RISC OS SW Show 2011
David R Lane
Is anyone who has been to today's show going to report what happened?
I haven't found anything on the newsgroups or IconBar, ROOL etc.
Is this a record of silence for a RISC OS Show? Or have Bill Gates'
mercenaries blown up the Webbington Hotel thus destroying
communications?
What about the Armini?
Dave Lane
--
And there was me thinking Armini was a fashion designer until R-Comp's
announcement.
Vince M Hudd
> Is anyone who has been to today's show going to report what happened?
http://www.riscository.com/?p=169
[...]
--
Vince M Hudd: http://misc.vinceh.com http://www.softrock.co.uk/info/vmh.html
Soft Rock Software: http://www.softrock.co.uk
Bristol RISC OS Users second meeting: http://www.riscository.com/?p=147
South West Show report: http://www.riscository.com/?p=169
glavallin
> David R Lane <D_L...@Lakeview.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > Is anyone who has been to today's show going to report what happened?
>
> http://www.riscository.com/?p=169
Around £600 inc vat, a bit over the top.Perhaps the Bik option would
be more feasable for me.
>
> [...]
>
> --
> Vince M Hudd:http://misc.vinceh.comhttp://www.softrock.co.uk/info/vmh.html
glavallin
> On Mar 5, 11:22 pm, Vince M Hudd <vin...@softrock.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > David R Lane <D_L...@Lakeview.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > > Is anyone who has been to today's show going to report what happened?
>
> >http://www.riscository.com/?p=169
>
> Around £600 inc vat, a bit over the top.Perhaps the Bik option would
> be more feasable for me.
>
Just noticed the Armini seems to be same as the Bik model. I'll just
have to look
for a cheaper option ( or stick to the Iyonix).
Steffen Huber
> On Mar 6, 2:33 am, glavallin<glaval...@freeuk.com> wrote:
>> On Mar 5, 11:22 pm, Vince M Hudd<vin...@softrock.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> David R Lane<D_L...@Lakeview.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>> Is anyone who has been to today's show going to report what happened?
>>
>>> http://www.riscository.com/?p=169
>>
>> Around £600 inc vat, a bit over the top.Perhaps the Bik option would
>> be more feasable for me.
>>
>
> Just noticed the Armini seems to be same as the Bik model. I'll just
> have to look for a cheaper option ( or stick to the Iyonix).
Just ask Detlef of a4com for a BIK price. A complete machine
(USB stick to boot from, large HD, DVD writer) should be
around 500 EUR incl. VAT, so certainly less than 450 UKP
incl. VAT.
Steffen
--
Steffen Huber - http://www.huber-net.de/
hubersn Software - http://www.hubersn-software.com/
Brian Bailey
> > Is anyone who has been to today's show going to report what happened?
> http://www.riscository.com/?p=169
About sums it up.
Clearly the ARMini needs more development and Andrew didn't hide that
fact. Also, certain features, not specifically stated what, depended on
others programing same. Most software that runs on the Iyonix will run on
it. Some programs would need recompiling.
What he did say was that he already had a complete set of mother
boards/chassis and was awaiting casings, it may have been the other way
round, can't remember which.
However, I thought that it was a very neat piece of kit, very 'Cool'.
What I saw was very desirable, for my purposes, and I wish him the best of
luck with this venture.
Patric
Brian Bailey <bba...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <mpro.lhly9m009...@softrock.co.uk>,
> Vince M Hudd <vin...@softrock.co.uk> wrote:
>> David R Lane <D_L...@Lakeview.demon.co.uk> wrote:
snip
> However, I thought that it was a very neat piece of kit, very 'Cool'.
> What I saw was very desirable, for my purposes, and I wish him the best of
> luck with this venture.
What's the difference between a4com's BIK and this "new" ARMini? They
look identical, both use the Beagleboard and presumably run the same
version of the OS, don't they?
Patric
Brian Bailey
Patric <pat...@invalid.com> wrote:
> In message <51af9334...@argonet.co.uk>
> Brian Bailey <bba...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
[snip]
> > However, I thought that it was a very neat piece of kit, very 'Cool'.
> > What I saw was very desirable, for my purposes, and I wish him the
> > best of luck with this venture.
> What's the difference between a4com's BIK and this "new" ARMini? They
> look identical, both use the Beagleboard and presumably run the same
> version of the OS, don't they?
RISC OS 5.00 (or something, but 5.00 was on the monitor) but customized
with 'bits' from RISCOS Ltd, as and when those 'bits' have been programed
and become available, is my understanding of what Andrew told me. But, he
was clearly unwilling/unable, at this stage, to go into detail and that's
understandable.
Steve Fryatt
<51afa8d8...@argonet.co.uk>:
> In article <e928a0a...@albutat.gmx.de>,
> Patric <pat...@invalid.com> wrote:
>
> > What's the difference between a4com's BIK and this "new" ARMini? They
> > look identical, both use the Beagleboard and presumably run the same
> > version of the OS, don't they?
>
> RISC OS 5.00 (or something, but 5.00 was on the monitor)
It will have to be 5.17 or it's non-test successor (odd numbered RO5 builds
are test versions; even numbered ones are stable releases), unless ROL
suddenly come out with a suitable version of RO6 that they've been sitting
on quietly for a while.
> but customized with 'bits' from RISCOS Ltd, as and when those 'bits' have
> been programed and become available, is my understanding of what Andrew
> told me.
So just like Select for the Iyonix, then...
--
Steve Fryatt - Leeds, England Wakefield Acorn & RISC OS Show
Saturday 16 April 2011
http://www.stevefryatt.org.uk/ http://www.wakefieldshow.org.uk/
Tim Hill
> > Is anyone who has been to today's show going to report what happened?
> http://www.riscository.com/?p=169
> [...]
That was an excellent and very helpful article for those of us near the
other end of the M4 corridor and with a keen sense of the price of
squirt. Thanks. (I was attending a compulsory security course anyway so
had not much choice really.)
Hmmm. New RISC OS 'Nettops' for 450 or 600 quid, or a windoze one (Acer
Aspire Revo recommended by Gadget Show 200) with emulation for ...? I
hope new hardware providers realise what they're up against!
That and I expect - given our history - that anyone asking for deposits
for new RISC OS hardware may only get them if they are going to be held
in trust and are fully refundable. :-/
Just one small thing: did you know that http://www.riscository.com/ CSS
seems to cause the page layout to easily be, um, not as the author
intended? I'm sure the left column isn't meant to be rendered in the
middle of the article and over/under it. The narrower the browser window,
the further to the right the left column is displayed. Only when the
browser window is maximised is it rendered correctly. Or so it seems.
I was thinking that a RISC OS web site and its 'only' browser - albeit
version 3.0(dev)r11922 - don't get on, you do begin to wonder ... but
then I tried Firefox 4.0b12 in the pee sea and the same 'undocumented
feature' shows up. Phew! ;-)
--
Tim Hill
...................................................
tjrh.eu
... "Love comforteth like sunshine after rain" Venus & Adonis
Chris Hughes
Steve Fryatt <ne...@stevefryatt.org.uk> wrote:
> On 6 Mar, Brian Bailey wrote in message
> <51afa8d8...@argonet.co.uk>:
>> In article <e928a0a...@albutat.gmx.de>,
>> Patric <pat...@invalid.com> wrote:
>>
>>> What's the difference between a4com's BIK and this "new" ARMini? They
>>> look identical, both use the Beagleboard and presumably run the same
>>> version of the OS, don't they?
