond. But you can, however, make certain choices during the present to alter its trajectory into the future.

Insisting that the rest of the world return to the standards of circa 2005 while only using (or consuming; either is fitting) the technology from that time period, while everyone else continues to contribute to the problem is foolhardy to say the least. Something less foolhardy would be to use alternative solutions of the present that aim to fix this problem, or introduce a solution to said problem of your own and convince others to join you on your way.

Without embarking onto another tirade, I will say that I intend to do what I can to help fix the problems that currently plague Web 3.0 by joining others who feel the same way and are therefore taking action now, in addition to creating and publishing organic solutions to said problems as well.

And, needless to say, complaining endlessly within a niche sub-forum does not qualify as one.
 
Last edited:
So does Mr. Brendan Eich, whom you want to punch in the face for a decision he made 25 years ago. Unlike most people, he's actually taking action to make this a reality with Brave, which is steadily (thankfully) gaining real traction in browser market share.

Personally, Firefox has been my browser of choice since at least 2012. That being said, Firefox ESR 78 will be the final version of Firefox I bother with before making the sensible decision in moving to Brave, alongside Min.

So, about Brave... https://gizmodo.com/brave-blows-up-its-whole-reason-for-existing-1843951126

I'd stick with Firefox or use SeaMonkey if you really do not want to mess with Edge Chromium or Safari. Or maybe Opera.

As for your reply to Macbookprodude, yeah, I pretty much agree with you. This is where I differ to him. I do not want to force a return, I was suggesting the creation of a community to consume such old stuff. And all that while suggesting to web devs to stick to better standards. By "better standards" I do not mean a return to old technology, but an evolution of that technology. Back to an internet without CSS? No way. Back to an internet without Javascript? No way too. But do we need an entire website made of JS frameworks? No, we don't. Are these JS websites complying with the W3C goals I mentioned above? No, they aren't...

But wait. I could suggest more vanilla javascript usage - I believe the introduction of jQuery made many devs lazy to know what really javascript is and they rely a lot on jQuery to do what vanilla Javascript can also do. And vanilla Javascript is more compatible with older browsers than jQuery is. I have seen performance tests suggesting that vanilla performs faster than jQuery.

For example, instead of doing an accordion style list with jQuery and CSS (bootstrap, here am I looking at you), you can just use a datalist (I believe this is more semantically correct) and add much less CSS as you wish, but the datalist alone works as an accordion too. This is one approach. There are several pure HTML/CSS methods that do not require jQuery to achieve the same result. But devs tend to rely on jQuery because a) is easier, there are ready-made libraries, and b) is faster to build and c) they do not know vanilla Javascript, they should, but don't.

Why do I need a 4G of libraries and frameworks to build a website that is not even taking up 50MB? Something is wrong in the current state of web development, right?
 
Last edited:
@Bruninho I must have missed the memo; this is news to me. Thank you for sharing.

On a relative scale, I still think that they are on higher footing on the subject of privacy than Google or Mozilla. Although now that they were called out on it, let's hope they don't make any more "mistakes" again!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bruninho
So does Mr. Brendan Eich, whom you want to punch in the face for a decision he made 25 years ago. Unlike most people, he's actually taking action to make this a reality with Brave, which is steadily (thankfully) gaining real traction in browser market share.

Meanwhile, Mozilla's Chairwoman and CEO is cutting costs by laying off a majority of their software engineers while increasing her salary by the year, and paying their remaining UX and PR employees to write op-eds like these.

Personally, Firefox has been my browser of choice since at least 2012. That being said, Firefox ESR 78 will be the final version of Firefox I bother with before making the sensible decision in moving to Brave, alongside Min.

-

Which brings me to my next point:

Although I have discovered (with success) that one can feasibly alter their entire perception of time to identically match that of an individual living under any given point in at least recent history, you cannot force the rest of the world to correspond. But you can, however, make certain choices during the present to alter its trajectory into the future.

Insisting that the rest of the world return to the standards of circa 2005 while only using (or consuming; either is fitting) the technology from that time period, while everyone else continues to contribute to the problem is foolhardy to say the least. Something less foolhardy would be to use alternative solutions of the present that aim to fix this problem, or introduce a solution to said problem of your own and convince others to join you on your way.

Without embarking onto another tirade, I will say that I intend to do what I can to help fix the problems that currently plague Web 3.0 by joining others who feel the same way and are therefore taking action now, in addition to creating and publishing organic solutions to said problems as well.

