Risc PC 2 Cancelled
James Holtom
> Another restructuring announced this morning (information from
> Bloomberg). Acorn are reducing their staff from 175 to 100,
> concentrating on new products and cancelling Risc PC 2.
o
I couldn't quite believe this so I moseyed over to Bloomberg's UK site.
(www.bloomberg.co.uk)
There it is in black-and-white...
I still find it hard to believe -- given that the majority of the R&D
for Phoebe must have been spent by now, I'd have thought it would make
more sense to push them into production, and at least get some earnings,
rather than ditch the project at this late stage...
Oh well -- time will tell -- I think the people I feel sorriest for
(aside from the folks at Acorn) is Steve Turnbull, and the guys that have
just bought-out Acorn User...
[Unless the unspecified activities that he couldn't discuss, was the
/continuation/ of the Phoebe project...]
But on the grounds of probability things do not look so good, if this
report is substantiated... (And after-all Bloomberg are-not some dodgy
back-room zero-credibility web-site...)
Bugger.
James
Liam Gretton
<URL:mailto:hol...@cs.bris.ac.uk> wrote:
> But on the grounds of probability things do not look so good, if this
> report is substantiated... (And after-all Bloomberg are-not some dodgy
> back-room zero-credibility web-site...)
It's true - even Dave Walker's been made redundant :-(
Oh well, time to look for a new platform, I guess...
--
Liam Gretton l...@star.le.ac.uk
Space Research Centre, li...@binliner.demon.co.uk
Physics and Astronomy Dept, phone +44 (0) 116 223 1039
Leicester University, fax +44 (0) 116 252 2464
Leicester LE1 7RH, UK http://xmm4.xra.le.ac.uk/
Kell Gatherer
<l...@star.le.ac.uk> wrote:
>Oh well, time to look for a new platform, I guess...
Maybe, however I would be very, very surprised if the workstations division
is not an attractive buy to somebody or other.
Up until today, RPC's are still in production, and make a profit.
This week, Phoebe has been up and running for the first time.
The development work has been done and paid for.
The software is ready to make use of it.
Surely *somebody* can make a go of it, even if the idiots on the board
can't?
--
Kell Gatherer
ke...@locationworks.com
www.locationworks.com
Paul Vigay
<URL:mailto:hol...@cs.bris.ac.uk> wrote:
> There it is in black-and-white...
>
>
> I still find it hard to believe -- given that the majority of the R&D
> for Phoebe must have been spent by now, I'd have thought it would make
> more sense to push them into production, and at least get some earnings,
> rather than ditch the project at this late stage...
I can't believe this, as all the hard work has already been done and people
have been placing deposits - and Acorn are still promoting it on their newlook
Workstations page - which looks recently revamped.
> Oh well -- time will tell -- I think the people I feel sorriest for
> (aside from the folks at Acorn) is Steve Turnbull, and the guys that have
> just bought-out Acorn User...
Well, existing users won't suddenly stop buying Acorn user, so I don't if it
will have an immediate impact anyway.
> [Unless the unspecified activities that he couldn't discuss, was the
> /continuation/ of the Phoebe project...]
Perhaps there ought to be a "management buyout" of the Workstation division.
Perhaps Chris Cox could re-recruit Peter Bondar and they could continue as
"Acorn Workstations Ltd" or something.....
--
Paul Vigay Computer Advice,
__\\|//__ Internet Consultancy
http://www.matrix.clara.net (` o-o ') & Web Design
-----------------------------------ooO-(_)-Ooo---------------------------
Stuart Bell
> There it is in black-and-white...
>
Yep - and no Acorn World '98, so scrub all the AAUG plans. . . .
>
> I still find it hard to believe -- given that the majority of the R&D
> for Phoebe must have been spent by now, I'd have thought it would make
> more sense to push them into production, and at least get some earnings,
> rather than ditch the project at this late stage...
Unless it wasn't going to make a profit with all the discounts flying
around.
>
> Oh well -- time will tell -- I think the people I feel sorriest for
> (aside from the folks at Acorn) is Steve Turnbull, and the guys that have
> just bought-out Acorn User...
Yep
> [Unless the unspecified activities that he couldn't discuss, was the
> /continuation/ of the Phoebe project...]
I doubt if he'd have bought out AU knowing that RPC2 was going down the
pan.
>
> But on the grounds of probability things do not look so good, if this
> report is substantiated... (And after-all Bloomberg are-not some dodgy
> back-room zero-credibility web-site...)
Indeed. Despite their disclaimers, they'd be up the creek if the info
was false. They even give contact numbers at Acorn.
Basically, all the desktop stuff is being off-loaded to Xemplar, and
Acorn will concentrate on technologies.
I also feel sorry for Acorn dealers -what will their situation be with
Xemplar handling sales?
RPC1 is to be continued with, but it looks like the end of the trail.
Can't blame anyone, it always was a backs-to-the-wall scenario once PCs
took such a strong grip on things. . . . .
(Hopefully non-inflamatory note; there are alternatives to Windross on
PCs if people are thinking of migrating, however sadly.)
Stuart
--
Stuart Bell
writing from a Wintel-free zone.
Liam Gretton
<URL:mailto:pvi...@bohunt.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> I can't believe this, as all the hard work has already been done and
> people have been placing deposits - and Acorn are still promoting it on
> their newlook Workstations page - which looks recently revamped.
It does seem a bit rash, considering that it's only just about to be
released. I feel very sorry for all those developers who have poured
resources into new products for Phoebe (especially the hardware products),
not to mention the staff who've lost their jobs.
Barry Wickett
<URL:mailto:pvi...@bohunt.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> > for Phoebe must have been spent by now, I'd have thought it would make
> > more sense to push them into production, and at least get some earnings,
> > rather than ditch the project at this late stage...
It does seem a more than a little daft. It works. They've spent a few
million on it. Why cancel it?
Their argument of having something to display their technology on
doesn't hold much water now!
>
> I can't believe this, as all the hard work has already been done and people
> have been placing deposits - and Acorn are still promoting it on their newlook
> Workstations page - which looks recently revamped.
They also seem to be clammering for more people to place orders for the
machine. I guess they didn't get enough orders and thought it wasn't
worth going any further.
>
> > Oh well -- time will tell -- I think the people I feel sorriest for
> > (aside from the folks at Acorn) is Steve Turnbull, and the guys that have
> > just bought-out Acorn User...
>
> Well, existing users won't suddenly stop buying Acorn user, so I don't if it
> will have an immediate impact anyway.
>
No, but what for the long term? Without support developers can't keep
going for much longer. What would the magazine review in say a year's
time?
> > [Unless the unspecified activities that he couldn't discuss, was the
> > /continuation/ of the Phoebe project...]
>
> Perhaps there ought to be a "management buyout" of the Workstation division.
> Perhaps Chris Cox could re-recruit Peter Bondar and they could continue as
> "Acorn Workstations Ltd" or something.....
>
I would love to think this were possible. Perhaps it is, but
realistically I can't see it myself.
Does this mean Acorn Browse and Java are also dead?
Barry
James Holtom
> In article <Pine.SOL.3.95.980917125056.895M-100000@aniu>, James Holtom
> <URL:mailto:hol...@cs.bris.ac.uk> wrote:
> > But on the grounds of probability things do not look so good, if this
> > report is substantiated... (And after-all Bloomberg are-not some dodgy
> > back-room zero-credibility web-site...)
>
> It's true - even Dave Walker's been made redundant :-(
Oh sh!t!
I've known Dave for quite a while, having met him just as he was leaving
Bristol post-MSc for Acorn [back in 1993].
He's always been ever-so helpful with things-Acorn... Definitely one of
the good-guys...
> Oh well, time to look for a new platform, I guess...
Well I'd been wondering how I could possibly afford a Phoebe + a P2
system that I need for Windows (spit) and FreeBSD + pay my tax-bill for
'97-98. I think the problem has just evapourated.
Damn!
James
Greg Hennessy
<Ba...@tquest.org.uk> wrote:
>
>It does seem a more than a little daft. It works. They've spent a few
>million on it. Why cancel it?
>
Because there is not rational market for it
>Their argument of having something to display their technology on
>doesn't hold much water now!
Quite.
>They also seem to be clammering for more people to place orders for the
>machine. I guess they didn't get enough orders and thought it wasn't
>worth going any further.
I cannot believe that they even proposed it in the first place.
greg
James Holtom
> In article <ant1713231cbq#H...@bohunt.demon.co.uk>, Paul Vigay
> <URL:mailto:pvi...@bohunt.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> > I can't believe this, as all the hard work has already been done and
> > people have been placing deposits - and Acorn are still promoting it on
> > their newlook Workstations page - which looks recently revamped.
>
> It does seem a bit rash, considering that it's only just about to be
> released.
Indeed -- None of it makes any sense given the proximity of RPC2, and
AW'98 -- I am sure the cancelation fees will be collosal (for the
exhibition and IOMD2 and all the other bits they've cancelled...)
I wonder if IMS perhaps fancy having a full-blown desktop machine as
well as a portable...
> I feel very sorry for all those developers who have poured
> resources into new products for Phoebe (especially the hardware products),
> not to mention the staff who've lost their jobs.
Indeed :(
How is this going to affect Leicester -- seeing as a portion [all?] of your
space imaging stuff is driven from Acorn kit?
James
Liam Gretton
<URL:mailto:hol...@cs.bris.ac.uk> wrote:
> How is this going to affect Leicester -- seeing as a portion [all?] of
> your space imaging stuff is driven from Acorn kit?
For some (certainly not all) projects here we use Acorns for testing and
calibration of space-based instruments, but I can't see it being much of a
problem for us. Although we've kept up with what Acorn has to offer (all but
one of our RPCs are SA-equipped), there are still quite a few Arcs doing
sterling work.
We're under some pressure to move over to PCs for future missions, and I
guess the demise of Phoebe will make it hard for us to push for their
continued use.
Still, I was looking forward to getting hold of a Phoebe for my desk :-(
James Hammerton
> On Thu, 17 Sep 1998, Lee McGinty wrote:
>
> > Another restructuring announced this morning (information from
> > Bloomberg). Acorn are reducing their staff from 175 to 100,
> > concentrating on new products and cancelling Risc PC 2.
[snip]
> I still find it hard to believe -- given that the majority of the R&D
> for Phoebe must have been spent by now, I'd have thought it would make
> more sense to push them into production, and at least get some earnings,
> rather than ditch the project at this late stage...
Problem is the marketing and selling of the machine itself costs money
(e.g. for advertising, producing manuals/brochures and support) and
they'd need to be confident of recouping that to make it worth while
pressing on. Presumably they don't, hence the cancellation.
> Oh well -- time will tell -- I think the people I feel sorriest for
> (aside from the folks at Acorn) is Steve Turnbull, and the guys that have
> just bought-out Acorn User...
I also feel sorry for all Acorn users who have stuck with a platform
loyally for so many years only to see it finally bite the dust.
> [Unless the unspecified activities that he couldn't discuss, was the
> /continuation/ of the Phoebe project...]
Even if there were some sort of buyout of the Workstations division,
the likelihood of success is low, though I suppose the Amiga provides
a role model for this, except that it had far more of a user base than
RiscOS has.
[snip]
> Bugger.
Quite.
James
--
James Hammerton, Research Student, School of Computer Science,
University of Birmingham | Home Page: http://www.cs.bham.ac.uk/~jah/
Connectionist NLP WWW Page: http://www.cs.bham.ac.uk/~jah/CNLP/cnlp.html
Replace "seemysigfile" with "james" in my email address
Thomas Boroske
sad news, isn't it ? So it's essentially over now. Finally. And there was
me thinking Acorn would still be around in 20 years time, producing
one new flagship desktop computer every five years or so.