>>
>> RISC OS 5.00 (or something, but 5.00 was on the monitor)
> It will have to be 5.17 or it's non-test successor (odd numbered RO5 builds
> are test versions; even numbered ones are stable releases), unless ROL
> suddenly come out with a suitable version of RO6 that they've been sitting
> on quietly for a while.
>> but customized with 'bits' from RISCOS Ltd, as and when those 'bits' have
>> been programed and become available, is my understanding of what Andrew
>> told me.
> So just like Select for the Iyonix, then...
If you read the item in Archive, you will note that ROOL and RISCOS
Ltd are involved in this project, with all the appropriate
"commercial" as against shared source licences being sorted out.
All the details seem to be a little sketchy at the moment probably
because some things still need to be finalised, but Wakefield show
might have some more news.
Bits of RO6 have worked with ROOL versions of the OS for awhile (but
not officially), the firewall being one example.
--
Chris Hughes
Wakefield RISC OS Computer Show - 16th April 2011
http://www.wakefieldshow.org.uk
Vince M Hudd
I believe the BiK is running RISC OS 5.17 - which is a test/development
version.
The intention is that ARMini, subject to all the 'i's being dotted and the
't's being drunk (with rich tea biscuits, obviously, to help fuel any
necessary development work) will have a suitable version of RISC OS 5**, but
with components on top of it from RISCOS Ltd. A bit like the Select for
Iyonix that has always been so desirable.
** Which could be 5.17 or, with all the dotting and drinking out of the way,
perhaps an 'official' release.
Brian Bailey
Chris Hughes <ne...@noonehere.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <mpro.lhmtkn01...@stevefryatt.org.uk>
> Steve Fryatt <ne...@stevefryatt.org.uk> wrote:
[snip]
> >>
> >>> What's the difference between a4com's BIK and this "new" ARMini? They
> >>> look identical, both use the Beagleboard and presumably run the same
> >>> version of the OS, don't they?
> >>
> >> RISC OS 5.00 (or something, but 5.00 was on the monitor)
> > It will have to be 5.17 or it's non-test successor (odd numbered RO5
> > builds are test versions; even numbered ones are stable releases),
> > unless ROL suddenly come out with a suitable version of RO6 that
> > they've been sitting on quietly for a while.
Replying to both Steve and Chris in one go.
I wouldn't attempt to argue about 5.17, however I do take your point, but
I am as sure as I can be that 5.00 was on the desktop as I had
specifically asked Andrew what OS he was running - maybe just a generic
icon, perhaps.
> >> but customized with 'bits' from RISCOS Ltd, as and when those 'bits'
> >> have been programed and become available, is my understanding of what
> >> Andrew told me.
> > So just like Select for the Iyonix, then...
I couldn't say but I was very much under the impression that it would only
be /selected/ bits. Open to correction, of course.
> If you read the item in Archive, you will note that ROOL and RISCOS
> Ltd are involved in this project, with all the appropriate
> "commercial" as against shared source licences being sorted out.
I had an unread copy of Archive in my sweaty paw at the time!
> All the details seem to be a little sketchy at the moment probably
> because some things still need to be finalised, but Wakefield show
> might have some more news.
That just about sums it up as portrayed by Andrew.
Vince M Hudd
> glavallin wrote:
> > Just noticed the Armini seems to be same as the Bik model. I'll just
> > have to look for a cheaper option ( or stick to the Iyonix).
> Just ask Detlef of a4com for a BIK price. A complete machine (USB stick to
> boot from, large HD, DVD writer) should be around 500 EUR incl. VAT, so
> certainly less than 450 UKP incl. VAT.
An important difference, though, is that if R-Comp are able to proceed as
planned, they will be paying at least *TWO* licence fees for the RISC OS
builds and components used.
This isn't going to be a machine where, some years down the line, massive
arguments flare up on usenet about how the operating system was or was not
legally licenced from one company and not the other. Andrew wants this all
done *properly* - and achieving that means additional costs.
As I said in the article, I think it would be quite a feat *given the
numbers they are likely to sell in the RISC OS market* if R-Comp *can* do it
for £500 inclusive and still turn a profit. £500 plus VAT strikes me as
being a not unreasonable price - which, let's not forget, isn't set in
stone: it could change.
--
Vince M Hudd: http://misc.vinceh.com http://www.softrock.co.uk/info/vmh.html
Doug Webb
Tim Hill <t...@invalid.org.uk> wrote:
[snip]
> Hmmm. New RISC OS 'Nettops' for 450 or 600 quid, or a windoze one (Acer
> Aspire Revo recommended by Gadget Show 200) with emulation for ...? I
> hope new hardware providers realise what they're up against!
Well it is horses for courses as they say. One is emulation and for
the purists not a "real" RISC OS/ARM machine and the other is and has
a niche market. Given that it seems this may well have ROOL's and
ROL's approval and combine bits of both lines of OS's then again that
may be another reason why it is a premium over the BIK or a DIY
Beagleboard setup.
Also it has been implied that the machine may come with some
pre-installed software so again this may add to the price.
I for one applaud Andrew and RComp for at least having a go at sorting
out the RISCOS minefield and at the same time expanding the choice
that RISC OS users have.
> That and I expect - given our history - that anyone asking for deposits
> for new RISC OS hardware may only get them if they are going to be held
> in trust and are fully refundable. :-/
Well if you fully read the article at http://www.riscository.com/ it
implies it is different as at least you will get the Beagleboard if
the full ARMini for what ever reason does not materialise and then you
can just do a DIY version. As usual best to contact RComp for the full
T&C's before purchasing.
Doug
--
Using an IYONIX pc and RISC OS 5.16, the thinking person's alternative
operating system to Microsoft Windows.
Vince M Hudd
> Hmmm. New RISC OS 'Nettops' for 450 or 600 quid, or a windoze one (Acer
> Aspire Revo recommended by Gadget Show 200) with emulation for ...? I hope
> new hardware providers realise what they're up against!
There are those of us who just don't like the emulation route - which Andrew
specifically mentioned in his press release, which you should be now have
read on comp.sys.acorn.announce (or the previous item on riscository.com).
I am one of those people. I migrated from a RiscPC to VRPCSASETLAETC because
I was always using the laptop and I have always had desk space problems. It
seemed like a good idea at the time - but in truth, while the emulator was**
useful, I just didn't like it so I migrated to an Iyonix fairly soon after.
> That and I expect - given our history - that anyone asking for deposits
> for new RISC OS hardware may only get them if they are going to be held in
> trust and are fully refundable. :-/
This was explained in the article: the deposits are tied to hardware, such
that those who paid the deposit will still get something if the project
doesn't come to fruition. Given the time and effort that seems to have gone
into it, should it come to that the only real loser will be R-Comp.
