Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Handhelds Hardware

PocketPC Wireless Webserver 331

Posted by timothy
from the talk-to-the-handheld dept.
Patrick Morris writes: "I learned that I could put Linux on my iPaq... so of course I did. I did a little research and found thttpd already ported to the ARM platform... So, I've got this poor little 206mHz ARM processor with 64mb running a webserver. Hey, it's kinda cool holding a webserver in your hand and being able to walk around with it."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

PocketPC Wireless Webserver

Comments Filter:
  • by metacosm (45796) on Thursday June 06, 2002 @10:27AM (#3652581)
    I am currently taking time (measured in seconds) until total slashdot meltdown of the poor little ipaq.
    • 300+ when I went.. very good I would say.

      Good idea giving your ipaq the stress test this way. Very, very cool hack.
      • by MaxVlast (103795) <maxim@@@sla...to> on Thursday June 06, 2002 @10:52AM (#3652791) Homepage
        Is it really that cool? (Disclaimer: It's slashdotted, so I can't see the details.) From the post, it looks like a guy installed linux on his ipaq and found a ported version of httpd, turned it on, and submitted the story. Big deal.
        • This isn't too unlike Bill Gates putting a WiFi card in a flatpanel computer and acting like David Copperfield by walking around with it like it's magic. That capability has been built into X11 for over 10 years but it's big news when Bill finally figures out how to do it....

          You are correct, this is really no big deal but it won't get on the front of eWeek either.

          by the way, it must have been cool enough for you to click thru to the forum..... If you don't think a story is interesting, why not skip it?

          LoB
    • 519 hits, and iPackedUp

      Do Not Surrender to the lameness filter!

    • That burning sensation in your pocket? That's your iPaq on Slashdot....

      1...2...3.... its down for the count.
  • by rhadamanthus (200665) on Thursday June 06, 2002 @10:28AM (#3652589)
    What he originally said was, "So, I've got this poor little 206mHz ARM processor with 64mb running a webserver, and I want to kill it"

    ----rhad

    • by kzinti (9651) on Thursday June 06, 2002 @10:54AM (#3652804) Homepage Journal
      Really. Do us a favor, Taco & Co.: the next time someone writes in to say that he has a web server running on his ancient computer / handheld computer / kitchen appliance / Craftsman power tool / wife's electronic pleasure toy, please DON'T BOTHER to post it unless the submitter can reasonably claim that said device can handle the slashdot effect. Now, if they have a how-to / making-of site complete with story and pictures, on a server that can handle the load, now that's cool. But this assisted suicide of unusual web servers is just kind of pointless and perverse otherwise.

      --Jim
      • Because the only interesting thing about this is seeing the webpage? What about the cool use of wireless technology. What about the potential of keeping your webserver with you to tell your family/friends where you are via http. Who cares about the /. effect. If the owner of the ipaq doesn't then no big deal. I don't mean to flame but I hate reading an interesting story only to be filled up with comments from people who don't care about it. IF YOU DON'T CARE WHY TAKE THE TIME TO COMMENT!
        • "I don't mean to flame but I hate reading an interesting story only to be filled up with comments from people who don't care about it."

          Try reading the comment you replied to a little more closely. The person explicitly supported the notion of publishing these things if there's an actual story we can read. But in a case like this, all we have is a Slashdot summary that boils down to, "So I, uh, installed the prepackaged webserver and stuff on my iPAQ."

          I hate the people who mindlessly bash every interesting project, but in this case, there's nothing to actually read about here. It isn't even an interesting hack, in that the webserver was apparently already packaged and ready to go. All this guy did was install it. And if he actually did more, we wouldn't know since there's no link to a robustly hosted story of what was done.

      • Actually, I'd love to see a webserver on an "electronic pleasure toy" that can "handle the load".

      • ... some clever hacker has a T-1 hooked up to the wife's electronic pleasure toy? :)
        • ...some clever hacker has a T-1 hooked up to the wife's electronic pleasure toy?