Does anyone think I'm too pessimistic if I say Acorn is the new
Amiga now ? I mean, people are already speculating on IMS possibly
taking over, or perhaps Steve Turnbull has something to do with it -
but let's face it, there's simply no third party organisation that's
even near the size (in people and competence) of Acorn. And we've already
been criticizing that there're not enough people to
- Maintain a decent website
- Develop RiscOS as fast as needed
- Solve some "outstanding issues", like a proper compiler
etc etc.
Sob ...
Depressed,
--
Thomas Boroske
Jim Lesurf
Barry Wickett <Ba...@tquest.org.uk> wrote:
> In article <ant1713231cbq#H...@bohunt.demon.co.uk>, Paul Vigay
> <URL:mailto:pvi...@bohunt.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> It does seem a more than a little daft. It works. They've spent a few
> million on it. Why cancel it?
The timing does seem absurd at first glance. It would've made more sense
to cancel when Peter Bondar left *or* to 'give it a go' and decide after
trying to sell for a while.
However, it has seemed to me for some time, from messages emerging from
Acorn in recent weeks, that a kind of covert 'battle' has been going on
between the 'bean counters' who hate any kind of consumer manufacturing
(i.e. for sale to individual customers as opposed to sale of designs or
intellectual property on contract/license to businesses) and those who
believe desktop hardware is the foundation of future success in the
intellectual property area. It seems as if the bean counters have won and
decided not to spend the money required to set up a production line and
commit cash to component stock.
It may be that they have, until now, presented the RPC2 as a forthcoming
'going concern' in the hope of finding a corporate buyer. Stopping the
process leading to launch, in itself, lowers the potential sale value of
this business area. They may also be assuming that they can wait and see
if those made redundant come back with a plan for a 'buy out' that will
relieve them of the messy business of making desktop machines for real
people.
> No, but what for the long term? Without support developers can't keep
> going for much longer. What would the magazine review in say a year's
> time?
Speaking as someone who finds RiscOS and some of its apps (e.g.
TechWriter) virtually essential. I'll be keeping RiscOS boxes going for as
long as I can to *use* them. I need this for a productive working life and
for some small measure of sanity! In the absence of a RPC2 I'll keep my
RPCs going whilst possible, and will probably if I can also buy a peanut
with the money saved.
The worry is, indeed, the survival of developers. Some like the Avante
group must be particularly snookered by the way Acorn have behaved.
> > Perhaps there ought to be a "management buyout" of the Workstation
> > division. Perhaps Chris Cox could re-recruit Peter Bondar and they
> > could continue as "Acorn Workstations Ltd" or something.....
> >
I really *hope* that something like this happens. If it did I'd even
invest in it, although I'm not exactly as rich as the gates of hell...
> Does this mean Acorn Browse and Java are also dead?
One of my main concerns for the future is Java. I can imagine continuing
to use a RPC until defeated by one of three things
1) Some hardware fails that can no longer be replaced
2) I need a more up-to-date JVM for daily work
3) some new 'killer' software requirement appears
A buyout might allow a RPC2 to appear, perhaps bundled with some decent
software. But what about Java 1.2 - and beyond?... Developing a
'validated' JVM/JDK is serious stuff. Outside Acorn, Peter Naulls is doing
an excellent job as a 'one man band' of porting/writing in his own right,
but trying to keep up with the big boys in this area could be very
demanding. And for anyone wanting to keep using a RiscOS box, Java becomes
ever more important in my view as the way to break beyond the limits
imposed by the 'ghetto'.
Acorn have recently shown a willingness to 'rent out' RiscOS3. I hope it
might be possible for someone - a buyout or a 3rd party - to do something
similar to bring the RPC2 into production. Both for the livelyhoods of all
involved, and for users like myself who need it. If I was rich enough I'd
emulate the guy who bought a company cos he liked their razors. Alas, I'm
not, but I'd still pay somewhat more than the *original* projected price
of a RPC2 to get one or two!
I also extend much sympathy to the people at Acorn who were dumped this
morning. It is bad enough to be made redundant. It makes it worse, to be
left feeling that the people you were working for regard your creative
efforts as "not good enough to support". This sadly shows the poor state
of the thinking of many who tend to run public (i.e. shareholder)
companies in the UK. They know the cost of everything and the value of
nothing. They regard any investment in the future as a 'risk' to be
avoided. Alas, all too typical.
Where there is no vision, the people also perish.
Hopefully, someone can organise a way to pick up the RPC2 *and* those
whose livelyhoods depend upon it. I'm still ready to put some money in
that direction if they do, and I hope I'm not alone.
Slainte,
Jim
--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
MMWaves http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/MMWave/Index.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html
TechWriter http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/TechWrite/Tips1.html
Dutton CDs http://www.duttonlabs.demon.co.uk/index.html
Liam Gretton
<URL:mailto:jc...@st-and.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> One of my main concerns for the future is Java. I can imagine continuing
> to use a RPC until defeated by one of three things
[snip]
> 2) I need a more up-to-date JVM for daily work
[snip]
Surely Acorn will still require an up-to-date JVM for their NC boxes? If
not, that's more money down the pan - IIRC the Java licence cost Acorn in
the region of 1 million quid alone.
Nigel Parker
Two things strike me about the bloomberg release. Firstly, it doesn't
appear to be text from Acorn, although it must be based on something from
Acorn. This leaves me hoping that RPC2 cancelled, may mean the R&D
project has ended, since the product is completed - could still mean a
Phoebe release (but unlikely)?
If it really has been completely abandoned, then who's going to take up
the license to manufacture the thing? Any takers? If it really was a
bean counter decision, then surely even they would be happy to license the
complete designs to someone?
Better get another RiscPC1 I suppose (sold mine recently)! And a nice
unix workstation ;-)
A sad day.
<in the voice of Homer Simpson>
You maniacs, you blew it up! Damn you, damn you all to hell!!
Nigel
--
Girton College, Cambridge, England, CB3 0JG. Tel: 0411 384803
http://welcome.to/nigels nigel....@iee.org
Neil Spellings
[snip]
> Surely Acorn will still require an up-to-date JVM for their NC boxes? If
> not, that's more money down the pan - IIRC the Java licence cost Acorn in
> the region of 1 million quid alone.
Yes, Acorn will still need RISC OS and other products like Java as these are
already used in many of their new 'core' products. What will probably happen is
that whoever buys the workstations division will have to licence RISC OS and
other cruicial apps from Acorn.
Regards,
/Neil/
--
+-------------------------+---------------------------------+
| Neil Spellings | Spellings Computer Services Ltd |
| NT Systems Analyst | Telephone 0171 451 1960 |
+-------------------------+---------------------------------+
| StrongARM Acorn RiscPC Owner |
| Chairman, Association of Acorn User Groups (AAUG) |
+------------- http://www.argonet.co.uk/scs/ ---------------+
Views expressed are entirely my own...
Clockmeister
Thomas Boroske <y000...@ws.rz.tu-bs.de> wrote in article
<fbac148748%y000...@tu-bs.de>...
> Hello,
>
> sad news, isn't it ? So it's essentially over now. Finally. And there was
> me thinking Acorn would still be around in 20 years time, producing
> one new flagship desktop computer every five years or so.
>
> Does anyone think I'm too pessimistic if I say Acorn is the new
> Amiga now ?
Well, the Amiga does have a future although not very well defined.
Which raises a point... The only way the platform can have a future is if
the users remain loyal, as is the case with the Amiga. It was the remaining
users (quite a few of them) which interested Gateway and finally pushed
them to buy Amiga out.
If a company realises the potential sales market because of the number of
users still using an orphan platform they are likely to consider purchasing
the production rights to that platform.
Remember that the Amiga was in nowhere land for four years, and with only a
handfull of hardware developers keeping the machine competetive it
survived.
As an Amiga user I would have to suggest you stay loyal to your platform,
even if Acorn hasn't. If there is a potential market someone may snap it
up.
Failing that, could I interest you in a new Amiga in about a year and a
half?
Just kidding.
Don't give up all hope yet!
Regards,
Clockmeister.
Greg Hennessy
<locatio...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
>Maybe, however I would be very, very surprised if the workstations division
>is not an attractive buy to somebody or other.
>
For what exactly ? A niche platform with less than stellar performance
serving a rapidly shrinking market.
>Up until today, RPC's are still in production, and make a profit.
Any school not looking closely at the alternatives is very foolish
indeed.
>This week, Phoebe has been up and running for the first time.
>The development work has been done and paid for.
>The software is ready to make use of it.
>
But obviously the market is not there. So we have X million Ł down the
toilet. Sounds like the previous management @ Acorn have a lot to
answer for.
>Surely *somebody* can make a go of it, even if the idiots on the board
>can't?
Thats quite harsh.
greg
Michael Prior-Jones
>
> In article <ant1713231cbq#H...@bohunt.demon.co.uk>, Paul Vigay
> <URL:mailto:pvi...@bohunt.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> > <URL:mailto:hol...@cs.bris.ac.uk> wrote:
<Snip>
> > > [Unless the unspecified activities that he couldn't discuss, was the
> > > /continuation/ of the Phoebe project...]
> >
> > Perhaps Chris Cox could re-recruit Peter Bondar and they could continue as
> > "Acorn Workstations Ltd" or something.....
> >
Look again closely at Stan Boland's words on the report. He doesn't
mention the cancellation of the project,
only expresses his regret at the redundancies. IMHO, there's rather more
to this than meets the eye. Some might say that I'm too much of an
optimist.
It does seem strange that only two days ago Acorn were making big noises
about how fantastic the RPC2 would be. Major restructuring doesn't
happen overnight, in my experience. If they were going to axe it
completely, why spend the money promoting it the week before the project
is cancelled?
Maybe Steve Turnbull knows...
Michael Prior-Jones
BBC Research & Development
Opinions expressed are not those of the BBC, and must not be taken as
such.
Steve Turnbull
Thomas Boroske <y000...@ws.rz.tu-bs.de> wrote:
> Does anyone think I'm too pessimistic if I say Acorn is the new
> Amiga now ? I mean, people are already speculating on IMS possibly
> taking over, or perhaps Steve Turnbull has something to do with it -
> but let's face it, there's simply no third party organisation that's
> even near the size (in people and competence) of Acorn.
Oi, I resent that implication.
It's not size that counts, it's how you use it :-)
Let me just say that I am not [yet] despondent, the news came to
us just as we were having a staff meeting so "the chaps" could meet
my partners -- it was certainly a bit of a bombshell but, without
being able to go into any detail, the reaction was "what are we
going to do about it" not "oh sh*t let's give up and go home".
--
Steve Turnbull (st...@turnbull.cix.co.uk)
http://www.cix.co.uk/~turnbull/
... Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
Greg Hennessy
<y000...@ws.rz.tu-bs.de> wrote:
>Hello,
>
>sad news, isn't it ? So it's essentially over now. Finally. And there was
>me thinking Acorn would still be around in 20 years time, producing
>one new flagship desktop computer every five years or so.
>
Despite my often vocal criticism of the platform I take no joy in its
demise. It was however inevitable. If you do not innovate you die.
The last time Acorn was innovative was in Jul 1987. That 1mb 305 was
the first computer I owned & even today the warm fuzzy feeling of
owning it still has some echoes within.
>Does anyone think I'm too pessimistic if I say Acorn is the new
>Amiga now ?
Unlike the Amiga, I believe the number of enthusiasts are just not
there to keep it going. Even the Amiga has a dearth of software these
days. Given the rather rudimentary nature of the underlying OS, it
will be somewhat of a wasted effort to leverage application
development on platforms like Linux through porting or whatever.