> Just one small thing: did you know that http://www.riscository.com/ CSS
> seems to cause the page layout to easily be, um, not as the author
> intended? I'm sure the left column isn't meant to be rendered in the
> middle of the article and over/under it. The narrower the browser window,
> the further to the right the left column is displayed. Only when the
> browser window is maximised is it rendered correctly. Or so it seems.
When I first set it up, it looked fine - including on NetSurf. When I just
looked, it also appeared to be fine until I downloaded the latest build
(mine was over a year old), and now I see what you mean. Hmm.
It seems that the narrower the window is than the sum total of the three
minimum widths of the three columns, the further offset from the left that
column actually is. (And yes, this isn't limited to NetSurf, so it's not a
problem with that. It also occurs in both Firefox, Safari and MSIE.)
The site is running a very simple Wordpress theme, with almost no tweaking
on my part (except the colours). Both misc.vinceh.com and posts.softrock.com
are running the same theme, and my intention was to leave them as they are
- because being such a simple theme, what could possibly go wrong? =:o -
until I'd redesign softrock.co.uk, and then I'd modify them to make them as
similar as possible. I've been sitting on the unfinished redesign of
softrock.co.uk for over two years now. :|
I'll have a little play with the settings today - or perhaps experiment with
a couple of alternative themes.
Dr Peter Young
> In message <51afb1...@invalid.org.uk>
> Tim Hill <t...@invalid.org.uk> wrote:
> [snip]
>> Hmmm. New RISC OS 'Nettops' for 450 or 600 quid, or a windoze one (Acer
>> Aspire Revo recommended by Gadget Show 200) with emulation for ...? I
>> hope new hardware providers realise what they're up against!
> Well it is horses for courses as they say. One is emulation and for
> the purists not a "real" RISC OS/ARM machine and the other is and has
> a niche market. Given that it seems this may well have ROOL's and
> ROL's approval and combine bits of both lines of OS's then again that
> may be another reason why it is a premium over the BIK or a DIY
> Beagleboard setup.
> Also it has been implied that the machine may come with some
> pre-installed software so again this may add to the price.
If the supplied software is similar to that which RComp put on my
RISCBookMini, it's all free.
With best wishes,
Peter.
--
Peter \ / zfc Lu \ Prestbury, Cheltenham, Glos. GL52
and \/ __ __ \ England.
family / / \ | | |\ | / _ \ http://pnyoung.orpheusweb.co.uk
/ \__/ \_/ | \| \__/ \______________ pny...@ormail.co.uk
Dave Symes
Dr Peter Young <pny...@ormail.co.uk> wrote:
[Snippy]
> If the supplied software is similar to that which RComp put on my
> RISCBookMini, it's all free.
> With best wishes,
> Peter.
Missed an opportunity for a bit 'o humour there Peter...
<John Inman mode>
it's all free, it's all free...
<End>
Dave
--
Dave Triffid
Dr Alan Leighton
Dr Peter Young <pny...@ormail.co.uk> wrote:
> On 6 Mar 2011 Doug Webb <doug....@btinternet.com> wrote:
>> In message <51afb1...@invalid.org.uk>
>> Tim Hill <t...@invalid.org.uk> wrote:
>> [snip]
>>> Hmmm. New RISC OS 'Nettops' for 450 or 600 quid, or a windoze one (Acer
>>> Aspire Revo recommended by Gadget Show 200) with emulation for ...? I
>>> hope new hardware providers realise what they're up against!
>> Well it is horses for courses as they say. One is emulation and for
>> the purists not a "real" RISC OS/ARM machine and the other is and has
>> a niche market. Given that it seems this may well have ROOL's and
>> ROL's approval and combine bits of both lines of OS's then again that
>> may be another reason why it is a premium over the BIK or a DIY
>> Beagleboard setup.
>> Also it has been implied that the machine may come with some
>> pre-installed software so again this may add to the price.
> If the supplied software is similar to that which RComp put on my
> RISCBookMini, it's all free.
And with my Rcomp cube. What a blessings this computer is to me,
Alan
--
glavallin
Chris Hughes <ne...@noonehere.co.uk> wrote:
At least with Select users had the choice , subscribe or not. Personaly
I wouldn't want any of RISCOS Ltd's offerings.
--
Geoff
Steve Fryatt
<c255c6af5...@pnyoung.ormail.co.uk>:
> On 6 Mar 2011 Doug Webb <doug....@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
> > Also it has been implied that the machine may come with some
> > pre-installed software so again this may add to the price.
>
> If the supplied software is similar to that which RComp put on my
> RISCBookMini, it's all free.
Free in the sense of Free Software, or free as in you didn't pay for it
(explicitly)? If the latter, then it's a fair assumption that you /did/ pay
for it, wrapped up in the overall cost of the machine.
Alexander Ausserstorfer
<242fa699-c588-4026...@t13g2000vbo.googlegroups.com>
glavallin <glav...@freeuk.com>
hat geschrieben:
[novel snipped]
> > > > Is anyone who has been to today's show going to report what happened?
> >
> > >http://www.riscository.com/?p=169
> >
> > Around £600 inc vat, a bit over the top.Perhaps the Bik option would
> > be more feasable for me.
> >
>
> Just noticed the Armini seems to be same as the Bik model.
I fear that it has the same problems, too. The Beagle-board doesn't seem
to me to fit generally into such a case. That is why you have to plug
cables between board and case. I don't like that idea.
Why is the Beagle board made of so a strange size that it doesn't fit
into a standard case or hut, does someone know?
A.
--
Alexander Ausserstorfer, Bavaria
http://home.chiemgau-net.de/ausserstorfer/
Dr Peter Young
> On 6 Mar, Dr Peter Young wrote in message
> <c255c6af5...@pnyoung.ormail.co.uk>:
>> On 6 Mar 2011 Doug Webb <doug....@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Also it has been implied that the machine may come with some
>>> pre-installed software so again this may add to the price.
>>
>> If the supplied software is similar to that which RComp put on my
>> RISCBookMini, it's all free.
> Free in the sense of Free Software, or free as in you didn't pay for it
> (explicitly)? If the latter, then it's a fair assumption that you /did/ pay
> for it, wrapped up in the overall cost of the machine.
Free, as in, for instance, NetSurf (for which continuing great
thanks).
charles
Alexander Ausserstorfer <bavari...@chiemgau-net.de> wrote:
> In der Nachricht
> <242fa699-c588-4026...@t13g2000vbo.googlegroups.com>
> glavallin <glav...@freeuk.com>
> hat geschrieben:
> [novel snipped]
> > > > > Is anyone who has been to today's show going to report what
> > > > > happened?
> > >
> > > >http://www.riscository.com/?p=169
> > >
> > > Around £600 inc vat, a bit over the top.Perhaps the Bik option would
> > > be more feasable for me.
> > >
> >
> > Just noticed the Armini seems to be same as the Bik model.
