[Info-vax] OpenVMS graphics - once more

[David Froble]

Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) wrote:
> In article <ff1b7b85-39fc-40e3-a2ea-63163f3f7391 at googlegroups.com>,
> terry+googleblog at tmk.com writes: 
> 
>> 1) Do nothing (no browser on VMS)
> 
> Don't want that.
> 
>> 2) Hope that VMS becomes popular enough that a browser maker will
>> handle the VMS port at no charge (unlikely) 
> 
> Unlikely.
> 
>> 3) Write an emulation layer for something (Windows, Linux, etc.) that
>> is "good enough" to run a browser intended for that platform on VMS
>> (expensive, doesn't necessarily address plugins) 
> 
> Don't want that.
> 
>> 4) Pay a browser maker to maintain a VMS version of that browser
>> (expensive, doesn't address plugins) 
> 
> Probably too expensive.
> 
>> 5) Maintain a local port / build of a browser (expensive, doesn't
>> address plugins, plus adds delay after the "reference" version(s) of the
>> browser are released) 
> 
> Ditto.
> 
> I think an almost-good-enough solution would be a browser which handles 
> modern html, java and javascript well enough but doesn't do, say, 
> embedded video.  Mozilla was ported to VMS, so it is certainly doable.  
> Yes, it means that there is a snapshot.  Maybe VMS stuff could get into 
> the main code tree?  This is the case with ZIP, for example.
> 

ZIP on VMS has an advocate, I believe.  Does any browser have a VMS advocate 
that will invest the effort to insure that browser can run on VMS?