          You'd need to find a hacker with a wife before that can happen...

      • by Oliver Wendell Jones (158103) on Thursday June 06, 2002 @01:15PM (#3653673)
        Future Slashdot story:

        Man Claims Development of Invulnerability Fabric
        John Q. Public writes, "I just developed a new kind of fabric that renders the wearer invulnerable. I can be found at 123 Main Street, Smalltown, USA and I'll be wearing a suit made from this fabric in case anyone who reads this wants to drive by and take a shot at me."
  • It's just as cool (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Enry (630)
    as getting slashdotted. You dork.

    There's a bunch of web servers ported to ARM. Heck, my Zaurus can run Apache and PHP.
  • ya don't.
  • by Bryan_Casto (68979) on Thursday June 06, 2002 @10:30AM (#3652604)
    Anyone ever seen an iPaq burn before?
  • by Tweezer (83980) on Thursday June 06, 2002 @10:30AM (#3652609)
    How long until this Ipaq is slashdoted?

    30 sec.
    1 min.
    5 min.
    10 min.
    1 hr.
    CowboyNeal
    • I got a connection refused, so I'm guessing it took about 5-10 minutes.
    • I haven't seen the site so I don't know how large it is, but last time I checked, a 200mhz pentiumpro was fast enough to fill a 10mbit link so I don't see how it's even interesting when it gets slashdotted; when the iPaq is properly configured, the uplink will be the bottleneck, not the iPaq.

      I don't see what the big deal is; a few years ago 200mhz/64mb was a pretty normal configuration for a webserver. The iPaq is just a bit smaller. Maybe if a take a picture of my cellphone running tetris, I'll make it to /. mainpage as well! woohoo.

      • Nope. These are numbers for normal/benchmark load. Not for half of the geek universe trying to get to it.

        After the link will get severely congested the number of SYNs flowing towards the IPAC will exceed what it can handle.

        In order to survive a slashdot effect on a low end device you need to rate limit them. Otherwise you are dead. In other words the slashdot effect nowdays is by no means different from a decent SYN flood.
  • by DavidpFitz (136265) on Thursday June 06, 2002 @10:31AM (#3652615) Homepage Journal
    I'm sure that this poor little beastie will buckle sooner rather than later, here's what it said: (Plus a hit counter underneath, at 165 when I visited)

    ---

    This server is running from a Compaq iPaq 3765 running the Familiar distribution of the linux operating system. The http server is thttpd which can be found here. Furthermore, this server is completely wireless. The only cable plugged in is a power cord to replenish the battery.
  • about a 10 second access time..

    Put up some porn ;-)
  • Ha (Score:2, Funny)

    by almeida (98786)
    "Hey, it's kinda cool holding a webserver in your hand and being able to walk around with it."

    Right, cool until it melts in your hand and you end up looking like Johnny Tremain.
  • by Mr. Sketch (111112) <`moc.liamg' `ta' `hcteks.retsim'> on Thursday June 06, 2002 @10:34AM (#3652639)
    is now the first slashdotted handheld device.
  • So? (Score:5, Informative)

    by noahm (4459) on Thursday June 06, 2002 @10:35AM (#3652656) Homepage Journal
    Honestly, what's the big deal here? There's a Linux box running a web server. Is that a big deal anymore, even if it runs on "exotic" hardware? I'm sure this isn't the first web server run on a handheld. It's definitely not the first web server run on a Linux handheld. And it's not the first web server run on a Linux handheld over 802.11b.

    Here, just for fun, is a link to my iPaq running thttpd over a wireless link [18.24.6.206]. It's really nothing spectacular.

    noah

    • Re:So? (Score:2, Flamebait)

      by dinivin (444905)

      Agreed. I did the same thing with a IBM z50 last year. Slashdot is getting even more pathetic than usual, posting this kind of crap.

    • Re:So? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Erasmus Darwin (183180) on Thursday June 06, 2002 @10:46AM (#3652757)
      "Is that a big deal anymore, even if it runs on "exotic" hardware?"