>- Develop RiscOS as fast as needed
>- Solve some "outstanding issues", like a proper compiler
>etc etc.
These issues should have been tackled 8-9 years ago. Acorn is finally
seeing the consequences of failing to do so then.
greg
garyp
Nigel Parker <URL:mailto:95...@eng.cam.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> Two things strike me about the bloomberg release. Firstly, it doesn't
> appear to be text from Acorn, although it must be based on something from
From what Ive seen it is the same/very similar
> Acorn. This leaves me hoping that RPC2 cancelled, may mean the R&D
> project has ended, since the product is completed - could still mean a
> Phoebe release (but unlikely)?
Sorry, cancelled as in NO RPC2
> If it really has been completely abandoned, then who's going to take up
> the license to manufacture the thing? Any takers? If it really was a
> bean counter decision, then surely even they would be happy to license the
> complete designs to someone?
>
> Better get another RiscPC1 I suppose (sold mine recently)! And a nice
Like many ppl a suppose
> unix workstation ;-)
>
> A sad day.
>
> <in the voice of Homer Simpson>
> You maniacs, you blew it up! Damn you, damn you all to hell!!
>
>
> Nigel
Gary
--
The /\ | ) |\ /| ga...@thesidingsbbs.demon.co.uk
|__| |-- | \/ |
| | | \ | | ga...@armclub.org.uk
Club
Kell Gatherer
>The timing does seem absurd at first glance.
It's plain silly.
>They may also be assuming that they can wait and see
>if those made redundant come back with a plan for a 'buy out' that will
>relieve them of the messy business of making desktop machines for real
>people.
Two companies: Acorn pursuing digital TV & thin-client solutions, and Acorn
Workstations Ltd, making desktop computers. This is a split of their
expertise, and may lead to key Acorn people jumping ship....
>Speaking as someone who finds RiscOS and some of its apps (e.g.
>TechWriter) virtually essential. I'll be keeping RiscOS boxes going for as
>long as I can to *use* them. I need this for a productive working life and
>for some small measure of sanity! In the absence of a RPC2 I'll keep my
>RPCs going whilst possible, and will probably if I can also buy a peanut
>with the money saved.
Me too.
<snip>
>Hopefully, someone can organise a way to pick up the RPC2 *and* those
>whose livelyhoods depend upon it. I'm still ready to put some money in
>that direction if they do, and I hope I'm not alone.
You're not.
Adrian Look
>
>is not an attractive buy to somebody or other.
>
>The development work has been done and paid for.
>The software is ready to make use of it.
>
>can't?
Indeed, may be even a management buy-out lead by an ex-Acorn employee?
--
Adrian Look
<mailto: adrian at looksystems dot demon dot co dot uk>
LOOKsystems Limited
15 Grovehill Drive
Falmouth
Cornwall
TR11 3HS
Tel/fax: +44 (0)1326 318279
Adrian Look
>On Thu, 17 Sep 1998, Liam Gretton wrote:
>
>> In article <Pine.SOL.3.95.980917125056.895M-100000@aniu>, James Holtom
>> <URL:mailto:hol...@cs.bris.ac.uk> wrote:
>> > report is substantiated... (And after-all Bloomberg are-not some dodgy
>> > back-room zero-credibility web-site...)
>>
>> It's true - even Dave Walker's been made redundant :-(
[snip]
>I've known Dave for quite a while, having met him just as he was leaving
>Bristol post-MSc for Acorn [back in 1993].
>
>He's always been ever-so helpful with things-Acorn... Definitely one of
>the good-guys...
Indeed. :-(
Dickon Hood
Nigel Parker <95...@eng.cam.ac.uk> wrote:
: Two things strike me about the bloomberg release. Firstly, it doesn't
: appear to be text from Acorn, although it must be based on something from
: Acorn. This leaves me hoping that RPC2 cancelled, may mean the R&D project
: has ended, since the product is completed - could still mean a Phoebe
: release (but unlikely)?
It's dead, gone, buried, and if it ever sees the light of day I'll be
stunned. Pleased, but stunned. I've spoken (well, typed at) those affected,
and it's all true. End of story. These rumours of buyouts are for the
optimists only, I'm afraid.
--
Dickon Hood
Due to binaries posted to non-binary newsgroups, my .sig is
temporarily unavailable. Normal service will be resumed as soon as
possible. We apologise for the inconvenience in the mean time.
Kell Gatherer
<webr...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>Maybe *that* is the point. I may be not as ready as we are made to
>believe......
No, that's the point. THIS WEEK they had the first Phoebe up and running.
Or so I'm told.
Matthias Seifert
> On Thu, 17 Sep 1998, Lee McGinty wrote:
[...]
> There it is in black-and-white...
> I still find it hard to believe -- given that the majority of the R&D
> for Phoebe must have been spent by now, I'd have thought it would make
> more sense to push them into production, and at least get some earnings,
> rather than ditch the project at this late stage...
I just wonder what will happen with RISC OS 4 now. Will we be able to get
it for Risc PC - at least? Will they continue developing it (for RPC) at
all?
> Oh well -- time will tell -- I think the people I feel sorriest for
> (aside from the folks at Acorn) is Steve Turnbull, and the guys that have
> just bought-out Acorn User...
> [Unless the unspecified activities that he couldn't discuss, was the
> /continuation/ of the Phoebe project...]
And don't forget developers which already spent some money to develope for
Phoebe (e.g. Aleph One)...
--
_ _ | Acorn Risc PC, StrongARM @ 287 MHz
| | | _, _|__|_ |) ' _, , | 130 Mbyte RAM, >20 Gbyte HD
| | | / | | | |/\ | / | / \ | ------------------------------------
| | |_/\/|_/|_/|_/| |/|/\/|_/ \/ | Buy Acorn - 24 users can't be wrong!
Matthias Seifert
> Two things strike me about the bloomberg release. Firstly, it doesn't
> appear to be text from Acorn, although it must be based on something from
> Acorn.
It definitely is taken word by word from a press release of Acorn.
> This leaves me hoping that RPC2 cancelled, may mean the R&D project has
> ended, since the product is completed - could still mean a Phoebe
> release (but unlikely)?
No, sadly this is a fact.
> If it really has been completely abandoned, then who's going to take up
> the license to manufacture the thing? Any takers? If it really was a
> bean counter decision, then surely even they would be happy to license
> the complete designs to someone?
But who would licence it? I don't see anyone.
> Better get another RiscPC1 I suppose (sold mine recently)! And a nice
> unix workstation ;-)
I still have mine (as I wasn't about getting a Phoebe).
> A sad day.
That's true because it means that there will be no RPC3 either...
> <in the voice of Homer Simpson>
> You maniacs, you blew it up! Damn you, damn you all to hell!!
--
Gary Henderson
Shit!
--
Gary Henderson
- I'd rather be flying my kite!!!!
Gary Henderson
SH*T!
Andrew P. Harmsworth Esq.
<locatio...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> >RPCs going whilst possible, and will probably if I can also buy a peanut
> >with the money saved.
>
I have to say that since AW is 'on hold' (yeah right), that IMS should now
give the Peanut a little more 'clout'. i.e. power. They can and should
afford the extra development time - as there are now MANY MORE people who
will buy one. I was saving for a Phoebe, expecting to get one by the middle
of next year. I could not afford to buy a Peanut as well. But now? Maybe
I'll just save for a Peanut!
APH
--
Science Coursework http://start.at/scirep * Warwick School * * *
Warwick School http://welcome.to/warwick * WARWICK * Physics Dept
Solar System http://travel.to/theplanets * CV34 6PP, UK * 01926 776464
* * * * * * my own views * * * a...@warwick.warwks.sch.uk * * * *
Nicholas Foster
I was just wondering if the share holders have any say in the matter of
closing the workstations division and stopping the RISC PC 2.
I don't own any shares at the moment but if the share holders have a say I
will gladly buy some tomorrow.
--
Best Wishes,
Nick mailto:ni...@foster.newnet.co.uk
mailto:ni...@weblocust.co.uk
http://www.weblocust.co.uk/ - Web site design and construction for everyone.
Andy Marks
Andrew P. Harmsworth Esq. <dna...@ni.edam.maps> wrote:
> I have to say that since AW is 'on hold' (yeah right), that IMS should
> now give the Peanut a little more 'clout'. i.e. power. They can and
> should afford the extra development time - as there are now MANY MORE
> people who will buy one. I was saving for a Phoebe, expecting to get one
> by the middle of next year. I could not afford to buy a Peanut as well.
> But now? Maybe I'll just save for a Peanut!
> APH
Ditto. That's all.
--
--------------------------------------------
Andy Marks - and...@argonet.co.uk
Worksop, Nottinghamshire
Very near the World-Famous(?) Creswell Crags
I know, I've been in them!
--------------------------------------------
Rob Hemmings
> <snip>
> >Hopefully, someone can organise a way to pick up the RPC2 *and* those
> >whose livelyhoods depend upon it. I'm still ready to put some money in
> >that direction if they do, and I hope I'm not alone.
I'd certainly be prepared to consider some investment. (i.e. Me too!)
(I'm not talking about particularly large sums of money but maybe if
enough people are prepared to put some money where their mouth is...)
--
-------------------------------------------------------------
Rob Hemmings Southport
Tel: +44 (0)1704 573210 ro...@argonet.co.uk
AJR Porrer
: I don't own any shares at the moment but if the share holders have a say I
: will gladly buy some tomorrow.
I imagine the majority of Acorn shareholders are investment banks and the
like who will always go with the accountants (what's best for there
investment), so you would always be outvoted. I recall the incident where
the BBC pension fund as share holders in a privatised gas company voted to
award those huge fat cat pay rises to the bosses.
Andrew
--
Andrew...@Bigfoot.com
Andrew Wineberg
Nicholas Foster <ni...@foster.newnet.co.uk> wrote:
> I was just wondering if the share holders have any say in the matter of
> closing the workstations division and stopping the RISC PC 2.
A company must, by law, act "wholly and exclusively for the benefit of
the company." The shareholders are the sovereign body. Individual
shareholders were not consulted about this, but the intention is clear
from reading between the lines in the interim report.
> I don't own any shares at the moment but if the share holders have a say I
> will gladly buy some tomorrow.
If the owners of (I think) 10% of the shares (or 10% of the
shareholders?) desire it, the company *must* hold an extraordinary
general meeting at its own expense; shareholders are sovereign and so,
if you are prepared to buy enough shares, you can reverse this. Of
course, you and your supporters will need more than 51% of the shares to
be sure of having control and I suspect that it would be at least an
order of magnitude cheaper to actually buy the Workstations division.
IANAL, etc.
--
Andrew Wineberg <A.Win...@BTINTERNET.COM>
<URL:http://www.BTINTERNET.COM/~a.wineberg/> for my portrait and details
Matt Rix
> Let me just say that I am not [yet] despondent, the news came to us just
> as we were having a staff meeting so "the chaps" could meet my partners
> -- it was certainly a bit of a bombshell but, without being able to go
> into any detail, the reaction was "what are we going to do about it" not
> "oh sh*t let's give up and go home".
I wish you and every other Acorn developer that may or may not feel they
have been shafted by this move every success. I would also like to extend my
sympathies to the Acorn employees that have been made redundant as a result
of this move.