> I fear that it has the same problems, too. The Beagle-board doesn't seem
> to me to fit generally into such a case. That is why you have to plug
> cables between board and case. I don't like that idea.
it's very common to have cable connecting a board and case - unless, of
course you design a special case and have all the on board connectors of
the type that will be accessable from the outside. My Iyonix has cable to
the USB front sockest and the mains switch - as well as to the various
drives (floppy, CD and hard)
> Why is the Beagle board made of so a strange size that it doesn't fit
> into a standard case or hut, does someone know?
What's a "standard case"?
> A.
--
From KT24
Using a RISC OS computer running v5.16
Folderol
Very good points. it should also be remembered that the beagle board is
actually described as a *development* board.
--
Will J G
Kevin Wells
Folderol <fold...@ukfsn.org> wrote:
>>
>> What's a "standard case"?
>>
>> > A.
>>
>
>Very good points. it should also be remembered that the beagle board is
>actually described as a *development* board.
>
Looking at the photo of the new Rcomp computer, it looks like it has a
CD or DVD drive and floppy drive as well.
Two USB ports at the front, speaker and microphone sockets, SD etc slots
plus a RISC OS license sticker.
<http://www.riscository.com/2011/south-west-show-2011-that-was-today-that-was/>
--
Kev Wells http://riscos.kevsoft.co.uk/
http://kevsoft.co.uk/ http://kevsoft.co.uk/AleQuest/
ICQ 238580561
MP Info http://kevsoft.co.uk/mp/result.php
Thomas Milius
"Alexander Ausserstorfer" <bavari...@chiemgau-net.de> wrote:
>
> I fear that it has the same problems, too. The Beagle-board doesn't seem
> to me to fit generally into such a case. That is why you have to plug
> cables between board and case. I don't like that idea.
I think you are seeing the BIK a bit to simple. AFAIR Detlef Tielsch and Raik
Fischer replaced the rear metal part of the case by an own one. So the BB xM
fits much better into the case as it usually would do. So in theory only
RS232, sound (sometimes individually wired in the Iyonix), the power supply
adapter and the HDMI needs to be connected by wires.
However you should renember that the BIK (and I assume the ARMini also)
offers the ability to drive some more USB devices. AFAIR internally an USB
Stick may be fitted and a DVDWriter (?) is available. And so there is much
more internal wiring as required by a minimal solution but of course these
are useful additions.
In case of fitting the wirings internally in the right way you won't face too
much problems. However due to the fact that the BIK is sush a light weight on
transports some persons seems to test how far it can be thrown. Compared to a
classical PC it is likely that the board will survive such "tests" without
any damage of its components but yes some cables may have to be reconnected.
For I am not owning a BIK I can't say whether the connections are marked
internally but because you can distinguish USB connectors and HDMI ones very
easily I think sorting out troubles should be much simpler than finding the
right position for the Iyonix reset button on the connector.
>
> Why is the Beagle board made of so a strange size that it doesn't fit
> into a standard case or hut, does someone know?
It is a development board. Why it should be bigger? Bigger size would only
increase the cost of manfacturing without offering any benefit. As it is it
offers maximum flexibilty to be mixed with other electronic compoments in
various devices. It provides its own busses and they are very powerful and
flexible.
There are two cases especally designed for the BB xM you can buy. One made of
metal and one made of transparent plastic. I personally would prefer the
metal one because of the better cooling. I personally made my own case out of
stainless steel. Not perfect but very useable. I wasn't too complicated and
took me one afternoon. However I am not using a CDDrive (if I would need one
I would share that of my Iyonix) but using an NAS. I think that programs in
future will be more and more delivered on USB Sticks/SD-Cards.
Best Regards
Thomas Milius
Vince M Hudd
[...]
> Looking at the photo of the new Rcomp computer, it looks like it has a CD
> or DVD drive and floppy drive as well.
It might look like it, but it doesn't have either. That's just a feature of
the case they've used. Andrew was quick to point out that it "has no moving
parts".
--
Vince M Hudd: http://misc.vinceh.com http://www.softrock.co.uk/info/vmh.html
Holger Palmroth
"Alexander Ausserstorfer" <bavari...@chiemgau-net.de> wrote:
> I fear that it has the same problems, too. The Beagle-board doesn't seem
> to me to fit generally into such a case. That is why you have to plug
> cables between board and case. I don't like that idea.
The alternative is having the cables sprawled all over your desk. This have a
certain "1980's homecomputer" retro style, but even my love for retro
computers has it's limits. ;)
>
> Why is the Beagle board made of so a strange size that it doesn't fit
> into a standard case or hut, does someone know?
As the BeagleBoard was never meant as a desktop computer, the developers
didn't choose a standard form factor like micro ATX.
Holger Palmroth
glavallin <glav...@gjlavallin.plus.com> wrote:
> >
> At least with Select users had the choice , subscribe or not. Personaly
> I wouldn't want any of RISCOS Ltd's offerings.
Oh, at least one function I envy a bit right now. Select has some
functionality to stop your icons to be changed. Doggysoft's AddSprites
module, which does roughly the same, is 26 bit only. At the moment i have to
replace the icon sprites manually in some application to keep my desktop
consistent.
Steve Fryatt
<8fae72b051%h.pal...@cne.de>:
> Oh, at least one function I envy a bit right now. Select has some
> functionality to stop your icons to be changed. Doggysoft's AddSprites
> module, which does roughly the same, is 26 bit only. At the moment i have
> to replace the icon sprites manually in some application to keep my
> desktop consistent.
I'm not at the Iyonix just now, but I'm sure that RISC OS 5 has this
functionality too: it was implemented to protect the Iyonix "look".
Martin Wuerthner
Steve Fryatt <ne...@stevefryatt.org.uk> wrote:
> On 7 Mar, Holger Palmroth wrote in message
> <8fae72b051%h.pal...@cne.de>:
>> Oh, at least one function I envy a bit right now. Select has some
>> functionality to stop your icons to be changed. Doggysoft's AddSprites
>> module, which does roughly the same, is 26 bit only. At the moment i have
>> to replace the icon sprites manually in some application to keep my
>> desktop consistent.
> I'm not at the Iyonix just now, but I'm sure that RISC OS 5 has this
> functionality too: it was implemented to protect the Iyonix "look".
"Protect built in icons" in the Windows panel of !Configure.
--
Martin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Martin Wuerthner MW Software http://www.mw-software.com/
RISC OS Software for Design, Printing and Publishing
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Holger Palmroth
Martin Wuerthner <spam...@mw-software.com> wrote:
> In message <mpro.lhpnvm00...@stevefryatt.org.uk>
> Steve Fryatt <ne...@stevefryatt.org.uk> wrote:
>
> > On 7 Mar, Holger Palmroth wrote in message
> > <8fae72b051%h.pal...@cne.de>:
>
> >> Oh, at least one function I envy a bit right now. Select has some
> >> functionality to stop your icons to be changed. Doggysoft's AddSprites
> >> module, which does roughly the same, is 26 bit only. At the moment i have
> >> to replace the icon sprites manually in some application to keep my
> >> desktop consistent.
>
> > I'm not at the Iyonix just now, but I'm sure that RISC OS 5 has this
> > functionality too: it was implemented to protect the Iyonix "look".
