Continue to Site

Welcome to our site!

Electro Tech is an online community (with over 170,000 members) who enjoy talking about and building electronic circuits, projects and gadgets. To participate you need to register. Registration is free. Click here to register now.

  • Welcome to our site! Electro Tech is an online community (with over 170,000 members) who enjoy talking about and building electronic circuits, projects and gadgets. To participate you need to register. Registration is free. Click here to register now.

Special web host possibly wanted

Status
Not open for further replies.

mstechca

New Member
I wanted to know if there was a web host out there (preferably free) that allows 16-bit standalone DOS programs to run as if it were server based EXE's.

I'm NOT looking for a server that allows only storage or downloading of EXE's, I want users who access the site to be able to run EXE's because I want my site to be in EXE format.

Why? because I find it much faster.
 
You can't run a normal DOS EXE file on a server and expect it to work, you would have to write the program specifically to run on a server and do it's I/O completely differently.

I see no reason why it would be any faster than a conventional HTML page using Apache?, any speed reductions are more due to the transport path and multitasking nature of the server.

There are plenty of website providers that allow you to run files, but most won't be DOS EXE files anyway, as most of the Internet runs on Linux or Unix, with considerably smaller parts on Windows.

If you want to write programs that run on the server, one of your best choices would be to pick a provider that gives you PHP and MySQL, PHP is designed specifically for running programs on servers, and lots of sites run using it (including this one!).
 
mstechca said:
I want my site to be in EXE format.

Why? because I find it much faster.

Much faster than what? :shock: :lol:

No one's gonna let you run EXEs off their web servers for obvious security reasons. It looks like what you want is write your own web server. But you don't, really. You just don't know it yet. What you want is learn PHP, ASP or JSP programming. Or plain HTML formatting for a start.

Why do you come up with such... original ideas so often? This one is in the same vein as your floppy-disk PIC programmer. :roll:
 
Much faster than what? :shock: :lol:
Windows processors like PHP for windows, Active Perl, Etc.

No one's gonna let you run EXEs off their web servers for obvious security reasons. It looks like what you want is write your own web server. But you don't, really. You just don't know it yet. What you want is learn PHP, ASP or JSP programming. Or plain HTML formatting for a start.
I already know HTML Perl, and PHP, and I found they take a little longer to be procesed than a DOS exe. The time difference really adds up when 100's of people access the server.

Why do you come up with such... original ideas so often? This one is in the same vein as your floppy-disk PIC programmer. :roll:

why not?
after all, I'm surprised some servers allow certain Windows EXE's and not DOS EXE's.

What I have setup at home now is Xitami web server (FREE for all at xitami.com) setup with PHP, and I made it work with 16-bit DOS programs.

The problem with putting it online is that I have to leave my computer on forever, and it will increase the costs of hydro (electricity). My computer never stays on for more than 16 hours a day.

Is there a faster server-side processor besides PHP, Perl and Java? I'm looking for FAST stuff, and so far, my DOS EXE's are outdoing everything.
 
Nigel Goodwin said:
You can't run a normal DOS EXE file on a server and expect it to work, you would have to write the program specifically to run on a server and do it's I/O completely differently.

I see no reason why it would be any faster than a conventional HTML page using Apache?, any speed reductions are more due to the transport path and multitasking nature of the server.

I forgot to mention that HTML is head-to head with DOS EXE, but I need to incorporate more than just a standard HTML page.

I already figured out the I/O involved. The DOS environment variables provide the input to my EXE, and the output is written to the "console device" or in most cases, the screen, which then spits it out on to the web server.
 
mstechca said:
Much faster than what? :shock: :lol:
Windows processors like PHP for windows, Active Perl, Etc.

There's your problem - Windows!, everything crawls under Windows!.

No one's gonna let you run EXEs off their web servers for obvious security reasons. It looks like what you want is write your own web server. But you don't, really. You just don't know it yet. What you want is learn PHP, ASP or JSP programming. Or plain HTML formatting for a start.
I already know HTML Perl, and PHP, and I found they take a little longer to be procesed than a DOS exe. The time difference really adds up when 100's of people access the server.

Don't you think this board is quite fast?, and it's had 326 people using it at the same time!. PHP is considerably faster than Perl, because PHP was designed for the job, Perl wasn't - it was modified from an old scripting language.

At the risk of sounding rude?, do you really think you're going to get hundreds of simultaneous visitors?. This forum is an EXTREMELY busy one, and the record is only 326!.

Why do you come up with such... original ideas so often? This one is in the same vein as your floppy-disk PIC programmer. :roll:

why not?
after all, I'm surprised some servers allow certain Windows EXE's and not DOS EXE's.

DOS is too low level, no one is going to give you that degree of access to their servers, and most run Linux and not Windows anyway. Of those that do run on Windows, they probably don't have DOS anyway, being XP or NT based.

What I have setup at home now is Xitami web server (FREE for all at xitami.com) setup with PHP, and I made it work with 16-bit DOS programs.

I've played with Xitami at home as well, it seems very slow generally, including just serving plain HTML pages - again, I suspect it's down to Windows 'bloat'.

Run PHP on a webhosts server and it should be plenty fast enough

The problem with putting it online is that I have to leave my computer on forever, and it will increase the costs of hydro (electricity). My computer never stays on for more than 16 hours a day.

It's already on for 66.6% of the day, so why not leave it on for the other 33.3%?, assuming you have the capability of running a server from home? - a fixed IP address is a good start.

Is there a faster server-side processor besides PHP, Perl and Java? I'm looking for FAST stuff, and so far, my DOS EXE's are outdoing everything.

Don't think so, PHP is already fast enough, you just haven't tried it on a proper server!.
 
I've played with Xitami at home as well, it seems very slow generally, including just serving plain HTML pages - again, I suspect it's down to Windows 'bloat'.
Yes, it is your windows "bloat".
Even though my processor according to today is S***, Xitami still runs fast with Windows 95!
You probably have Windows XP, and you probably dont have Xitami set to maximum priority. Also, check your throttle settings. There should be no throttle, or Xitami will deliberately serve them slowly.


It's already on for 66.6% of the day, so why not leave it on for the other 33.3%?, assuming you have the capability of running a server from home? - a fixed IP address is a good start.

this reminds me that I have to invest in a laptop.
 
mstechca said:
Even though my processor according to today is S***, Xitami still runs fast with Windows 95!
You probably have Windows XP, and you probably dont have Xitami set to maximum priority. Also, check your throttle settings. There should be no throttle, or Xitami will deliberately serve them slowly.

No, I still run Win98SE, I see no reason to downgrade to XP.
 
LOL Good joke Nigel. :lol:

May not be a joke.Since Windows is kinda crap.In Vista they went even more in the graphics so it looks crapy all transparent and probobly let down the interface wich is the most inporatnt.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest threads

Back
Top