--
Matt Rix ======>> JOIN CONVERGENCE INTERNATIONAL - THE NON-WINTEL USER GROUP:
http://surf.to/bigrisc/ http://www.convergence.org/
To respond by e-mail, first remove "||REMOVE||" from my e-mail address
The Sherratt Clan
Rob Hemmings <rhem...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <na.e81a9d4887.a70...@argonet.co.uk>, Kell Gatherer
> <locatio...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > In article <4887143...@st-and.demon.co.uk>, Jim Lesurf
> > <jc...@st-and.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > <snip>
> > >Hopefully, someone can organise a way to pick up the RPC2 *and* those
> > >whose livelyhoods depend upon it. I'm still ready to put some money in
> > >that direction if they do, and I hope I'm not alone.
>
> > You're not.
> I'd certainly be prepared to consider some investment. (i.e. Me too!)
> (I'm not talking about particularly large sums of money but maybe if
> enough people are prepared to put some money where their mouth is...)
Stephen B Streater of Eidos, and now Forbidden Technologies seems be
interested in setting something up (see Forbidden Technologies thread
further up this NG), but would need more cash.
I for one would be willing to put up a bit of the old folding stuff ( say
N hundred quid) for some shares/discount/whatever.
He says that he'll see what interest there is, so I'd advise those with
_any_ desire at all to see an RPC 2 of any form to hear him out and make
some _constructive_ comments.
TTFN, Karl
Stuart Bell
> I was just wondering if the share holders have any say in the matter of
> closing the workstations division and stopping the RISC PC 2.
>
> I don't own any shares at the moment but if the share holders have a say I
> will gladly buy some tomorrow.
That's not the way companies work. Shareholders can appoint and fire
directors, but not make business decisions. Unless, of course, you won
10%+ of a company, in which case you probably nominate a director, or
are one.
--
Stuart Bell
writing from a Wintel-free zone.
Mike Clarkson
<URL:mailto:y000...@ws.rz.tu-bs.de> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> sad news, isn't it ? So it's essentially over now. Finally. And there was
> me thinking Acorn would still be around in 20 years time, producing
> one new flagship desktop computer every five years or so.
>
> taking over, or perhaps Steve Turnbull has something to do with it -
> but let's face it, there's simply no third party organisation that's
> been criticizing that there're not enough people to
> - Maintain a decent website
> - Develop RiscOS as fast as needed
> - Solve some "outstanding issues", like a proper compiler
> etc etc.
>
>
> Depressed,
>
Agreed. The long term must be particularly bleak. Presumably the
offers etc. were Chirs Cox & co trying to get enough orders to
persuade the board to keep it going. Maybe we will now be able to
know how many orders were actually placed? And I guess many more
might have been placed at AW after we'd been able to see it and get a
final spec? I would have been one.
As far as Phoebe is concerned, I wonder if there isn't some money to
be made by someone. Acorn would presumably still charge for RiscOS
licensing, but in one sense any money they now get is a bonus, since
they must have written off all development costs. So the question is
how much does a machine cost, and how much could it be sold for? A
small company, which made it clear that support would not be as might
be expected from Acorn, could ship quite nicely, I guess. *But* would
anyone buy one, knowing (almost) for certain that it is a dead-end
product? I posted here a while back to the effect that much of the
angst over Phoebe's spec etc. was because we feared it might be the
last - now we know it would/will be. Maybe the real writing on the
wall is in the 500 MIP ARM thread - if RiscOS won't go beyond the
current SA1s, then whatever Acorn had done with Phoebe, it would have
been curtains...
--
Mike Clarkson.
Wayne Bagguley
Liam Gretton <l...@star.le.ac.uk> wrote:
> In article <Pine.SOL.3.95.980917125056.895M-100000@aniu>, James Holtom
> <URL:mailto:hol...@cs.bris.ac.uk> wrote:
> > But on the grounds of probability things do not look so good, if this
> > report is substantiated... (And after-all Bloomberg are-not some dodgy
> > back-room zero-credibility web-site...)
>
> It's true - even Dave Walker's been made redundant :-(
>
> Oh well, time to look for a new platform, I guess...
>
BeOS isn't bad.
:_(
--
_
( _ _ http://www.majic12.demon.co.uk/acorn/
_)| |(_)(_/\_) snow...@majic12.demon.co.uk
Wayne Bagguley
Liam Gretton <l...@star.le.ac.uk> wrote:
> In article <ant1713231cbq#H...@bohunt.demon.co.uk>, Paul Vigay
> <URL:mailto:pvi...@bohunt.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> > I can't believe this, as all the hard work has already been done and
> > people have been placing deposits - and Acorn are still promoting it on
> > their newlook Workstations page - which looks recently revamped.
>
> It does seem a bit rash, considering that it's only just about to be
> released. I feel very sorry for all those developers who have poured
> resources into new products for Phoebe (especially the hardware products),
> not to mention the staff who've lost their jobs.
>
I feel very sorry for everyone who's poured their heart and soul
into Acorn at any time.
There's not a lot you can say really.
--
:_(
Wayne Bagguley
Nigel Parker <95...@eng.cam.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> Two things strike me about the bloomberg release. Firstly, it doesn't
> appear to be text from Acorn, although it must be based on something from
> Acorn. This leaves me hoping that RPC2 cancelled, may mean the R&D
> project has ended, since the product is completed - could still mean a
> Phoebe release (but unlikely)?
>
> If it really has been completely abandoned, then who's going to take up
> the license to manufacture the thing? Any takers? If it really was a
> bean counter decision, then surely even they would be happy to license the
> complete designs to someone?
>
> Better get another RiscPC1 I suppose (sold mine recently)! And a nice
> unix workstation ;-)
>
> A sad day.
>
> <in the voice of Homer Simpson>
> You maniacs, you blew it up! Damn you, damn you all to hell!!
<in the voice of Eric Cartman>
Sonofabitch!
or
Goddammit!
<in the voices of Kyle and Stan>
Oh my God!
They've killed Pheobe!
You bastards!
--
:_(
Kim G. S. OEyhus
Clockmeister <gerr...@tnet.com.au> wrote:
>
>Remember that the Amiga was in nowhere land for four years, and with only a
>handfull of hardware developers keeping the machine competetive it
>survived.
>
>As an Amiga user I would have to suggest you stay loyal to your platform,
>even if Acorn hasn't. If there is a potential market someone may snap it
>up.
The Amiga had hardware and OS which had serious limitations for growth,
such as special 18bit circuits and no memory management. The ARM and
RiscOS do not have this limitations, and it should therefore be
easier to keep them alive than the Amiga.
Sure, there is that 32bit limitation, but I will be happy to run
RiscOS on my watch :-)
Kim0
Dave Cooper
<Ba...@tquest.org.uk> wrote:
>
> They also seem to be clammering for more people to place orders for the
> machine. I guess they didn't get enough orders and thought it wasn't
> > Perhaps there ought to be a "management buyout" of the Workstation
> division.
> > Perhaps Chris Cox could re-recruit Peter Bondar and they could continue
> as
> > "Acorn Workstations Ltd" or something.....
> >
> Barry
>
Surely it was too soon to say 'not enough orders' - I mean with the deadline
at end of October and the chance to see Phoebe in action at the London show
there must have been many of us (myself included) who would have been
putting down our deposits then with either our local dealer or the one
offering the 'best' extras.
I'm gutted!!
A buy-out with Chris Cox Dave Walker and Peter Bonbar (if he could be got
back) could surely work - especially if the Acorn dealers could buy-in as
well.
I' gutted!!
Also what about the people who have just sold their kit -say 2000UKPs worth
at purchase and sold for 700 to 800 UKPs ready for Phoebe?
I'm gutted!!
Regards, Dave C.
--
__ __ __ __ __ ___ ______________________________________________
|__||__)/ __/ \|\ ||_ | / StrongArm Risc Pc (586 PcCard) Clan & MAUG.
| || \\__/\__/| \||__ | / ArgoRing.AcornRing.Interests-Comp.Sat.AV.SF
___________________________/ Classical music & Wine. d...@argonet.co.uk
Homepage (inc.free photos) http://www.argonet.co.uk/users/dac/index.html
Dave Cooper
Nigel Parker <95...@eng.cam.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> If it really has been completely abandoned, then who's going to take up
> the license to manufacture the thing? Any takers? If it really was a
> bean counter decision, then surely even they would be happy to license the
> complete designs to someone?
>
> A sad day.
> Nigel
>
If Steve Jobs can come back and 'save' Apple - what about Herman Hauser
coming back to save Acorn. He's probably got the money and likes to suppost
'venture' capital and new products.
I was hoping/expecting to see Phoebe in action at Acorn World and then to
place my 500UKP deposit with one of the dealers.
I would have put my deposit down earlier but the shares I was selling to
fund the deal dropped at about the same time - I thought waiting until the
show was best.
It is really sad - especially with a number of positive items out recently -
ie. a StrongArm 2 and 3 talked of, the speed of the new Arm 9 and 10 and the
soon to be developed Amulet 3.
I feel very sorry for the staff of the Workstation division and wish them
well.
John Rees
> I don't own any shares at the moment but if the share holders have a say
> I will gladly buy some tomorrow.
Unfortunately, you would probably be out voted by the institutional
investors like the pension companies. When Rover was sold to B.M.W., at the
share holder's meeting to rubber stamp the Rover Group Board desicion, the
hall was pacted with small investors who wanted to preserve the bBritish Car
Industry. Their votes were swomped by the votes of three or four insurance
companies.
This comes at a very bad time, as the world economy is in such a
state. A few months ago, I would have expected an Asian OEM to snap the
Workstation Group up, but they have problems of their own.
--
John Campbell Rees
<jw...@argonet.co.uk> http://www.argonet.co.uk/users/jwcr/index.htm
"Just like swatting flies with a laser cannon. The aims a bit tricky, but it sure takes care of the flies" - Lord Miles Vorkosigan from "Komarr" by Lois McMaster Bujold
Andrew Hill
>
> On Thu, 17 Sep 1998, Lee McGinty wrote:
>
> But on the grounds of probability things do not look so good, if this
> report is substantiated... (And after-all Bloomberg are-not some dodgy
> back-room zero-credibility web-site...)
I'm probably unduly wishing to attempt to be positive, but :
Acorn are /supposed/ to be a technology industry, right? If all this
information is correct, why isn't it yet on the Acorn Workstations
Ltd.'s press releases (checked 17/09/98 at 8:15)? I find this all a
little incredulous. Perhaps I'm being too much of an optimist, but it
makes zero sense. You spend a research budget of millions, get a project
95% of the way to completion, put an offer out to Clan members on the
price, change the name and then just a week or so later shelve it ?!? I
know nothing about marketing at this kind of scale, but surely allowing
Phoebe to reach production stage should pay back at least some of the
money spent on it, even if the sales figures are shockingly
disappointing - certainly more than scrapping it now would be.
I'm not a natural conspircay theorist, but - what's the ulterior motive
here? Alternatively, have the lunatics truly taken over the Acorn asylum
once and for all? Also, if the press report is to be believed 100% (and
I'm a big believer in believing half of what you see and even less of
what you hear,) why would Acorn World be 'postponed'? If you were going
to effectively kill off your market - which is presumably what scrapping
the Phoebe would be doing, you'd either let AW go ahead regardless, or
you would cancel since you had nothing further to offer - not postpone.
IMHO - I'd wait for further, more informed press releases before
trooping off to PeeCee World, folks...(joke - I've no intention...)
TTFN (and heres hopin')
Andrew
--
_ _ _ _ _ _ _
/ \ _ __ __| |_ _______ /\ __ | |_| |(_)| || |
/ _ \ | '_ \ / _` | '__/ \ \/ \/ / | _ | _ | || |
/ ___ \| | | | (_| | | | (_/\ /\ / | | | || || || |
|/ \_|_| |_|\____|_| \__| \/ \/ |_| |_||_||_/|_/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Andrew Hill, MH Software. Look out for Imogen...
