Hi,

> My SparcStation LX takes 10 seconds to display 5KB of HTML
> and 2 JPEGs (77KB and 24KB) and this was using the "back"
> button, so it should have all been cached and ready to go.
> (I loaded another page, hit "stop" when the window cleared,
> then hit "back" and timed it.) It's about 40 seconds to
> load from scratch, and about 3 minutes to start and have
> the same page loaded.

That sounds about right!!!  Lynx is pretty damn quick and X
is not too bad, so there is some bloated crap in there
somewhere.    Jpegs will munch CPU but there is little that
we can do about that apart from come up with something
faster.  I might stick a different framebuffer in mine too
as it's painfully sloow (genuine onboard cgthree).  I have
a TGX sitting here looking dusty, but I'd have to take the
Classic to bits.  Me and Mr Static Zap are good friends you
see :)

> Maybe Apache is causing all the load, and Mozilla is just
> getting the left overs....  But then how would that Mac
> and P3 laptop display the same page coming from the same
> machine in less time than I can count?

Apache is not the problem!  My classic quite happily
handles the apache manual pages like lightning with browser
caching turned off.  It even stands a full 10Mbit load
serving average 5k pages.

> Anyone want to donate a 400MHz Ultra with 1GB of memory
> and 50GB of disk so I can surf in timescales other than
> geologic?  (I'd say glacial, but that would be way too
> fast.)

LOL!! :)  I'll settle for an E10k (or an U80 at least).

> I tried Grail for a bit, but it is only marginally better
> in speed, and a bit worse on features.  It's tempting to
> just put up with Mosaic's lack of features...

Grail is interpreted python AFAIK so it'll be like waiting
for Java to start in Netscape.  It'd be quicker (and easier)
to skateboard to the moon (and back) (twice).

Mosaic is a cool idea and could work well, but it's just not
enough.  mMosaic is quite good (Motif interface).  I do like
Motif (but not CDE)

> > I'm tempted to learn some more C and write my own because the
> > browser situation is getting even *more* terrible.
>
> The thought has occured to me as well.

Good, good - we might get enough people about to write a new
browser the way this thread is going...

- Chris.