      I have to agree with you on this not being anything noteworthy. Slashdot has had a number of interesting wacky webserver postings over the years (including the one that was supposedly potato powered and one running off a pinball machine), but the iPAQ one just can't compete on pure novelty. Hell, the platform isn't even particularly underpowered -- I'm sure there are quite a few traditional Linux boxes that've run webservers with less memory and processor speed.

      I could understand if it had some sort of actual feature on the site that related to its handheld nature (such as tying it to a GPS and allowing people to track the server), but that doesn't seem to be the case here (though it's slashdotted, so I can do little more than guess).

    • It's things like this that remind me of the good ol' days of the Internet. Call me nostalgic, but I have fond memories of the fishcams, the Internet-connected Coke machines, the Internet-controlled robotics, etc. It didn't matter if they were first, they were still fun toys.
      • Here, just for fun, is a link to my iPaq running thttpd over a wireless link [18.24.6.206]. It's really nothing spectacular.

      Ah, you're just griping because the story submitter is getting a thorough slashdotting, and your server (as I write) is still up. Tell you what, I'll keep hitting refresh until it dies. ;-)

      • Call me crazy, but when your comment is at score 3, is it not? I clicked on the #3652860 but it has no moderation. I thought "underrated" shows up. On the reply screen, your comment is rated score 2. I refreshed the first screen and it is still score 3. What the hell? What bug is this, how does it happen?
      • by SeanAhern (25764)
        It's dead, Jim.
    • This is incredible news! Release all zig for great justice!

      There are two wireless Ipaqs running web servers!
      Maybe they will vie for control of the airwaves! It'll be duelling, http serving ipaqs!

      Every sentence ends in an exclamation point! The subject line has three! I have a very low threshold for stimulus so everything is exciting!

    • From Netcraft

      "The site 24-6-206.wireless.lcs.mit.edu is running thttpd/2.20c 21nov01 on Linux.

      Linux users include Rackspace, www.dialtone.com, www.vasoftware.com and Borders.com

      We have no uptime data for 24-6-206.wireless.lcs.mit.edu at present, and cannot plot a graph.

      The host 24-6-206.wireless.lcs.mit.edu has been added to the list of sites that we may monitor. We will start monitoring 24-6-206.wireless.lcs.mit.edu in the next daily monitoring cycle.

      We will continue to monitor this host for a few days, to get enough values to plot a graph. After this time the host will not be monitored again unless it's requested again, or it is one of the most frequently requested hosts."

      So for those that are intersted, keep checking this on Netcraft to see on the sitability of the wireless iPac as a hosting platform, you could even compare it to slashdot's uptime [netcraft.com].
      • by noahm (4459)
        We will continue to monitor this host for a few days, to get enough values to plot a graph. After this time the host will not be monitored again unless it's requested again, or it is one of the most frequently requested hosts."

        Well, I do plan on going home tonight, and I have better uses for my wireless card than to sit and accumulate uptime for my little web server. So netcraft is going to end up plotting a flatline for this guy.

        So for those that are intersted, keep checking this on Netcraft to see on the sitability of the wireless iPac as a hosting platform, you could even compare it to slashdot's uptime

        Now that would be interesting. I wish I had a microdrive so we could install slash on the iPaq and see how it would handle dynamic sites and databases. It's not having any trouble with the load from Slashdot. It's served over 3000 pages and it's load average is consistantly around 0. It hasn't had any trouble with the kids out there who keep clicking reload rapidly in an attempt to make it fall over.

        I do wonder how many pages the original story submitter's iPaq managed to serve.

        noah

  • poor little 206mHz ARM processor with 64mb running a webserver.
    We used to run a 100mhz sparc with 64mb that did 750k dynamically generated hits per day.

    It's amazing what is considered slow...