Andrew P. Harmsworth Esq.
<ni...@foster.newnet.co.uk> wrote:
> I don't own any shares at the moment but if the share holders have a say I
> will gladly buy some tomorrow.
Buy some anyway - now more than ever, as the price has bottomed-out in a
turbulent market. The decision to shelve the Workstation division was a GOOD
ONE as far as profits were concerned. Therefore the share price will now
rise - as it did today (and as the market itself fell 3%).
Andrew P. Harmsworth Esq.
<nos...@wymondham.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> Yes that is a minus figure. The city must like the announcement though
> as Acorn's share price rise slightly today whereas ARM's fell.
The FTSE nose-dived 3% (again), so ARM went down with it. Acorn climbed a
full 1%.
Andrew P. Harmsworth Esq.
<kshe...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> Stephen B Streater of Eidos, and now Forbidden Technologies seems be
> interested in setting something up (see Forbidden Technologies thread
> further up this NG), but would need more cash.
What about the BBC? How about turning Phoebe into another Beeb? That would
be SO good to see...
Di Hillage
MSoft products, have noted that it seems so easy to achieve results on my
Acorn that they find extremely difficult to achieve on their Windoze
machines.
Maybe that's the root of the problem ? Too many people worried about
developing newer and fancier hardware when what we have had for some years
actually enables the majority of users to meet their needs with the minimum
of hassle..
Hang on to your s/h RISCPCs chaps ! If past records of such products as the
BBC micro and the A3000 are anything to go by, they'll still be useful in
ten years time... even if W98 is working by then !
--
__ __ __ __ __ ___ _____________________________________________
|__||__)/ __/ \|\ ||_ | /
| || \\__/\__/| \||__ | /...Internet access for all Acorn RISC machines
___________________________/ dhil...@argonet.co.uk
Bob Charlton
Rob Hemmings <rhem...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> (I'm not talking about particularly large sums of money but maybe
> if enough people are prepared to put some money where their mouth
> is...)
As seems quite possible - Acorn are allegedly currently losing in
excess of 800,000 Pounds per month. Its all going out and not enough
coming back. Classic Accountants dilema staunch the wound to slow the
bleeding or kill the patient ouright.
You'll need a very deep pocket to plug that gap, even to make a
slight difference.
At this rate you should be able to buy their shares for about
twopence each tomorrow. So good luck. Grey trading starts at 0830hrs.
the market opens at 0900hrs..
You can almost see the Vultures circling. Sad to hear the new company
policy in this manner but they built their own future.
The people I feel really sorry for those who have made their livings
with Acorn Computers Plc., or worse have just started their careers
and now are being unkindly rewarded for their faith and ingenuity.
--
Bob Charlton
Bob Charlton
AJR Porrer <ajr...@york.ac.uk> wrote:
> I imagine the majority of Acorn shareholders are investment banks
> and the like who will always go with the accountants (what's best
> for there investment), so you would always be outvoted.
company by something like a dozen or more categories. Sorry cannot
remember the precise page but it was on-line earlier tonight.
Hope this helps
--
Bob Charlton
Frank Jukes
> I was just wondering if the share holders have any say in the matter
> of closing the workstations division and stopping the RISC PC 2.
> I don't own any shares at the moment but if the share holders have a
> say I will gladly buy some tomorrow.
This one hasn't.
:-(
Frank
--
Frank Jukes
John Waddell
I share the views expressed that it would be a travesty if the RISC OS
machines we know and love were to disappear altogether. I wonder why some
have commented that, because of the anouncement, they are off to change OS,
to abandon their machines and to give up. I also express sympathy for those
about to be made redundant. I hope they secure continuous employment
through speedy transfer to other companies.
Some 12/13 years ago I bought my BBC B on the very day that Acorn went bust
and before Olivetti stepped in. That machine is still going strong. The
A310 I bought is still going strong. The A410 I bought is still going
strong, the RPC700 I bought is still going strong, in fact, I have still to
pluck up the courage to StrongArm it and I envisage it will keep going for a
good number of years yet. All these machines except the RPC have been
inherited by my children and I anticipate, being pretty robust (the machines
not the children!) that they will keep going for some time yet. Look at the
strong interest still around for BBC B kit and software.
Any advice I require has come either from Beebug, Norwich Computer Services,
CJE Micros - the firms from whom I bought the machines (except the beeb,
that was off the shelf from WH Smith!) - or more recently from the very
helpful and enthusiastic base of acorn newsgroup and mailling list
contributors on the net.
I use a limited range of software for all my needs and the magazines, PDware
add occasional bits and pieces.
Surely these groups, the mags and the software enthusiasts will continue to
use the kit and to participate?
There must be a strong base of enthusiasts with modest aspirations, like me,
who intend to stay with the hardware and software - there is probably a
large silent majority, some not even on the net yet.
Let's not commit suicide or abandon ship just yet!
--
John Waddell, Langbank, Renfrewshire
Ross Tierney
<URL:mailto:locatio...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <ant17195...@webracer.xs4all.nl>, Tony Hopstaken
> <webr...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>
> >Maybe *that* is the point. I may be not as ready as we are made to
> >believe......
>
> No, that's the point. THIS WEEK they had the first Phoebe up and running.
> Or so I'm told.
They did. It seemed to be mainly working.
As I heard, they had some work remaining to do to perfect it, but it was
okay. Then they had to tool-up for the production run. The figures are easy
to work out:
2000 units (that *IS* small quantities) at roughly a grand a pop. That 2
mil, just to manufacture the first batch. Of that, probably 200 quid was
just the IOMD II cost, and 100 was the new VIDC. With an outlay of that on
the books, their figures at the end of this coming quarter would look pretty
dire IMHO.
Plain suicidal move IMHO too. They seem to have chosen short-term gains in
favour of longer-term existance.
I don't think Acorn can 'grow' in this market if they just become a
consultancy business.Thera are too many others with far more clout and
financial backing to play in the big league they want to.
I've backed Acorn for almost 10 years now. I've devoted my career (and some
would say my life) to furthering it and it's products. I feel like I've just
been kicked in the teeth by my best friend.
I'm now looking for a *BETTER* friend.
For all those feeling the same way as me; a word of confidence: There are
some coming along soon now. Just you wait and see.
Ross Tierney.
r...@eidos.co.uk "...Breathing in... Breathing out..."
kra...@argonet.co.uk -An Old Friend
Ross Tierney
> Hi,
>
> I was just wondering if the share holders have any say in the matter of
> closing the workstations division and stopping the RISC PC 2.
Yes, I believe they did. The majority have said they don't want to produce
desktop systems any longer. Acorn are just listening to their owners.
> I don't own any shares at the moment but if the share holders have a say
> I will gladly buy some tomorrow.
If the Acorn enthusiast market got together and bought en-mass, they still
wouldn't have enough shares compared with a mid-sized speculator. Sadly it's
a wasted effort.
The *ONLY* way for the Phoebe to be salvaged now is for somebody to get a
few million together, buy the project and put it into production with
virtually no support from Acorn. That'd be a massive risk now that the
market has no confidence IMHO.
Even then, there's F-all chance of seeing 'the old gal' before about
June/July next year. Who's going to wait that long for a computer that was
due actually last year?
Even throwing 5 mil at the project would only guarantee it for the beginning
of next year. Which one company has that sort of clout and the interest in
the Acorn market to do it?
There's only the one to be brutaly honest. *THEY* just cancelled the
project.
Darren Salt
Steve Turnbull <st...@turnbull.cix.co.uk> wrote:
[snip]
> Let me just say that I am not [yet] despondent, the news came to us just as
> we were having a staff meeting so "the chaps" could meet my partners -- it
> was certainly a bit of a bombshell but, without being able to go into any
> detail, the reaction was "what are we going to do about it" not "oh sh*t
> let's give up and go home".
Well, that at least is positive... Me? I was hoping to upgrade in a year or
two. I still am, though it's looking somewhat more remote.
I fully intend to keep my Risc PC. I intend to keep developing software. If
I'm still using this machine in ten years' time, fine. Any platform
change required by circumstance (failure of irreplacable hardware) will be to
Linux...
[tagline]
> ... Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
Accountants?
--
| Darren Salt anti-UCE | ds@youmustbejoking,demon,co,uk | nr. Ashington,
| Acorn Risc PC, A3010, | ds@zap,uk,eu,org | Northumberland
| Spec+3, BBC Master 128 | arcsalt@spuddy,mew,co,uk | Toon Army
| Retrocomputing: a PC card in a Risc PC
"Why stop now, just when I'm hating it?"
Alan Harvey
<URL:mailto:sab...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> Nicholas Foster <ni...@foster.newnet.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > I was just wondering if the share holders have any say in the matter of
> > closing the workstations division and stopping the RISC PC 2.
> >
> > will gladly buy some tomorrow.
>
> directors, but not make business decisions. Unless, of course, you won
> 10%+ of a company, in which case you probably nominate a director, or
> are one.
As a Shareholder - bought at 2.5 x current price :( , I was rather worried
whan I got the results yesterday which stated :-
Value of Acorn's share of ARM = 145p per share
Acorn's current price (approx)= 83p per share
Value of Acorn = MINUS 62p per share
I thought Phoebe would change all that but someone got cold feet.....
--
Keep the faith
Alan Harvey
Ian Molton
> Acorn Workstations Ltd, making desktop computers. This is a split of
> their expertise, and may lead to key Acorn people jumping ship....
I think most of Acorns truely innovative people came to them through their
desktop computers. Without the desktop computers, Acorn will not have such
talented people knocking on their door.
--
-Ian aka Lennier
Acorn Computers, the best in the world
http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/hawk/
BaBe - Women's human rights organisation in Croatia
http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/hawk/babe/
Preferences: Cats, Zap, Purple, Aspie
Ian Molton
> > >whose livelyhoods depend upon it. I'm still ready to put some money
> > >in that direction if they do, and I hope I'm not alone.
> > You're not.
> I'd certainly be prepared to consider some investment. (i.e. Me too!)
> enough people are prepared to put some money where their mouth is...)
I'd sertainly buy a Phoebe if someone takes up the challenge (ie. Me me
too....)
Ian Molton
Wayne Bagguley <snow...@majic12.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> > <in the voice of Homer Simpson>
> > You maniacs, you blew it up! Damn you, damn you all to hell!!
> <in the voice of Eric Cartman>
> Sonofabitch!
> or
> Goddammit!
> <in the voices of Kyle and Stan>
> Oh my God!
> They've killed Pheobe!
> You bastards!
<Delenn>
Faith Manages.
Ian Molton
Ross Tierney <kra...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> I'm now looking for a *BETTER* friend.
I'm looking at chaltech....
David...@thepentagon.com
> > I was just wondering if the share holders have any say in the matter
> > of closing the workstations division and stopping the RISC PC 2.
>
> > I don't own any shares at the moment but if the share holders have a
> > say I will gladly buy some tomorrow.
>
> This one hasn't.
>
> :-(
Sorry to say it folks, but the sorry truth is that the workstations division
has blatantly been unprofitable for a while and the development costs of the
Phoebe would never have been covered by the number of buyers. It's a straight
cut business decision for the big chiefs at Acorn, their job is to keep the
company profitable and they weren't, so they did. Unfortunately for us
enthusiasts (read 'worshippers') there is no excuse as to why they have cut
their losses and run. We can only hope that perhaps there will be a take over
of the workstation division, with so much of the Phoebe already developed
there might be less costs to absorb by a potential buyer. Or by IMS and the
developers of Medi, with a 3rd party work station division. Even this would
probably be very short lived and result in little profit for the new
developers, it would be purely an act of faith.