>
> "Protect built in icons" in the Windows panel of !Configure.
>
Trouble is, it's a custom icon set, so it just make it worse. Short of
creating a custom rom image ,for which I completly lack the knowledge, this
option doesn't solve my problem. Thanks for the pointer, anyway.
John Williams (News)
Holger Palmroth <h.pal...@gmx.de> wrote:
> Trouble is, it's a custom icon set, so it just make it worse. Short of
> creating a custom rom image ,for which I completly lack the knowledge,
> this option doesn't solve my problem. Thanks for the pointer, anyway.
I have a /very/ simple little homebrew app which uses the IconSprites
command to load a spritefile containing my own alternatives to certain
sprites.
This replaces those in any 'rom' version (quotes because of the way the
Iyonix works).
I don't, but I could put this in Tasks to make it work automagically at
start-up, or in Apps with a boot file which runs it.
This latter is preferable as one can more easily rerun it if some app
subsequently overwrites your preferred icons - just go to Apps and there it
is - just double-click!
Preferred e-mail in sig.
John
--
John Williams, Brittany, Northern France - no attachments to these addresses!
Non-RISC OS posters change user to johnrwilliams or put 'risc' in subject!
Who is John Williams? http://petit.four.free.fr/picindex/author/ Somewhere nice to stay in Brittany? http://petit.four.free.fr/visitors/locate
Kevin Wells
Vince M Hudd <vin...@softrock.co.uk> wrote:
>Kevin Wells <kevin...@talktalk.net> wrote:
>
>[...]
>
>> Looking at the photo of the new Rcomp computer, it looks like it has a CD
>> or DVD drive and floppy drive as well.
>
>It might look like it, but it doesn't have either. That's just a feature of
>the case they've used. Andrew was quick to point out that it "has no moving
>parts".
>
OK, do you know what that blue thing is in the photo?
--
Kev Wells http://riscos.kevsoft.co.uk/
http://kevsoft.co.uk/ http://kevsoft.co.uk/AleQuest/
ICQ 238580561
http://worldticketshop.cleafs.com/go?k=TWKNy827tFspChxaFRbKe-OqVi3uXIyc MotoGP
Holger Palmroth
Kevin Wells <kevin...@talktalk.net> wrote:
>
> OK, do you know what that blue thing is in the photo?
It just shows that your BIK or ARMini is switched on, just like the subtle
green power LED of a RISC PC.
Just less subtle.
And blue.
Steve Fryatt
<1d5ab5b051%h.pal...@cne.de>:
The protected sprites on RISC OS 5 aren't in ROM, as they're too big:
they're loaded from disc during boot before the protection turns on. If you
(backup and) replace the relevant file, presumably your own sprites will be
protected instead?
Again, I'm not at the machine, but the file is in !Boot and IIRC isn't too
hard to find.
Xavier
Was Sophie Wilson's presentation recorded ?
I'd be happy to hear what she said about the development of the
Archies.
Thanks.
trevj
> Was Sophie Wilson's presentation recorded ?
Yes it was. WAUG/RISCOS Ltd had a video camera set up, and the people
speaking had mikes.
I asked Paul Middleton after the show if he intended to make the
videos available. He said yes, but it'll depend on the quality of
them. So, that's a possible question to put to RISCOS Ltd at the
Wakefield show, if nothing's available before then!
Jess
> At least with Select users had the choice , subscribe or not. Personaly
> I wouldn't want any of RISCOS Ltd's offerings.
ROL's offerings are very good, the issues were that they didn't come
often enough for the cost of the subscription, and they were also
pretty much Risc PC/A7000 only.
If RComp has managed to to work out an arrangement to allow bits of it
to be sold with RO 5 on a new machine, that would be excellent.
(And even more excellent if the bits were able to be bought for
existing RO5 systems)
--
Jess Iyonix
Jess
charles <cha...@charleshope.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> Why is the Beagle board made of so a strange size that it doesn't fit
>> into a standard case or hut, does someone know?
> What's a "standard case"?
ATX, or one of the smaller variants.
--
Jess Iyonix
glavallin
Jess <phant...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Even so I would have preffered the choice. The O.S. is essentially a
development 5.17 or an unproven 5.18 release so the fewer the unnecessary
complications the better.
--
Geoff
trevj
> Even so I would have preffered the choice. The O.S. is essentially a
> development 5.17 or an unproven 5.18 release so the fewer the unnecessary
> complications the better.
Perhaps R-Comp could optionally sell the hardware alone (at a reduced
price), and leave the user to download and install the non-custom-
built ROOL ROM.
John Williams (News)
<eb18f6af-501f-4d3b...@dn9g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,
trevj <tr...@cwazy.co.uk> wrote:
> Perhaps R-Comp could optionally sell the hardware alone (at a reduced
> price), and leave the user to download and install the non-custom-
> built ROOL ROM.
As RComp is not a charity, I rather doubt this.
Unless there was sufficient demand for this option to significantly affect
their order quantities to secure a significantly better deal.
I still rather doubt this!
Martin Wuerthner
glavallin <glav...@gjlavallin.plus.com> wrote:
> In message <3ffcfeb...@itworkshop.invalid>
> Jess <phant...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> In message <d644e8af51...@gjlavallin.plus.com>
>> glavallin <glav...@gjlavallin.plus.com> wrote:
>>
>>> At least with Select users had the choice , subscribe or not. Personaly
>>> I wouldn't want any of RISCOS Ltd's offerings.
>>
>> ROL's offerings are very good, the issues were that they didn't come
>> often enough for the cost of the subscription, and they were also
>> pretty much Risc PC/A7000 only.
>>
>> If RComp has managed to to work out an arrangement to allow bits of it
>> to be sold with RO 5 on a new machine, that would be excellent.
I have not see any announcement that would hint at such a possibility,
so I take it you are just speculating wildly here? The OS shown at the
SW Show was a fairly standard BeagleBoard build of the ROOL sources.
>> (And even more excellent if the bits were able to be bought for
>> existing RO5 systems)
>>
> Even so I would have preffered the choice. The O.S. is essentially a
> development 5.17 or an unproven 5.18 release so the fewer the unnecessary
> complications the better.
If you think about it, surely the company that introduces a new
machine to the market must be even more anxious to avoid any
unnecessary complications?
Brian Bailey
Martin Wuerthner <spam...@mw-software.com> wrote:
[snip]
> >>
> >>> At least with Select users had the choice , subscribe or not.
> >>> Personaly I wouldn't want any of RISCOS Ltd's offerings.
> >>
> >> ROL's offerings are very good, the issues were that they didn't come
> >> often enough for the cost of the subscription, and they were also
> >> pretty much Risc PC/A7000 only.
> >>
> >> If RComp has managed to to work out an arrangement to allow bits of it
> >> to be sold with RO 5 on a new machine, that would be excellent.
> I have not see any announcement that would hint at such a possibility,
> so I take it you are just speculating wildly here?
I don't think that's wild speculation, Martin. I am pretty sure that that
was what Andrew told me at the show, but he was being cautious about what
that might mean in practice ie there was some distance to go and was
giving nothing away re announcements.