    • Hell, when I was a freshman, I used a DECstation 5000 to serve a pretty busy webcam and an elaborate cgi-based dynamic site. It wasn't the fastest thing in the world, but it never got bogged down. People these days! Sheesh.
    • poor little 206mHz ARM processor with 64mb running a webserver.

      It's amazing what is considered slow...

      No kidding. My current production SNMP management box is a P133 w/ 40MB. It happily runs full-blown Apache, Postfix, MRTG, NetSaint, et. al. *Never* throw away old hardware! :^)
  • by L. VeGas (580015) on Thursday June 06, 2002 @10:36AM (#3652668) Homepage Journal
    geek: "Hey, is that a webserver in your pocket?"

    me: "No, I'm just happy to see you."
  • I hit it at 359.

    Refresh and it was dead.

    Well, on the upside.... If it was the iPaq that burnt out and not the connection dying, he'll be able to try to fix it on his way to the hospital to get those burns he woulda got from holding it when it died!
  • I think he just wanted to do a load test and the slashdot crowd were once again a swarm of guinea pigs at his beckon call, like he didn't know posting a link was gonna kill this webserver. GEEK
  • This cat [umich.edu] has had a native httpd for PalmOS for some time now. Getting an iPaq running Linux with a pre-ported web server should be much easier to pull off than writing from scratch a tiny httpd for the less powerful (processor and memory-wise) Palm platform.

    Must be a slow day for the Slash-boys
  • I seem to remember a /. article about some folks at Stanford (?) who'd put one together in a matchbox with a 486 CPU. Another article referenced the guys who put up a web server on a Commodore 64.

    Seems the iPaq is grossly over-powered for the job.

    Cool? yes. Nuts? yes. Newsworthy? um...

  • by Anemophilous Coward (312040) on Thursday June 06, 2002 @10:40AM (#3652703)
    I reached it at 9:32am MST and it had 506 hits at that point. That was about 7 minutes or so after the /. post.

    I just went back there at 9:34am and could not reach the server.

    Elsewhere in a galaxy far, far away...but at the exact same time....

    - "what happened? Are you alright?"
    - "I just felt a great disturbance in the force. It was as if a million transistors in an IPaq all cried out at once, and then were silenced. I feel something terrible has happened."

    - A non-productive mind is with absolutely zero balance.
    - AC
  • R.I.P. (Score:3, Funny)

    by Mr. Sketch (111112) <`moc.liamg' `ta' `hcteks.retsim'> on Thursday June 06, 2002 @10:40AM (#3652708)
    iPaq webserver
    9:25am-9:35am (MDT)
    May it rest in peace.
  • Zaurus (Score:5, Interesting)

    by IceFox (18179) on Thursday June 06, 2002 @10:40AM (#3652712) Homepage
    For those that have a Sharp Zaurus pda we have been doing this for a while.

    How about Apache with PHP [killefiz.de]

    [killefiz.de]
    Or maybe the smaller Boa web server

    [killefiz.de]
    How about a GUI Server manager for these? (screenshots)

    [killefiz.de]
    Maybe put MySQL on it too have some more fun!

    [zauruszone.com]
    How about instructions on how to set up all of the servers (including smb)

    There is nothign quite like getting your data by putting your sd card into the Z, selecting it as the root page and then browsing to it from another box.

    Benjamin Meyer

    P.S. How would you like to play Doom full framerate, multiplayer on the Zaurus! (for free too) It is coming soon! (Quake is more of a technical demo, can't do much without a floatingpoint, but if you want to see Quake on the Zaurus packages are already made.)
  • The Screen Savers on TechTV had a couple of folks demoing a handheld REAL PC from Tiqit [tiqit.com]. A full 640x480 screen, built-in keyboard, PCMCIA, Secure Digital, docking ability. Price tag will be steep (upwards of $1000), and the processor isn't as beefy as I'd like, but the built-in screen is SEXY.
    • The designer of the Tiqut showed it in EE380 at Stanford a few weeks ago. It's kind of cute to see a 640 x 480 screen running Windows on something that looks like a Nintendo Game Boy. You need a magnifying glass, though.