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
Stuart Bell
> The Amiga had hardware and OS which had serious limitations for growth,
> such as special 18bit circuits and no memory management. The ARM and
> RiscOS do not have this limitations, and it should therefore be
> easier to keep them alive than the Amiga.
The future of any similar product depends not on the nuances of the
technology, but on who can hammer out a deal in a baordroom / over the
golf course etc etc.
--
Stuart Bell
writing from a Wintel-free zone.
Andreas Dehmel
>On Thu, 17 Sep 1998, Lee McGinty wrote:
>> Another restructuring announced this morning (information from
>> Bloomberg). Acorn are reducing their staff from 175 to 100,
>> concentrating on new products and cancelling Risc PC 2.
``I feel a great disturbance of the Force...''
So that's it then? The bad guys do win in the end.
There was a lot of speculation that Phoebe might be the last of
Acorn's desktop computers, but I think even the most hardened
pessimist wouldn't have thought that the dubious honour would
be the RiscPC's.
OK, so speaking long-term, is there any alternative but trying to
get a development team of (former) Acorn programmers together to
port the Wimp to X? Theoretically speaking, who'd be interested?
Andreas, feeling very depressed.
``Don't base your joy upon the deeps of others,
for what is given can be taken away.
No hope = no fear.''
(Peter Steele)
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Andreas Dehmel When asked how his parrot had died
Orleansstr. 34 the mathematician replied:
D-81667 Muenchen ``Polynomial. Polygon.''
deh...@forwiss.tu-muenchen.de
Tel. 089 / 28095-218 http://www.forwiss.tu-muenchen.de/~dehmel
Tim Howarth
Rob Hemmings <rhem...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> (I'm not talking about particularly large sums of money but maybe if
> enough people are prepared to put some money where their mouth is...)
Richard "Virgin" Branson must have a few bob to spare - wonder if
he'd like to produce the Virgin Phoebe?
--
___
|im ---- ARM Powered ----
Dr R.J. Gayton
Jim Lesurf <jc...@st-and.demon.co.uk> wrote:
....snipped. Then...
> It seems as if the bean counters have won and decided not to spend the
> money required to set up a production line and commit cash to component stock.
Yet again. Makes you proud to be British, doesn't it?
... More snips...
> Speaking as someone who finds RiscOS and some of its apps (e.g.
> TechWriter) virtually essential. I'll be keeping RiscOS boxes going for as
> long as I can to *use* them. I need this for a productive working life and
> for some small measure of sanity! In the absence of a RPC2 I'll keep my
> RPCs going whilst possible, and will probably if I can also buy a peanut
> with the money saved.
Yep! Me too
>
... and more
>
> I also extend much sympathy to the people at Acorn who were dumped this
> morning. It is bad enough to be made redundant. It makes it worse, to be
> left feeling that the people you were working for regard your creative
> efforts as "not good enough to support". This sadly shows the poor state
> of the thinking of many who tend to run public (i.e. shareholder)
> companies in the UK. They know the cost of everything and the value of
> nothing. They regard any investment in the future as a 'risk' to be
> avoided. Alas, all too typical.
>
> Where there is no vision, the people also perish.
>
In your usual thoughtful, well-considered way I think you have spoken for
many of us, Jim
Robert
--
Dr Robert Gayton
The Physiological Laboratory
The University of Liverpool
Crown Street
P.O. Box 147
Liverpool L69 3BX
Tel: +44 (0)151 794 5304
Fax: +44 (0)151 794 5337
Glyn Royds
Tim Howarth <t...@worthy.demon.co.uk> wrote:
Hell, this is probably the first sign that I'm about to slide nicely
into a prolonged hysterical giggle fit (I'd get a bottle of Whiskey
to go with it but I've been developing for Acorn kit too long to be
able to afford one!!), but I think (not having watched the program a
lot) that Phoebe lost that cherry a long, LONG time ago ;-)
--
_ __ __ All views expressed in news postings are
/ '/ __ /_/__ __//_ my own and may have no relation whatsoever
/_///_// / / |/_//_//_/__/ to the views of my employer.
,_/ ,_/ ,_/
Try a new system or a different approach.
Steffen Huber
>
> Hello,
>
> sad news, isn't it ? So it's essentially over now. Finally. And
> there was me thinking Acorn would still be around in 20 years
> time, producing one new flagship desktop computer every five
> years or so.
I was also getting more optimistic about the Acorn market in
the last few weeks. The games market seemed to gain new life,
Acorn User had the potential to get much much better,
Avante was going to be released, Phoebe became suddenly
a sensible buy with the price reduction, a nice new notebook
was produced after all those A4 years...
Well, a decision was to be made. And it could be called "fair
against customers" to make this decision before selling
Phoebe to anyone. And I am sure that the decision was based
on some thinking - you don't sack a third of your people
without that.
However, I am not sure if this is a "good thing" for Acorns
other activities - after all, with selling machines to "real
people" they created a pool of very knowledgable people they
could recruit later. This will be no longer possible.
> Does anyone think I'm too pessimistic if I say Acorn is the new
> Amiga now ?
I think you are too optimistic. The Amiga market was very large,
and even now after years of lacking a decent perspective, new
products are still appearing.
The Acorn market does not have the size to be kept alive such
a long time without any "positive activities" from the OS and
hardware front.
> I mean, people are already speculating on IMS possibly
> taking over, or perhaps Steve Turnbull has something to do with it -
> but let's face it, there's simply no third party organisation that's
> even near the size (in people and competence) of Acorn.
I don't see "size" as a problem. As we now learned, Acorn had 178
people employed. Now think about all the development they did -
I guess the Phoebe was a three to four man project, with RISC OS
having probably no more than ten developers.
The problem I see is that if a third party is taking over, they
have to present a vision for the future. They have to present plans
to develop the hardware further. Although I would very much like
that somebody comes up with something like that, I don't quite
believe it. Please, prove me wrong somebody...
> And we've already been criticizing that there're not enough people to
> - Maintain a decent website
Well, you need one guy to do that...
> - Develop RiscOS as fast as needed
This I see as a short term problem for any potential buyer. Acorn
will surely continue development of e.g. the browser and the
JVM, but what about other things necessary for a desktop
machine, but not for a thin client or digital TV device?
> - Solve some "outstanding issues", like a proper compiler
Well, we had GNAT for some time now, so a compiler was not
the problem, more the people insisting on programming in C
or C++ ;-)
> etc etc.
> Sob ...
>
> Depressed,
Hey, I think BeOS lacks a decent CD writing app...
As a software developer, I have to say that it does not make
sense to me to "jump ship" or do any panic things immediately.
I will wait happily to see what cunning plans are developed to
rescue Acorn as a desktop platform. Development for CDBurn
will be ongoing for the forseeable future, because there
are still features I want to have personally, and as a
by-product, of course the users will still be able to get
upgrades. So don't panic, I am sure other developers will
do the same.
So long, Steffen
David...@thepentagon.com
Sleeper, which seems sadly appropriate:
"What do I do now ? are we going under?
what did I do wrong? I though we had it sorted
out the other day, maybe I'm just stupid
can't we try again?
no-one told me it was raining "
Good luck all
Dave
Richard J. Hesketh
<URL:mailto:Malcol...@csi.com> wrote:
> I'm probably unduly wishing to attempt to be positive, but :
> Acorn are /supposed/ to be a technology industry, right? If all this
> information is correct, why isn't it yet on the Acorn Workstations
> Ltd.'s press releases (checked 17/09/98 at 8:15)?
Typical chaotic news management @ Acorn, perchance? It wouldn't be the first
time!!! :(
> little incredulous. Perhaps I'm being too much of an optimist, but it
> makes zero sense. You spend a research budget of millions, get a project
> 95% of the way to completion, put an offer out to Clan members on the
> price, change the name and then just a week or so later shelve it ?!? I
> know nothing about marketing at this kind of scale, but surely allowing
> Phoebe to reach production stage should pay back at least some of the
> money spent on it, even if the sales figures are shockingly
> disappointing - certainly more than scrapping it now would be.
Well, that would have been my expectation. Clearly the accountants disagree.
> what you hear,) why would Acorn World be 'postponed'? If you were going to
> effectively kill off your market - which is presumably what scrapping the
> Phoebe would be doing, you'd either let AW go ahead regardless, or you
> would cancel since you had nothing further to offer - not postpone. IMHO -
> I'd wait for further, more informed press releases before trooping off to
> PeeCee World, folks...(joke - I've no intention...)
It's the usual flannel - Acorn are burning their bridges but trying to hide
the smoke in the hope that we won't notice until they've quite finished!!!
> TTFN (and heres hopin')
Well, there are plenty of rumours, but unless there really /is/ a buyout in
the offing... :(
--
o o Richard J. Hesketh ric...@glory-box.demon.co.uk o o
o o WebMaster, Acorn News Service http://www.acornusers.org/ANS/ o o
o o o o
o o DISCLAIMER: The Acorn News Service is an independent service. It is o o
o o in no way connected with, or supported by the Acorn Group PLC. o o
Richard J. Hesketh
<URL:mailto:ni...@foster.newnet.co.uk> wrote:
> closing the workstations division and stopping the RISC PC 2.
>
> I don't own any shares at the moment but if the share holders have a say I
> will gladly buy some tomorrow.
I somehow suspect that the big shareholders - the ones with /real/ influence
(no offence, Nicholas!) - are likely to side with Acorn on this one, in the
hope of seeing greater profitability. I wouldn't waste my shekels on Acorn
shares in the hope of rejuvenating Phoebe. However, as a profit-making
prospect, they look pretty good now...
Richard J. Hesketh
<URL:mailto:mjr_news@||REMOVE||poboxes.com> wrote:
> Steve Turnbull <st...@turnbull.cix.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > Let me just say that I am not [yet] despondent...
>
> I wish you and every other Acorn developer that may or may not feel they
> have been shafted by this move every success. I would also like to extend
> my sympathies to the Acorn employees that have been made redundant as a
> result of this move.
ANS, i.e. myself and Eytan Abrahams, would like to echo Matt's comments.
This really does seem like a terminal kick in the teeth to a dedicated and
enthusiastic developer and user community.
I'm actually off work due to illness this week, but we'll try to bring the
latest news to all our subscribers as things develop.
Glad to see there's not yet total despair in the Tau Publishing camp - we're
having trouble keeping it at bay here!!!
Regards,
Richard
Richard J. Hesketh
Andrew P. Harmsworth Esq. <URL:mailto:dna...@ni.edam.maps> wrote:
> In article <4887317f4...@argonet.co.uk>, The Sherratt Clan
> <kshe...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> > Stephen B Streater of Eidos, and now Forbidden Technologies seems be
> > interested in setting something up (see Forbidden Technologies thread
> > further up this NG), but would need more cash.
>
> What about the BBC? How about turning Phoebe into another Beeb? That would
> be SO good to see...
Pretty unlikely, though - I know they have some Acorn-based editing kit now,
but can anybody /really/ see them investing in what is now known to be
dead-end kit?
David Love
<URL:mailto:st...@turnbull.cix.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <fbac148748%y000...@tu-bs.de>
> Thomas Boroske <y000...@ws.rz.tu-bs.de> wrote:
>
<SNIP>
> > but let's face it, there's simply no third party organisation that's
> > even near the size (in people and competence) of Acorn.
>
>
> It's not size that counts, it's how you use it :-)
Very true - "Quality not quantity" is what counts
> Let me just say that I am not [yet] despondent, the news came to
> us just as we were having a staff meeting so "the chaps" could meet
> my partners -- it was certainly a bit of a bombshell but, without
> being able to go into any detail, the reaction was "what are we
> going to do about it" not "oh sh*t let's give up and go home".