> The OS shown at the SW Show was a fairly standard BeagleBoard build of
> the ROOL sources.
As I understood it, too.
> >> (And even more excellent if the bits were able to be bought for
> >> existing RO5 systems)
[snip]
trevj
wrote:
> In article
> <eb18f6af-501f-4d3b-a273-c4da9bdc8...@dn9g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,
> trevj <tr...@cwazy.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > Perhaps R-Comp could optionally sell the hardware alone (at a reduced
> > price), and leave the user to download and install the non-custom-
> > built ROOL ROM.
>
> As RComp is not a charity, I rather doubt this.
Of course it's not a charity. It was just a suggestion made because
glavallin didn't seem to want any potential extra ROL bells and
whistles.
> Unless there was sufficient demand for this option to significantly affect
> their order quantities to secure a significantly better deal.
>
> I still rather doubt this!
You're probably right. And I expect that most of their potential
customers would rather have the OS pre-installed. But note that - for
the moment - installing a ROM image upgrade will presumably
necessitate opening the machine up.
Jess
Martin Wuerthner <spam...@mw-software.com> wrote:
>>> If RComp has managed to to work out an arrangement to allow bits of it
>>> to be sold with RO 5 on a new machine, that would be excellent.
> I have not see any announcement that would hint at such a possibility,
> so I take it you are just speculating wildly here? The OS shown at the
> SW Show was a fairly standard BeagleBoard build of the ROOL sources.
No, this was a comment on what I have read. Of course that might be
someone else's speculation, or me reading too much into it.
--
Jess Iyonix
Doug Webb
ps.com>
trevj <tr...@cwazy.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> As RComp is not a charity, I rather doubt this.
> Of course it's not a charity. It was just a suggestion made because
> glavallin didn't seem to want any potential extra ROL bells and
> whistles.
So "glavallin" already has this option if they buy a BIK or do a DIY
Beagleboard so I can't see an issue in that they have that choice
today.
RComp will sell their machine in the way that makes them money and
satisfies the highest number of customers.
--
Using an IYONIX pc and RISC OS 5.16, the thinking person's alternative
operating system to Microsoft Windows.
Ste (news)
glavallin <glav...@gjlavallin.plus.com> wrote:
> Even so I would have preffered the choice. The O.S. is essentially a
> development 5.17 or an unproven 5.18 release so the fewer the unnecessary
> complications the better.
Can I just stop you there? The point of even-numbered RISC OS releases is
that they are considered "stable".
We _could_ just take the current 5.17 and call it 5.18 to freeze it as the
latest "stable" revision if we felt sufficiently happy with it's present
state. Or, we could do a whole bunch of quality assurance testing on 5.17,
fold the bugfixes in and _then_ call it 5.18.
Either way, at that moment we freeze 5.18, we create a further release of
the source tree called 5.19 to which everyone can keep contributing. Being
odd numbered, that becomes the current "development" version.
So there's simply no room in this scheme for an even-numbered RISC OS build
to be in any way "unproven". Or at least, that's the intention.
Ta,
Steve
--
Steve Revill @ Home
Note: All opinions expressed herein are my own.
trevj
Brian Bailey
<95685321-487c-4043...@r17g2000vbc.googlegroups.com>,
Odd that. It said 5.00 when I saw it, but then Andrew was experiencing
some kind of a momentary hitch using a USB stick before lighting the blue
touch paper.
Tim Hill
<vin...@softrock.co.uk> wrote:
> This was explained in the article: the deposits are tied to hardware,
> such that those who paid the deposit will still get something if the
> project doesn't come to fruition. Given the time and effort that seems
> to have gone into it, should it come to that the only real loser will
> be R-Comp.
Not whether that relates to the Consumer Protection legislation and the
bit about mail order purchases having to be fulfilled within 28 days or a
full refund given. :-/
That was in part thanks to Clive Sinclair and his ZX81.
If we imagine for a moment a scenario where, for whatever reason, a piece
of hardware fails to work reliably and the project is shelved (a) I am
not sure being presented with a useless bit of hardware is much good or
(b) whether any liquidator is bound to honour such a 'deposit against
hardware' scheme or whether the usual rules apply and any cash will be
used to pay off creditors and any stocks resold for the same reason.
Long story short: once bitten by a RISC OS pay-upfront scheme ... however
well meaning ...
Tim Hill
<pny...@ormail.co.uk> wrote:
> On 6 Mar 2011 Steve Fryatt <ne...@stevefryatt.org.uk> wrote:
> > On 6 Mar, Dr Peter Young wrote in message
> > <c255c6af5...@pnyoung.ormail.co.uk>:
> >> On 6 Mar 2011 Doug Webb <doug....@btinternet.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Also it has been implied that the machine may come with some
> >>> pre-installed software so again this may add to the price.
> >>
> >> If the supplied software is similar to that which RComp put on my
> >> RISCBookMini, it's all free.
> > Free in the sense of Free Software, or free as in you didn't pay for
> > it (explicitly)? If the latter, then it's a fair assumption that you
> > /did/ pay for it, wrapped up in the overall cost of the machine.
> Free, as in, for instance, NetSurf (for which continuing great thanks).
I am sorry but we cannot justify the premium price of any hardware which
includes software which is otherwise freely available. Maybe a tenner for
the trouble of installing it for you but we are looking at a price
differential rather larger. They may even be in breach of licences by
charging a premium for some otherwise free software!
At least the Iyonix came with premium software such as Fireworkz32 on
board. Maybe some of the margin cost of ARMini goes towards RISCOS Ltd's
stuff which, as a 5.16 user, I have to wonder what essential feature is
provided from the 6.0 branch users couldn't do without!
Having said that, the sooner the two divergent OSes merge, probably the
better. YMMV.
--
Support TFT and share in cheaper ethical telecoms: http://tjrh.eu/phone
Genuine & spam-proof addresses for Usenet: http://www.invalid.org.uk/
Email address for replies: substitute postmaster@ for tim@
... "Do thy worst old Time; despite thy wrong, my love shall in my verse ever live young" Sonnet 19
Grahame Parish
Tim Hill <t...@invalid.org.uk> wrote:
Exactly why is the BeagleBoard a piece of useless hardware? I'm
typing this email on mine while the Iyonix is off sick. I've got
NetFetch, Messenger and NetSurf all running without hitch, accessing
my Windows Server via RDPClient, playing FLAC audio files in
DigitalCD... All for an outlay of less than £200 including USB hard
disc.
--
Grahame Parish
maillistDOTparishATmillersHYPHENwayDOTnet
Aylesbury, Bucks. HP19 (UK)
Brian Bailey
David Pitt <ne...@pittdj.co.uk> wrote:
> 2001.06Brian Bailey <bba...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> Like this??
> http://www.a4com.de/riscos/46auto/Medium/P9271641.JIG
Probably, it was on and off the screen so fast that I didn't see the small
print.
Thanks!
Tim Hill
<spam...@millers-way.net> wrote:
> In message <51b2c4...@invalid.org.uk> Tim Hill <t...@invalid.org.uk>
> wrote:
[Snip]
> > If we imagine for a moment a scenario
[Snip]
> Exactly why is the BeagleBoard a piece of useless hardware?
