> 
> Actually, if you can get a stable verion of Java going and you have some
> memory and a little horse-power (like a Quadra) then HotJava is about the
> next best thing to Netscape. The linux-pmac folks were working hard on
> porting the Blackdown version of Java so that they could have a real browser
> before the advent of the Netscape port. Now they have both a real browser and
> a really good version of Java.
> 
> Though, I'm not sure how Java would perform on an old II. :(

Wouldn't count on much.  A simple Java applet (in Netscape) that
displays sports scores ate 2-3% of CPU on my PowerBase 180, which
is probably 10 times as fast as the fastest Quadra running NetBSD.
Let's just say that HotJava eats quite a bit more.  It's fairly
decent on the PowerBase - but - just barely so.  And the linux-ppc
JVM (with a Metrowerks JIT compiler) is actually pretty good.

In addition, HotJava eats RAM pretty well.  While the old memory
leaks in the linux-ppc JDK are fixed, we're still talking 24 MB
of RAM for HotJava to _start_.  Don't know about you, but my
NetBSD/mac68k box only has 20MB of RAM.

I really don't think that HotJava is a solution for _any_ m68k
box (including the 68060, which Apple never shipped).  Your
best bet is to pester Netscape about compiling the FreeBSD
port of Communicator for NetBSD/m68k.  Hey - the source already
exists.  (Why should there be differences?  You guys didn't
create differences, _did_you_?)  Convince them that it will
cost them basically nothing to do, and point out that they
wouldn't want _Microsoft_ to beat them to your platform.
(I mean, how hard can it be to cross-compile the FreeBSD
code?  Microsoft doesn't have FreeBSD code - _yet_).

It might work.



> 
> Oh well.
> 


(sorry if the "From:" field in this is screwed up; I only
use elm for the mailing lists to which I subscribe, and
I have never made any effort to set it up for email.  I
did notice that another post to the list had a screwy
"From:" field).