Thank you, Steve. for that optimism. The news was mind shattering but
it won't stop me having faith in RiscOS and my RisPCSA. What's that
well known phrase? Ah! yes, "When the going gets toough, the tough get
going".
David
--
PO Box 21 525, Henderson 1231 Editor of ARMed, the newsletter of Acorn
Waitakere City, New Zealand Users Auckland Inc. Proud owner of an
Telephone: 64 09 838 9744 Acorn RiscPC running on a 200+ MHz
email: z...@ww.co.nz StrongARM processor. British and best.
Thomas Boroske
"Clockmeister" <gerr...@tnet.com.au> wrote:
>
>
> Thomas Boroske <y000...@ws.rz.tu-bs.de> wrote in article
> <fbac148748%y000...@tu-bs.de>...
> > Hello,
> >
> > sad news, isn't it ? So it's essentially over now. Finally. And there was
> > me thinking Acorn would still be around in 20 years time, producing
> > one new flagship desktop computer every five years or so.
> >
> > Does anyone think I'm too pessimistic if I say Acorn is the new
> > Amiga now ?
>
> Well, the Amiga does have a future although not very well defined.
> Which raises a point... The only way the platform can have a future is if
> the users remain loyal, as is the case with the Amiga.
You mean a few percent of them ? All Amiga users I know have gone PC now - and
I'm not talking about the sort who got an A500 or A2000 to play pirated
games on. No, enthusiast users with A4000, A1200+68060 card and such.
And I can understand it: One of them is doing graphics - is running
the same raytracer now on a PC, only 10 times as fast; he didn't
even have to pay for the software, they sent him a copy cause they
published some of his pics on a CD previously ....
Oh, and all three of them were producing a game - of course, it still
hasn't been sold today.
> It was the remaining
> users (quite a few of them) which interested Gateway and finally pushed
> them to buy Amiga out.
Oh - and what good has this done ?
> If a company realises the potential sales market because of the number of
> users still using an orphan platform they are likely to consider purchasing
> the production rights to that platform.
Yeah, of course. I may not be 100% informed of what happened with Amiga
Tech, however, my impression was that they got sold several times,
but not one of the owners ever produced anything.
> As an Amiga user I would have to suggest you stay loyal to your platform,
> even if Acorn hasn't. If there is a potential market someone may snap it
> up.
Well, we can hope. I suggest we way a few weeks and have another look
then - of something hasn't happened then ...
The problem with "staying loyal" is that a userbase that stays loyal
just "for the sake of it" isn't enough in the long run. And don't
forget we're starting at significantly lower numbers than the Amiga
community did when Commodore went bust.
> Failing that, could I interest you in a new Amiga in about a year and a
> half?
> Just kidding.
Why ? Amiga is a nice system, granted.
> Don't give up all hope yet!
>
> Regards,
>
> Clockmeister.
Kind regards,
--
Thomas Boroske
Thomas Boroske
Mike Clarkson <m...@easynet.co.uk> wrote:
> product? I posted here a while back to the effect that much of the
> angst over Phoebe's spec etc. was because we feared it might be the
> last - now we know it would/will be. Maybe the real writing on the
> wall is in the 500 MIP ARM thread - if RiscOS won't go beyond the
> current SA1s, then whatever Acorn had done with Phoebe, it would have
> been curtains...
Well, if this was/is the case, now we know why they finally had to
put in MP support ? Unfortunately, that requires even more
changes to software ...
Regards,
--
Thomas Boroske
Malcolm Knight
<URL:mailto:ric...@glory-box.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <na.0136474887...@ni.edam.maps>,
> Andrew P. Harmsworth Esq. <URL:mailto:dna...@ni.edam.maps> wrote:
> > In article <4887317f4...@argonet.co.uk>, The Sherratt Clan
> > <kshe...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> > > Stephen B Streater of Eidos, and now Forbidden Technologies seems be
> > > interested in setting something up (see Forbidden Technologies thread
> > > further up this NG), but would need more cash.
> >
> > What about the BBC? How about turning Phoebe into another Beeb? That would
> > be SO good to see...
>
> Pretty unlikely, though - I know they have some Acorn-based editing kit now,
> but can anybody /really/ see them investing in what is now known to be
> dead-end kit?
The big market in video editing gear is in turnkey solutions. A Phoebe
motherboard inside a black box with software from Eidos (and not forgetting
Irlam's stuff which is truly excellent) could sell very well. A German
company is mopping up this market at present with something that is neither
cheap nor very good. But it's easy to use. :-)
The editing systems running on PCs are appallingly difficult to set up. Cost
much the same as Phoebe plus Videodesk if you pay the support costs and if
my circle of video friends are anything to go by aren't nearly as attractive
as the simple black box. They are buying black boxes 3:1.
So maybe Eidos should build a video editor to beat the Germans who are alone
in this game at present and make sure there is a mouse and keyboard port at
the back.
Mr. Tiernan care to comment? :-)
--
Malcolm
Liam Gretton
<URL:mailto:M.Se...@t-online.de> wrote:
> I just wonder what will happen with RISC OS 4 now. Will we be able to get
> it for Risc PC - at least? Will they continue developing it (for RPC) at
> all?
I hope so; in some ways development of the OS is more important than a new
machine to run it on.
--
Liam Gretton
li...@binliner.demon.co.uk
l...@star.le.ac.uk
Alan Harvey
<URL:mailto:char...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <na.4620904887....@argonet.co.uk>,
> Rob Hemmings <rhem...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> > (I'm not talking about particularly large sums of money but maybe
> > if enough people are prepared to put some money where their mouth
> > is...)
>
> excess of 800,000 Pounds per month. Its all going out and not enough
> coming back. Classic Accountants dilema staunch the wound to slow the
> bleeding or kill the patient ouright.
>
> You'll need a very deep pocket to plug that gap, even to make a
> slight difference.
>
> At this rate you should be able to buy their shares for about
> twopence each tomorrow. So good luck. Grey trading starts at 0830hrs.
> the market opens at 0900hrs..
The price has gone UP - see my other posting why
> You can almost see the Vultures circling. Sad to hear the new company
> policy in this manner but they built their own future.
>
> The people I feel really sorry for those who have made their livings
> with Acorn Computers Plc., or worse have just started their careers
> and now are being unkindly rewarded for their faith and ingenuity.
James Hammerton
> James Holtom <hol...@cs.bris.ac.uk> writes:
>
> >On Thu, 17 Sep 1998, Lee McGinty wrote:
>
> >> Another restructuring announced this morning (information from
> >> Bloomberg). Acorn are reducing their staff from 175 to 100,
> >> concentrating on new products and cancelling Risc PC 2.
>
> ``I feel a great disturbance of the Force...''
>
> So that's it then? The bad guys do win in the end.
> There was a lot of speculation that Phoebe might be the last of
> Acorn's desktop computers, but I think even the most hardened
> pessimist wouldn't have thought that the dubious honour would
> be the RiscPC's.
>
> OK, so speaking long-term, is there any alternative but trying to
> get a development team of (former) Acorn programmers together to
> port the Wimp to X? Theoretically speaking, who'd be interested?
And add yet another style of GUI to the several Unix already has? I think
you'd be better to adopt one of the standards already in use,
e.g. KDE or GNOME, and port Acorn applications to X than to try and
port the GUI. Porting the GUI would exacerbate the problem Unix with X
windows based packages having little consistency in their user interfaces.
Yes I agree RiscOS is better than most X-based GUIs, but whether it
could displace them is another matter entirely.
James
--
James Hammerton, Research Student, School of Computer Science,
University of Birmingham | Home Page: http://www.cs.bham.ac.uk/~jah/
Connectionist NLP WWW Page: http://www.cs.bham.ac.uk/~jah/CNLP/cnlp.html
Replace "seemysigfile" with "james" in my email address
Barry Wickett
<URL:mailto:steffe...@dbag.stg.daimlerbenz.com> wrote:
> I don't see "size" as a problem. As we now learned, Acorn had 178
> people employed. Now think about all the development they did -
> I guess the Phoebe was a three to four man project, with RISC OS
> having probably no more than ten developers.
Having seen pictures of the Pheobe development team I believe there were
more involved than this.
Barry
Andrew McMurry
> > What about the BBC? How about turning Phoebe into another Beeb? That would
> > be SO good to see...
>
> Pretty unlikely, though - I know they have some Acorn-based editing kit now,
> but can anybody /really/ see them investing in what is now known to be
> dead-end kit?
I couldn't see the BBC investing in anything new these days, apart
from Digital TV. And they are only investing in Digital TV because
they would be wiped out by Sky if they didn't.
Andrew
Andreas Dehmel
>Andreas Dehmel (deh...@Informatik.TU-Muenchen.DE) wrote:
>> OK, so speaking long-term, is there any alternative but trying to
>> get a development team of (former) Acorn programmers together to
>> port the Wimp to X? Theoretically speaking, who'd be interested?
>And add yet another style of GUI to the several Unix already has?
Yes.
>I think
>you'd be better to adopt one of the standards already in use,
>e.g. KDE or GNOME, and port Acorn applications to X than to try and
>port the GUI. Porting the GUI would exacerbate the problem Unix with X
>windows based packages having little consistency in their user interfaces.
But that's the whole point: the available X-GUIs suck big time. KDE is
just a Win95 clone, it'd be completely useless to add Wimp-features
to that. What would that achieve? Drag and drop AND file-selection
boxes? Forget it, if you want something as nice as the Wimp you have
to make very strict guidelines and enforce them, and you can't do that
with an existing lib that follows a totally different strategy, nor
can you do that with existing apps. You have to start by using the mouse
buttons like in RISC OS (incompatible with Unix paste, of course, so
we'll probably also need new xterms). Then you need the filer and make
it the backbone of the system, the way it is on RISC OS. Then you have
to make sure that nobody developing for this lib is using crap like
File Selection boxes, which is the real problem because the rest of
the world seems to be completely blind to this kind of concept. What I
meant was not merging with Unix, but building something entirely new
on top of Unix/X. It means starting again from scratch, yes. It means a
lot of work, yes. But it's the _ONLY_ way if you want to save the Wimp.
The Wimp philosophy is completely incompatible with any other GUI I've
ever seen / had the misfortune to use.
Your problem is you're thinking Unix + existing X apps, which is not at
all what I meant. I meant building an isle in the Unix sea where _we_
Acorn users can feel at home. I don't give a fuck about how the rest of
the Unix world feels about this, I don't even care much if it's downwards-
compatible to X; if Acorn developers will migrate to that lib + WM
environment (which is of course the ultimate goal) I wouldn't wanna use
any of the existing X-apps anyway.
>Yes I agree RiscOS is better than most X-based GUIs, but whether it
>could displace them is another matter entirely.
What do you mean, ``most''? I haven't seen a single X-GUI I'd call
anything but pathetic. UI counts, G is fluff.
I'm not trying to make the rest of the Unix world switch to this system.
That's completely hopeless, I know that. The new environment wouldn't
be different from the current one, i.e. basically an enthusiast env,
only hardware-independent and with a better OS sitting beneath it.
Should the developers currently active in the Acorn scene migrate to
such an env that'd mean about the same amount of software we have
ATM, with maybe the fallback solution of using other X apps, but of
course those won't integrate at all, so that's not a preferred
option.
I'm not kidding myself about the scope of this project, it's much too
big for one person or even a small group of experienced programmers and
since you'll also need apps for this environment you'll need every
homeless Acorn programmer you can get. But what else is there to do?
Downgrade to another GUI? No thanks, the Wimp spoiled me for good.
Andreas
Alan Gray
>
> > (I'm not talking about particularly large sums of money but maybe if
> > enough people are prepared to put some money where their mouth is...)