Whoa there Tiger! Please read the bit which says: "imagine for a moment".
Not everything ever written is literal. That was to ILLUSTRATE firms and
their wish to adjust both Consumer Law and the Law relating to winding-up
as they see fit. (They can't.)
Potential buyers of RISC OS systems have been let down before by promises
which couldn't be kept, not to mention the odd other bits of RISC OS
vapourware such as laptops or the non appearance of paper publications or
software schemes having neither the depth, breadth, granularity or
frequency of delivery as anticipated.
I am absolutely certain that everybody involved in ARMini has every
intention of delivering everything they promise, and given (almost all
of) the track records involved I am sure this can be achieved. However
sometimes unexpected things happen to thwart plans. Sometimes a
godzilla-level event will intervene. Ask those poor Japanese.
> I'm typing this email on mine while the Iyonix is off sick. I've got
> NetFetch, Messenger and NetSurf all running without hitch, accessing my
> Windows Server via RDPClient, playing FLAC audio files in DigitalCD...
> All for an outlay of less than £200 including USB hard disc.
You have illustrated my gist well. BB £200 and it works. ARMini £500 and
we don't know yet. To put it bluntly that looks like £300 for bundled
software, a warranty, a box, assembly and postage.
Or maybe there are two BBs in the box, working in parallel. :-o
<author wear="asbestos jacket" action="run and hide" />
--
Tim Hill
...................................................
tjrh.eu
... "Sleep dwell upon thy eyes, peace in thy breast" Rom & Jul, Act ii, Sc.2
Grahame Parish
Tim Hill <t...@invalid.org.uk> wrote:
> [Snip]
> [Snip]
The point being that the piece of hardware that you buy into by paying
your £150 deposit IS the BeagleBoard so you aren't running the risk of
not having anything for your money if the project fails - it's still a
viable purchase that is faster than any previous ARM powered option
for RISC OS.
Steve Fryatt
Tim Hill
<spam...@millers-way.net> wrote:
[Snip]
> The point being that the piece of hardware that you buy into by paying
> your �150 deposit IS the BeagleBoard so you aren't running the risk of
> not having anything for your money if the project fails - it's still a
> viable purchase that is faster than any previous ARM powered option
> for RISC OS.
<facepalm /> I know <weeps /> that's why I wrote "If we imagine for a
moment". Is that an echo?
IMAGINE: they buy a duff batch of BBs and the manufacturer goes belly-up.
Or "unscrupulous supplier takes deposits and buys Porche" instead.
Every time you buy anything you are ALWAYS running the risk of ending up
with nothing. For the reasons I think I explained. The good intentions of
a supplier can be outweighed by the actions of a theif, an idiot, a
liquidator, or action taken under the Distance Selling Regulations. How
is title to the hardware in such as scheme as this to be vested in a
depositor from day one?
As always "caveat emptor" which today means "always pay with a credit
card or VISA debit". ;-)
--
Tim Hill
...................................................
tjrh.eu
... "When to the sessions of sweet silent thought I summon up remembrance of things past, I sigh the lack of many a thing I sought" Sonnet 30
Brian Bailey
Steve Fryatt <ne...@stevefryatt.org.uk> wrote:
> On 12 Mar, Brian Bailey wrote in message
> <51b2c8a6...@argonet.co.uk>:
> > In article <mpro.lhxxmn00...@pittdj.co.uk>, David Pitt
> > <ne...@pittdj.co.uk> wrote:
> > > 2001.06Brian Bailey <bba...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > > > Odd that. It said 5.00 when I saw it, but then Andrew was
> > > > experiencing some kind of a momentary hitch using a USB stick
> > > > before lighting the blue touch paper.
> >
> > > Like this??
> >
> > > http://www.a4com.de/riscos/46auto/Medium/P9271641.JIG
> >
> > Probably, it was on and off the screen so fast that I didn't see the
> > small print.
> So not "5.00" after all.
Well, it was, I suppose, very small values of 'O'. 8-)
5 = 5.00 doesn't it? I can't remember.
druck
> As always "caveat emptor" which today means "always pay with a credit
> card or VISA debit". ;-)
Watch out though, you only have 120 days from the date of purchase to
initiate a charge back, according to section 75 of the consumer credit
act. If they keep stringing you out longer than this, before you realise
you are never going to get anything, your credit card company may
decline to peruse it.
I was stupid enough many years ago to put down a deposit for the
RiscStation portable, and it about 18 months before we found it it was
no better than a scam - rather than the claimed technical and
manufacturing issues, they hadn't even started on the ARM hardware. By
this time the CC company wasn't interested, so when Roy claimed
RiscStation were broke and couldn't pay anything back, I had to threaten
a winding up order against his PC reseller business to get my money back.
Never pay for anything until you can take it away in your hands on the
day, doubly so for hardware and triply so for software.
---druck
charles
druck <ne...@druck.org.uk> wrote:
> On 12/03/2011 15:56, Tim Hill wrote:
> > As always "caveat emptor" which today means "always pay with a credit
> > card or VISA debit". ;-)
> Watch out though, you only have 120 days from the date of purchase to
> initiate a charge back, according to section 75 of the consumer credit
> act. If they keep stringing you out longer than this, before you realise
> you are never going to get anything, your credit card company may
> decline to peruse it.
> I was stupid enough many years ago to put down a deposit for the
> RiscStation portable, and it about 18 months before we found it it was
> no better than a scam - rather than the claimed technical and
> manufacturing issues, they hadn't even started on the ARM hardware. By
> this time the CC company wasn't interested, so when Roy claimed
> RiscStation were broke and couldn't pay anything back, I had to threaten
> a winding up order against his PC reseller business to get my money back.
I simply contacted my credit card company and the money reappeared in my
account
--
From KT24
Using a RISC OS computer running v5.16
Tim Hill
<cha...@charleshope.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <ilh26c$9ha$1...@news.eternal-september.org>, druck
> <ne...@druck.org.uk> wrote:
> > On 12/03/2011 15:56, Tim Hill wrote:
> > > As always "caveat emptor" which today means "always pay with a
> > > credit card or VISA debit". ;-)
[Snip]
> > I was stupid enough many years ago to put down a deposit for the
> > RiscStation portable, and it about 18 months before we found it it
> > was no better than a scam
[Snip]
> I simply contacted my credit card company and the money reappeared in
> my account
How long after the event was that?
Tim Hill
> > As always "caveat emptor" which today means "always pay with a credit
> > card or VISA debit". ;-)
> Watch out though, you only have 120 days from the date of purchase to
> initiate a charge back, according to section 75 of the consumer credit
> act. If they keep stringing you out longer than this, before you
> realise you are never going to get anything, your credit card company
> may decline to peruse it.
If anyone gets strung out longer that (many companies seem to think six
months is the limit) you have to understand the company and the rest of
the world may label you as a mug. Distance selling regulations say that
goods have to be supplied within 28 days or you are entitled to a full
refund. Last time I paid for something online (a new chair) which never
materialised - lots of promises did - I was onto the Credit Card company
after 31 days. I no longer am prepared to be messed about with.