      It's not clear what it's for. They're still searching for the killer app.

  • oh for gods sake ive been running apache on ARM for a long time

    the reason that you run apache is that it is threaded and can handle multiple connections at the same time and a bunch of other features that I wont list here see httpd.apache.org

    compared to thttpd wich while tiny has no real performance

    I wrote a webserver in about 200 lines so its not hard (mine had images as well)

    the cool thing would be porting a 802.11b stack to a uCOS or eCOS now that would be cool

    regards

    john 'MIPS rules' jones

  • The 206mhz strongarm was the CPU used in lots of Network Computers, like the Dnard from Digital which became most of the NCs (that all flopped of course).
  • How long 'till it puked? I'm imagining the following conversation:

    Patrick: Please slashdot my handheld.
    Slashdot Community: Well, OK, if you insist.

    At least let us know how it went....
  • I mean, c'mon ... there is at least one person who ported Apache to Windows CE [rainer-keuchel.de] (ApacheCE [rainer-keuchel.de]), so it's not like this particular example is unique in terms of serving networked content. One wouldn't even have to go through the pain of configuring Familiar Linux [handhelds.org], as was the case here. Slow news day already?

  • The real potential for these devices lies in giving individuals the inalienable right to surveil their personal surroundings at all times. Attach a tiny mic and webcam to this device. Goodbye police brutality. Human rights abuses? Perfect, realtime, documentation.

    Sure there's problems, but if airplanes get blackboxes, humans surely deserve something similar.

    Propose this in congress, and watch which agencies get themselves bent out of shape. Ask yourself what they have to lose from such a device.
  • by bahtama (252146) on Thursday June 06, 2002 @10:47AM (#3652766) Homepage
    Can't companies pay Slashdot and it's readers a ton of money to do load testing on servers? Now that would be cool. We could give out a "Slashdot-Proof" certificate or something.

    I was surprised to see Moshe Bar's [slashdot.org] web server handle the slashdot load just fine. He even says, The server handling this site is a noname PII 500Mhz machine with 256MB RAM, Apache 1.3.20, Mysql 3.23, Linux 2.4.18 and two IDE 6GB disks. Very simple hardware, but it still can withstand the Slashdote tide.

    So what troublemakers really should do is stop writing trojans/bots and instead concentrate on building a community website and make sure it becomes really popular. Then, when you want to unleash a DOS attack, forget bots, IRC and all that other stuff, just post it and away you go! :)

    • One of the biggest reasons sites succumb to /. is because their pages are created dynamically, either through PHP, perl (or ick, mod_perl), ASP, etc. If all you're serving is static content and you have your web server tweaked properly (in Apache, KeepAlive off, MinSpareServers 4, MaxSpareServers 4, StartServers == MaxClients) you can serve many hundreds of pages per second.

      You might need dual NICs or a gigE though. :-)
  • Why would it die? (Score:5, Informative)

    by tweakt (325224) on Thursday June 06, 2002 @10:50AM (#3652779) Homepage
    Guys, it'n on 802.11 wireless.
    Running @ 200Mhz.

    Last time I checked that was more than enough for thttpd. thttpd is a non-blocking non-threaded design... (select()). It's supposed to scale BETTER than apache, etc..

    It will just have it's network link congested I think, but it won't *die* or *crash*.

  • "Hey guys, you know how lots of big servers die when we link to them? I just approved a submition with a link to a webserver running on a hand held! I got a stop watch...want take bets on the number of seconds it lasts? Better hurry!"

    Come on timothy. How stupid is it to post to slashdot a link like this!?