And, needless to say, complaining endlessly within a niche sub-forum does not qualify as one.
Ok, I agree with you. We should design our typical revived 2000s based internet off of how System 7's website is with no ads and no embedded video. Right now, ironically, I am typing this on my G4 Titanium under LWK which is doing rather well. If I need wikipedia, I can use other alternatives on this platform, but back to the topic at hand. I am not going to get into politics here or debate, but I have a way of subverting those to my will, but that is reserved for another topic and not here.. No, all jokes aside.. I never said I want to punch him or do anything, it was a MAJOR shock to me to see Kaiser give up so easily. I also was donating to him as well.. before the pandemic I would send him about 50 dollars for his work and he even told m, at that time, Classila would see an update when he got around to it. I firmly believe so long as one is alive(in his realm at least), anything is possible. Sure, we can create our own webservers which can host 2000s like internet web design and implementation, but I for one want to see a revival of the internet standards from 2000s because they present a much cleaner and better internet experience. We never had Youtube back then, we never had Google(1999-2003), and of course no real social media which I am heavily against anyway as its a waste of time. IRC is where its at. Good news is that IRC never died and its now popular again.

Technology does not have to speed up like this. Example, why is Apple bringing a NEW OS out every year, instead of doing like they did with Tiger and building on it ? Waste of RND if you ask me. Personally, anything after Snow Leopard is nothing but a toy integrating IOS. But, I am getting off topic here. I would like to see the rest of the world return to a normal standard where the internet can be accessed with any browser and it doesn't matter how old. To me, a computer is useful and not obsolete so long as it does what you need it to. But, PowerPC has a soul and is a breathing living CPU which we truly don't know its full potential, though Intel cut that short on us back in 2005 and Jobs just decided to lie and say "Oh, Snow Leopard only run on Intel CISC hardware".. Even I saw this coming with the hackintosh revolution which nearly destroyed Apple, sadly it failed and will continue to because M1 won't ever support bootcamp.

I must admit something here also.. I was very angry that night.. tell me, when you come home from 11 hours at work and want to read the news and you see your favorite processor, browser, etc not being worked on anymore, wouldn't you get angry ? I admit because of my Iron fisted rule, I tend to get very much out of control which I am trying to work on. But, now is the time for healing and division within the community is not good, so I propose a new Internet standard for us PowerPC folks, including the Talos II folks as well - we should return to the pre-2010s internet before it became hostile and destructive to our PowerPC machines. Think about it for a second, why a G5 Quad should have to struggle with the web, given its impressive power. I have a G5 Quad and I think it has the power to rip the internet apart, but the bloatness, the wasteful javascript, and the rest bring this mighty beast to its knees when it should not even be so.

Now, that I am being more civilized and calm, tell me what we should do 1st for implementing a new internet standard for vintage machines ?
 
@Bruninho I must have missed the memo; this is news to me. Thank you for sharing.

On a relative scale, I still think that they are on higher footing on the subject of privacy than Google or Mozilla. Although now that they were called out on it, let's hope they don't make any more "mistakes" again!
Trust me, they won't.
 
So does Mr. Brendan Eich, whom you want to punch in the face for a decision he made 25 years ago. Unlike most people, he's actually taking action to make this a reality with Brave, which is steadily (thankfully) gaining real traction in browser market share.

Meanwhile, Mozilla's Chairwoman and CEO is cutting costs by laying off a majority of their software engineers while increasing her salary by the year, and paying their remaining UX and PR employees to write op-eds like these.

Personally, Firefox has been my browser of choice since at least 2012. That being said, Firefox ESR 78 will be the final version of Firefox I bother with before making the sensible decision in moving to Brave, alongside Min.

-

Which brings me to my next point:

Although I have discovered (with success) that one can feasibly alter their entire perception of time to identically match that of an individual living under any given point in at least recent history, you cannot force the rest of the world to correspond. But you can, however, make certain choices during the present to alter its trajectory into the future.

Insisting that the rest of the world return to the standards of circa 2005 while only using (or consuming; either is fitting) the technology from that time period, while everyone else continues to contribute to the problem is foolhardy to say the least. Something less foolhardy would be to use alternative solutions of the present that aim to fix this problem, or introduce a solution to said problem of your own and convince others to join you on your way.

Without embarking onto another tirade, I will say that I intend to do what I can to help fix the problems that currently plague Web 3.0 by joining others who feel the same way and are therefore taking action now, in addition to creating and publishing organic solutions to said problems as well.

And, needless to say, complaining endlessly within a niche sub-forum does not qualify as one.
We also can start with creating our own PowerPC forum because obviously, Mac Rumors uses and loves javascript. Javascript is a bad idea to begin with.
 
This. Exactly. Things will not change, but maybe a small community driven by a desire for a “vintage web” can happen.

And even if this works, taking it to the world and convince them that this is the right way to build a website is a completely different story. And that’s okay. We would still have our old web. You have to browse on your vintage operating system like its 90s again: go to where it existed back then, not to where it did not exist. So no twitter, no facebook, no youtube. It has to be the same experience. I think it’s the right thing to do.