>
>
> he'd like to produce the Virgin Phoebe?
Or even Sir Clive "Speccy" Sinclair;-)
Now wouldn't *that* be ironic...
--
Alan...@argonet.co.uk Dr A.G.Gray. Great Warley, Essex. UK
http://www.argonet.co.uk/users/alan.gray
N 51 33'58" E 00 17'35" G3XQU (DXCC=323/328) Acorn RiscPC S/A 202MHz
Stephen Burke
> happen overnight, in my experience. If they were going to axe it
> completely, why spend the money promoting it the week before the project
> is cancelled?
If they had a buyer, why not wait until it could be announced? As it is they'll
start losing customers almost immediately, whether to PCs, Macs, or indeed
Peanuts. I have to agree that what they've done sems odd, I'd have thought
they'd have waited at least a bit longer to see how many advance orders were
taken. And cancelling Acorn World at this stage seems very drastic; presumably
dealers and developers would like to carry on even if Acorn doesn't. What will
the penalty payment be for not using the exhibition hall?
--
e----><----p | Stephen Burke | E-mail: (anti-junk mail version)
H H 1 | Gruppe FH1T (Lancaster) | stephen.burke@
H H 11 | DESY, Notkestrasse 85 | desy.de
HHHHH 1 | 22603 Hamburg, Germany | All junk mail deleted on sight!
H H 1 | "It is also a good rule not to put too much confidence in
H H 11111 | experimental results until they have been confirmed by theory"
Stephen Burke
> Problem is the marketing and selling of the machine itself costs money
> (e.g. for advertising, producing manuals/brochures and support) and
Marketing? This is Acorn you're talking about ... and I thought most of the
manuals were now just disk-based? With a 500 quid deposit per machine they
should have been able to cover the up-front costs. The only thing I can think
of is that something significant in the software or hardware is unfinished.
> I also feel sorry for all Acorn users who have stuck with a platform
> loyally for so many years only to see it finally bite the dust.
The writing has been on the wall for four years, the surprising thing
is how long it kept going.
> Even if there were some sort of buyout of the Workstations division,
> the likelihood of success is low, though I suppose the Amiga provides
> a role model for this, except that it had far more of a user base than
> RiscOS has.
You could imagine a low-volume production of the Phoebe design a la Peanut,
but ongoing development is another matter. It might be possible with
the OS source code in the public domain, but I can't see how Acorn
could allow that given that they need large chunks of the code in their
other projects.
Stephen Burke
> I really *hope* that something like this happens. If it did I'd even
> invest in it, although I'm not exactly as rich as the gates of hell...
As I said before, 5000 Clan members * 2k pounds would almost certainly be
enough ..
> I also extend much sympathy to the people at Acorn who were dumped this
I agree with that.
> companies in the UK. They know the cost of everything and the value of
> nothing. They regard any investment in the future as a 'risk' to be
> avoided. Alas, all too typical.
Acorn has had a lot of time (more than a decade since the first round of
troubles) to prove itself, and it hasn't. Anyone who invested at the height of
the NC enthusiasm has lost 3/4 of their money at the current price, and would
have lost the lot if it weren't for the stake in ARM. Acorn isn't a charity,
it's a (supposedly) profit-making company; if you keep making losses for long
enough investors will decide they've had enough.
Stephen Burke
> If the Acorn enthusiast market got together and bought en-mass, they still
> wouldn't have enough shares compared with a mid-sized speculator. Sadly it's
> a wasted effort.
Not strictly true. There are several thousand Acorn enthusiasts, and Acorn as a
whole is only worth 60 million or so at the moment, so in theory enthusiasts
could buy enough shares to make a difference. More to the point, Acorn without
the ARM shares is worth practically nothing.
> The *ONLY* way for the Phoebe to be salvaged now is for somebody to get a
> few million together, buy the project and put it into production with
> virtually no support from Acorn. That'd be a massive risk now that the
> market has no confidence IMHO.
If people would agree to pay in advance you could do it with no risk
(or rather, with the risk being spread amongst the buyers). IMS think they
can make a go of the Peanut, and Phoebe ought to sell better. (Especially
if they changed the name and the colour :)
> Even then, there's F-all chance of seeing 'the old gal' before about
> June/July next year. Who's going to wait that long for a computer that was
> due actually last year?
Presumably the die-hards who were going to buy it come what may ...
Mike Pumford
James Hammerton <seemys...@tardis.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
>And add yet another style of GUI to the several Unix already has? I think
>you'd be better to adopt one of the standards already in use,
>e.g. KDE or GNOME, and port Acorn applications to X than to try and
>port the GUI. Porting the GUI would exacerbate the problem Unix with X
>windows based packages having little consistency in their user interfaces.
>could displace them is another matter entirely.
>
going to have custimizable look and feel. Perhaps the RISC OS could be
one of those looks. I would certainly be interested in this and could
even manage to contribute some time to the development of it.
Mike
James Hammerton
> In article <EzFrDx.5op.0.sta...@dcs.ed.ac.uk>, seemys...@tardis.ed.ac.uk (James Hammerton) writes:
> > Problem is the marketing and selling of the machine itself costs money
> > (e.g. for advertising, producing manuals/brochures and support) and
>
> Marketing? This is Acorn you're talking about ... and I thought most of the
> manuals were now just disk-based? With a 500 quid deposit per machine they
> should have been able to cover the up-front costs. The only thing I can think
> of is that something significant in the software or hardware is unfinished.
Well at the very least Acorn would need to produce brochures for the
machine for dealers to hand out and provide support for the machine,
e.g. helplines, bug fixes, people to handle warranties and the like.
Also you're right there may have been some signficant work to be done
on the machine. Also they may not have been confident at getting back
the money it costs simply to do a production run.
> > I also feel sorry for all Acorn users who have stuck with a platform
> > loyally for so many years only to see it finally bite the dust.
>
> The writing has been on the wall for four years, the surprising thing
> is how long it kept going.
Well I thought the RiscPC did a good job of moving the RiscOS range
on, but now it has become out-dated and has been so for about 2
years, although the SA made a bit of a difference when it arrived.
> > Even if there were some sort of buyout of the Workstations division,
> > the likelihood of success is low, though I suppose the Amiga provides
> > a role model for this, except that it had far more of a user base than
> > RiscOS has.
>
> You could imagine a low-volume production of the Phoebe design a la Peanut,
> but ongoing development is another matter. It might be possible with
> the OS source code in the public domain, but I can't see how Acorn
> could allow that given that they need large chunks of the code in their
> other projects.
Indeed. However the idea being floated of porting the RiscOS GUI and
applications to Linux and producing ARM-based Linux machines running
it seems to allow more scope for development.
Stephen Crocker
Liam Gretton <l...@star.le.ac.uk> wrote:
> In article <Pine.SOL.3.95.980917125056.895M-100000@aniu>, James Holtom
> <URL:mailto:hol...@cs.bris.ac.uk> wrote:
> > But on the grounds of probability things do not look so good, if this
> > report is substantiated... (And after-all Bloomberg are-not some dodgy
> > back-room zero-credibility web-site...)
>
> It's true - even Dave Walker's been made redundant :-(
>
> Oh well, time to look for a new platform, I guess...
Just because Acorn aren't making a new computer, we can't assume no-one
is. Maybe Peanut and Medi have given them the idea that it's more
profitable just to design systems and let someone else make them.
--
x^ ( ) _________ // Email: mailto:cr...@crok.demon.co.uk
< U O |_|_|_|_|_| O || WWW: http://www.crok.demon.co.uk
\, |/|\ _________ [ ]
. |/^\ . 2 . /__\
... Live every day like it's your last, because someday you'll be right.
Stephen Crocker
M.Se...@t-online.de (Matthias Seifert) wrote:
> James Holtom <hol...@cs.bris.ac.uk> wrote:
> > On Thu, 17 Sep 1998, Lee McGinty wrote:
>
> [...]
> > There it is in black-and-white...
>
> > I still find it hard to believe -- given that the majority of the R&D
> > for Phoebe must have been spent by now, I'd have thought it would make
> > more sense to push them into production, and at least get some earnings,
> > rather than ditch the project at this late stage...
>
> I just wonder what will happen with RISC OS 4 now. Will we be able to get
> it for Risc PC - at least? Will they continue developing it (for RPC) at
> all?
Or a RPC2 made by another company?
> > Oh well -- time will tell -- I think the people I feel sorriest for
> > (aside from the folks at Acorn) is Steve Turnbull, and the guys that have
> > just bought-out Acorn User...
>
> > [Unless the unspecified activities that he couldn't discuss, was the
> > /continuation/ of the Phoebe project...]
>
> And don't forget developers which already spent some money to develope for
> Phoebe (e.g. Aleph One)...
That is why I cannnot believe that Phoebe is just going to fade away.
If Acorn have a suitable design, surely they could license it to another
company for manufacture. It would seem a bit odd for the whole plan to
be scrapped just as soon as they managed to get the IOMD2 working.
Maybe I'm just clutching at straws, but I just cannot see how they could
give up completely. Maybe after a week we'll have some idea about the
future of RiscOS.
--
x^ ( ) _________ // Email: mailto:cr...@crok.demon.co.uk
< U O |_|_|_|_|_| O || WWW: http://www.crok.demon.co.uk
\, |/|\ _________ [ ]
. |/^\ . 2 . /__\
... Laddie, ya think ya might like ta ... rephrase that?
Tim Rowledge
<URL:mailto:mh12...@cr10m.staffs.ac.uk> wrote:
> In article <ant180157b49xn%n...@ross.skarpsey.demon.co.uk>,
> Ross Tierney <kra...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > I'm now looking for a *BETTER* friend.
>
> I'm looking at chaltech....
>
Also consider the Corel NetWinder <http://www.corelcomputer.com> which is a 275MHz SA, 32Mb ram, gig disc, ethernet, video in/out etc linux machine for $800 !
OK it won't run RiscOS but maybe somebody will finally get around to doing a ROS like window manager for X ? Enough people have claimed to be willing to try over the years....
tim
--
Why Dogs Hate WIn95:- 8) 'Cause dogs ain't GEEKS! Now, cats, on the other hand...
Tim Rowledge: rowl...@interval.com (w) +1 (650) 842-6110 (w)
t...@sumeru.stanford.edu (h) <http://sumeru.stanford.edu/tim>
Charles Duckworth
James Holtom <hol...@cs.bris.ac.uk> wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Sep 1998, Lee McGinty wrote:
>
> > Another restructuring announced this morning (information from
> > Bloomberg). Acorn are reducing their staff from 175 to 100,
> > concentrating on new products and cancelling Risc PC 2.
> o
>
> I couldn't quite believe this so I moseyed over to Bloomberg's UK site.
> (www.bloomberg.co.uk)
>
>
> http://quote.bloomberg.com/analytics/bquote.cgi?story_num=603780470&view=story&version=news.quote.uk.cfg
>
>
> There it is in black-and-white...
>
Haven't felt this bad since Blake's Seven finished!
Charles Duckworth
--
Prodese quam conspice
Stephen Burke
> Indeed. However the idea being floated of porting the RiscOS GUI and
> applications to Linux and producing ARM-based Linux machines running
> it seems to allow more scope for development.
Personally I don't see that being much use. Linux is a hacker's OS; those
Acorn users who like that sort of thing can move to Linux anyway, I don't
see a RISC OS-like GUI making much difference. Conversely, people who
use Acorn machines to use the applications aren't (IMO) going to want
something as complex as Linux; one of the advantages of RISC OS machines
has always been that you can basically turn them on and use them with
little prior knowledge, but Unix isn't like that.