    -Pete
  • by Test Drive (236441) on Thursday June 06, 2002 @11:01AM (#3652863) Homepage
    If you want to try out Linux running on an iPAQ for yourself, we happen to have one in the HP Test Drive Program [compaq.com]. We also have a cross-compiling toolchain that lets you compile for the StrongARM from our Alpha servers. Additionally, we have a number of DEC Shark systems which are also based on the StrongARM processor available for your use.
  • Hmm (Score:2, Informative)

    by alphabet26 (534873)
    That is very cool... But I'm wondering if this would be a way to host "unsavory" web sites. For example, if you were posting code for building worms or a hate web site. It's easier to hide a ipaq then it is to hide a tower, monitor, keyboard, etc.
  • by GeneralEmergency (240687) on Thursday June 06, 2002 @11:02AM (#3652880) Journal
    ...by Microsoft in the early developer kit promotion literature but it never was delivered. I suspect that the RIAA got to them and persuaded them to drop it because the last thing that they wanted to see was people sharing music/files on a mobile, wireless basis. Imagine a subway car full of people sharing music files.

    Now if someone could come up with a wireless, peer-to-peer Gnutella type client....

    • Now if someone could come up with a wireless, peer-to-peer Gnutella type client....

      Now that would be cool and something I'd love to have a hack at, however, doesn't 802.11b require a base station? In other words, you can't have two people with wireless cards communicating with each other without going through a base station. If thats the case then you couldn't just wander out into the street and hook up with a bunch of people nearby as they'd need access to your network.

      Of course, you could just use bluetooth or IR, but that would mean you'd need 15,000 people stood just a bit too close to each other for comfort.

      • Yes you can. Either using ad-hoc WLAN or using GPRS. Or using Bluetooth. All three work great for me..
      • >however, doesn't 802.11b require a base station?

        No - 802.11b has two modes, managed and ad-hoc. Ad-hoc sacrifices a bit of performance for the ability to join peer-peer networks that don't have any base station

      • This sounds interesting.

        Do these iPAQs or Zauri come or be augmented with audio, for example?

        A portable web server that streams out live music or video from remote locations (concerts, theatres, seminars, political speeches) would be quite useful.

        Practically, though, you wouldn't want everyone connecting directly to the BW limited wireless device. Better to relay to a cache server with big pipes to handle the multicasting.

      • If memory serves, most 802.11b wireless card software allows the card to be put into Ad-Hoc Mode, which effectively eliminated the need for a base station. From what I remember, this significantly reduces your range, but it should work in the aforementioned subway car full of wifi users.
  • by moray (45630) on Thursday June 06, 2002 @11:04AM (#3652884) Homepage
    Yup, all you need to do to replicate this amazing feat is:

    • Take a few minutes to download Familiar [handhelds.org]
    • ipkg install thttpd


    There's also the BOA web server if you prefer.
  • by honeypea (556690) on Thursday June 06, 2002 @11:06AM (#3652897) Homepage
    raduga> check out headlines on slashdot!
    raduga> some crazy hacker has apparently managed to run linux on an ipaq!!!!
    dc_> OMFG
    dc_> who??
    dc_> I want one!
    raduga> i dunno
    raduga> but slashdot seems to think its amazing
    raduga> not only linux but an http server!!
    raduga> and wifi!
    dc_> hahaha
    dc_> omg.
    dc_> somone's actualy installed linux on an...
    dc_> iPAQ!!
    raduga> WEIRD
    * honeypea goes to read :)
    dc_> really
    honeypea> theyre really on the ball, arent they
    raduga> slashdot is news for nerds!
    raduga> er. you *are* a nerd, aren't you?
    honeypea> stuff that used to matter!
  • If I had known this was newsworthy, I would have posted a few months ago when I got my Visor (Manos, the Handspring of Fate) running httpd [sourceforge.net] with a Xircom wireless ethernet module...
  • Thats right my car is a driving Network. The Chip running my fuel injectors is a mail server. My steroe is cleverly a front for a file server. I have the main combustion system running an apache web-server.

    The neat part is each of the disc brakes are actually Harddrives. Thats right and they are a raid too!

    Oh and I didn't bother with that linux stuff... ALL MS HERE....