Instead of forcing the old browsers so we can go to Mars, how about using them for what they were really built for? Go back to Moon.
Please see my earlier response to creating a new web standard.
I agree - let’s start to plan this. besides, those big tech sites never existed in 2000, we don’t need them now and we never needed them then.
 
I am going to reply only once because this is not a discussion that needs yet more rehashing in this thread of all places.

Also, I'm quite sure the others are exhausted with this by now, as I know I am.

No, all jokes aside.. I never said I want to punch him or do anything
we don't need javascript.. Wish the person or persons who created it were right here, because I would smash their brains in.

The first step to humility is in taking personal responsibility for your own actions, whether it's desired or not. I've learned for myself that most people one could ever associate themselves with will tend to appreciate this greatly.

I also was donating to him as well..

In Mr. Kaiser's words ...

"If you aren't paying for the software, then please don't be a jerk. There is a human at the other end of those complaints and unless you have a support contract, that person owes you exactly nothing."

(For clarification, donating to the project is not the same as purchasing the software and does not carry the same symbiotic qualities. Providing donations are a one-way street and do not come attached with any licenses, contracts, or guarantees whatsoever, whereas purchasing something in specific does.)

I would like to see the rest of the world return to a normal standard where the internet can be accessed with any browser and it doesn't matter how old.

The Internet can be accessed with any browser, no matter how old.

What you seem to want is to access www.Amazon.com, www.YouTube.com, and www.Weather.com (or wherever else you go) on browsers these websites have long since moved on from of their own volition. As previously outlined, you cannot change how they offer their site to the public, as that's simply not how the world works.

However, absolutely nothing is stopping you from creating your own site that is perfectly attuned for old browsers and the machines they run on, like www.Cornica.org, www.MacintoshGarden.org, and www.TheOldNet.com are doing today. As a result, these great websites are not only establishing places for these old browsers / computers to go online to, but they are also doing it in such a fashion that is far more faithful to what most of the Web was actually like to visit back when these old browsers / computers were new, and in the process, making the experience feel much more authentic as a result.

when you come home from 11 hours at work and want to read the news and you see your favorite processor, browser, etc not being worked on anymore, wouldn't you get angry ?

Although I can see where you're coming from, I'm going to have to be honest with you and tell you no, because it was for a long time an inevitable event, and we knew it. Hence why I prefaced my original post with "we knew this day would come". Everyone did.

Again, in the words of Mr. Kaiser himself ...

"If you aren't paying for the software, then please don't be a jerk. There is a human at the other end of those complaints and unless you have a support contract, that person owes you exactly nothing."

And personally, I would regard what I've previously spent my day on as irrelevant when regarding news of a completely different topic. Plus, when I realized that the outcome of getting angry was 9 out of 10 times more trouble than it was worth (to use a relevant example, I had plenty of experience with this back when I still relied on El Capitan for day-to-day), I learned that getting angry was more or less just a waste of time and did what I could to not only lessen the chances of getting angry in the first place (switching to Linux), but care less altogether (stop reading / watching videos about macOS).

So with that said, here is my advice to you:

Stop being this self-appointed "authoritarian leader". And stop ruling with an "iron fist". Life isn't worth living this way, especially after you consider that you're the one who has to live with yourself the most, bar none.

So, is that really how you choose to live?

We only get to once.

-

Also, in regards to post #20, pursue a refund for your newly-purchased speaker donor TiBook if you're having buyer's remorse. eBay (assuming that's what you used) has a money back guarantee and will almost always side with the buyer if they raise a request, speaking from experience as both a buyer and seller with seasonings.

tell me what we should do 1st for implementing a new internet standard for vintage machines ?

Well, I'm not the one who raised that idea. But as other people have said before me, I think keeping JavaScript use to a minimum and writing clean and efficient code are good starts, to be sure.

We also can start with creating our own PowerPC forum because obviously, Mac Rumors uses and loves javascript. Javascript is a bad idea to begin with.

Yes.

Alternatively, you could also just support the ones that already exist, which makes life easier for everyone.

There is always Macintosh Garden, which uses significantly less JavaScript than MacRumors does. And if I'm not mistaken, their new website version still in development does not use any at all. In addition, there is also Mac OS 9 Lives!, which makes for two social media places suitable for PowerPC Macs.

And even so, there may be more yet.

Anyway ... I hope you learned something. Truly.
 
Last edited:
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
Nope. You probably mean El Capitan which is only the end if you don't have a Penryn. If you do, it's at least High Sierra. The exception being the Early 2008 MacBook [Air] thanks to the useless GPU.

Oh yeah, oops! 10.11 whatever that is. ;)

My 2009 Mac mini has a Penryn. Official support stops at 10.11 for that. CPU might support higher, but Apple stopped official support at that level for most of the MCP79 machines. For a machine that shipped with 10.5, it wasn't a bad innings, and it's still running 24x7 now ... 12 years after I bought it.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.