    Anyone wanna Drag Race My Web Server?
  • Two years ago -
    JUMPtec AMD 486 DIMM PC 66MHz running a Slackware with apache and pppd, getty etc. and ccam (connectix camera capture software) INSIDE a Omnipoint Redhawk 2000 GSM modem hooked up to a Connectix Quickcam bought on eBay for $40. Linked up to mobilewebcam.com (I let it drop so someone else has got it now). Unfortunately, most of this hardware is end of lifed but it was good while it lasted.
    The whole lot spent time between the dashboard of my car and being nailed to a tree looking at my house being built.
    The aim was to build a totally autonomous web cam capable of working anywhere. To avoid slashdotting (even a few hits maxed out the connection) we had it uploading JPEGs to a server but it could be accessed directly, no problemo. The only issue we had was the 9.6k circuit switched connection to the ISP would drop every so often, indeed there were telephone numbers that wouldn't even accept 9.6k connections! Nowadays, we'd use a miniscule GPRS module like this one [intel.com] to get a 33k uplink always-on Internet connection.
    One other problem was that the picture took quite a long time to scan - it was a parallel port connection. So if you moved the camera, like when I was driving, the picture washed out to white fairly quickly. When stationary it worked fine though.

  • About six months ago, somebody excitedly mentioned that they had successfully ported a webserver to WinCE. And I was thoroughly unimpressed, since the first thing I ever ported to the OS was Apache and it was almost a cakewalk.

    Now, somebody has done the exact same thing except they've bound the webserver to a wireless card. Is this worthy of another post? I say thee nay, CorporalBurrito.

    Anyway, I think the key here is that you palm kiddies don't understand an important thing about PocketPCs: they are not data managers, they do not simply replace a pad and pencil, they are not neat toys, they are not proof of concept demo pieces. They are PCs that fit in your hand, and anything you can do on a PC and fit into the 320x240 resolution you can do with a palm PC. My Cassiopeia has about the same power and ability of my old Cyrix 166, and I use it to do the same things I used to do -- I play games, I word process, I web browse, I manage files, I play music and movies, I compile programs and so forth. It's not like the palm world, where you're often crippled by the same design requirements that give you your long battery life -- a weak screen, a slow chip, little memory.

    Is it impressive that I can play networked Quake and use Java c-s apps and run PostgreSQL and ssh into my server wirelessly from my pocket pc? Yes. Is it newsworthy? Not on your life.
  • Try explaining that to the Compaq tech support.
  • by heyjero (575759) on Thursday June 06, 2002 @12:11PM (#3653302)
    ...have been doing this for a long time. Here is a site that lists a few running Newton Message Pad web servers.. http://misato.chuma.org:2110/ I didn't get to see the IPaq's page, but the Newton's pages listed here are pretty remarkable.
  • This is old news... the webserver has been abailable on handhelds.org for a while now.

    More intersting in my opinion is the intimate project. Full Debian distro, in your pocket. I currently dualboot to Familiar/Qtopia (for PIM and such, it has a nice UI and fits on my 'paq without a CF sleeve) and Intimate (for everything else, it's a full linux distro). Check it all out at handhelds.org!
  • by 00_NOP (559413)
    I do think these things are fun. Seems to be that 3G mobile phones will offer the ultimate in 'vanity' servers - does anyone know if the telcos are actively looking at hosting services going on their phones?
  • Last year at Drury U [drury.edu] in Springfield MO I had a Palm Vx ($199) with a Minstrel CDPD modem (off eBay for $40.) With that you have a dedicated IP anywhere in town and actually in the downstairs below the Commons (cafeteria.) We used to post log entries [jdhodges.com] from the Palm during live band performances downstairs, anyhoo, we also had a web server on the Palm [sourceforge.net] and it was pretty pimp.

    Here are some photos of the setup:
    Pimp Palm Vx with Minstrel Wireless Modem [jdhodges.com]


    Shot of the Palm Vx serving web pages through httpd application (wirelessly!) [jdhodges.com]

"If that makes any sense to you, you have a big problem." -- C. Durance, Computer Science 234

Working...