The statute of limitations rather flies in the face of such limits
though. If suspected fraud is the case ...
> I was stupid enough many years ago to put down a deposit for the
> RiscStation portable, and it about 18 months before we found it it was
> no better than a scam - rather than the claimed technical and
> manufacturing issues, they hadn't even started on the ARM hardware. By
> this time the CC company wasn't interested, so when Roy claimed
> RiscStation were broke and couldn't pay anything back, I had to
> threaten a winding up order against his PC reseller business to get my
> money back.
... you can chase the b**gers for seven years at least. Off to debtor's
prison with him and the owner of a local business who went down owing me
over Ł1K.
> Never pay for anything until you can take it away in your hands on the
> day, doubly so for hardware and triply so for software.
I'll drink to that.
--
Tim Hill Cs
...................................................
tjrh.eu
... "Give me thy hand, 'tis late; farewell, good night" Rom & Jul, Act iii, Sc.3
Russell Hafter News
> In article <ilh26c$9ha$1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> druck <ne...@druck.org.uk> wrote:
> > On 12/03/2011 15:56, Tim Hill wrote:
> > > As always "caveat emptor" which today means "always
> > > pay with a credit card or VISA debit". ;-)
[Snip]
> I simply contacted my credit card company and the money
> reappeared in my account
Do remember, though, that, as with anything else, there is a
price for this.
The cost comes out of the money the credit card companies
take from all businesses that accept payment by credit card.
From 1 Sept last year, the cost of accepting a Visa or
Mastercard issued outwith the EU was increaded by an extra
0.8%. So the cost to me of taking payment for an Australian
buying a �500 holiday is an *extra* �4 over what it costs
someone from the UK or from Ireland.
MasterCard have introduced 'MasterCard World' credit cards,
which offer a whole lot of benefits to the card holder. What
they conveniently forget to tell you is that they charge the
merchant an extra 0.6% compared with an ordinary MasterCard
to pay for these benefits - so they are not from the card
company at all.
On 1 April the cost of taking EU Visa and MasterCards is
increasing too - and these extra charges will continue to
apply on top of the new rates (OK the MC World surcharge
drops from 0.6% to 0.565%).
And the cost of accepting a standard Visa Credit card is
going up by an additional .0449%, making it cheaper to
accept an American Express card than a Visa Card!
--
Russell
http://www.russell-hafter-holidays.co.uk
Russell Hafter Holidays E-mail to enquiries at our domain
Need a hotel? <http://www.hrs.com/?client=en__blue&customerId=416873103>
Folderol
Very glad you put this comment up. It is easy to forget just what charges are
made on these cards.
Ultimately we all pay, as most merchants charge exactly the same for cards as
for cash, so the costs have been ultimately spread over all purchasers.
--
Will J G
Tim Hill
News <see...@walkingingermany.invalid> wrote:
> In article <51b336ac...@charleshope.demon.co.uk>, charles
> <cha...@charleshope.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> > In article <ilh26c$9ha$1...@news.eternal-september.org>, druck
> > <ne...@druck.org.uk> wrote:
> > > On 12/03/2011 15:56, Tim Hill wrote:
> > > > As always "caveat emptor" which today means "always pay with a
> > > > credit card or VISA debit". ;-)
> [Snip]
> > I simply contacted my credit card company and the money reappeared in
> > my account
> Do remember, though, that, as with anything else, there is a price for
> this.
> The cost comes out of the money the credit card companies take from all
> businesses that accept payment by credit card.
Some of the cost. The whole point of a charge-back is that the payment is
reversed and the supplier will see the money vanish back to their
ex-customer.
> From 1 Sept last year, the cost of accepting [some credit cards has increased]
[Snip]
We mustn't forget all the fraud too. It takes a huge chunk of their
income and if personal experience is anything to go by, it is becoming
more frequent. The measures in place these days seem a bit barmy: use a
barclaycard too often and their computer phones you up "are you the
cardholder?" and "did you make the following transactions?" and "If you
are not the cardholder, hang up as it is illegal for you to listen".
:-D
--
Tim Hill
...................................................
tjrh.eu
... "Condemn the fault, and not the actor of it?" M for M, Act ii, Sc.2
Tim Hill
<fold...@ukfsn.org> wrote:
[Snip]
> Ultimately we all pay, as most merchants charge exactly the same for
> cards as for cash, so the costs have been ultimately spread over all
> purchasers.
Merchants are justified and allowed to charge the extra cost of taking
plastic, even though paypal don't like it! But not as much as the likes
of RyanAir thinks is appropriate.
I see nothing wrong in a merchant having a menu showing cheaper ways to
pay. This may include cash, of course, as the true cost of handling it
has never been passed directly to customers. Naively, many people think
the cost of taking cash (and sometimes cheques) is 'nil'.
Tim
(Who now _always_ uses a cashback VISA card. Sorry retailers! Not sorry
petrol companies!)
--
Tim Hill
...................................................
tjrh.eu
... "When sorrow comes, they come not single spies, but in battalions" Hamlet, Act iv, Sc.5
charles
Russell Hafter News
<t...@invalid.org.uk> wrote:
> Some of the cost. The whole point of a charge-back is
> that the payment is reversed and the supplier will see
> the money vanish back to their ex-customer.
A charge-back can only work if the trader is still in
business.
In many cases (whenever the firm has ceased trading without
supplying goods) it is, in fact, the card issuers who end
up carrying the can for claims under the Consumer Credit
Act.
In travel, where financial protection for many, though not
all, purchases is legally required (Package Travel, Package
Holidays and Package Tours Regulations 1992) many so called
experts writing in the media still tell everyone to pay by
credit card to ensure that they are protected, which ends up
with people having two separate types of protection and all
the expensive fun for the lawyers that that can entail.
trevj
> On 12 Mar, Brian Bailey wrote in message
>
> > In article <mpro.lhxxmn00000y307vp.n...@pittdj.co.uk>,
> > David Pitt <n...@pittdj.co.uk> wrote:
> > > 2001.06Brian Bailey <bbai...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > > > Odd that. It said 5.00 when I saw it, but then Andrew was experiencing
> > > > some kind of a momentary hitch using a USB stick before lighting the
> > > > blue touch paper.
>
> > > Like this??
>
> > >http://www.a4com.de/riscos/46auto/Medium/P9271641.JIG
>
> > Probably, it was on and off the screen so fast that I didn't see the small
> > print.
>
> So not "5.00" after all.
I have a photo of the ARMini on the R-Comp stand. The Info box
accessed from the switcher icon shows '5.17'. Unfortunately I wasn't
quick enough to get a shot of the splash screen during Andrew's talk.
Also note that the ROOL logo switcher icon in the a4com.de shot
previously quoted has been replaced by a slightly angled cyan 3D
version of the RO cogwheel on the ARMini. It looks a little as if the
ROOL cogwheel has been made to have a blue jellybean like Iyonix
appearance. I'm sure that Andrew could elaborate.
Philip Draper
> In article <09f21fb05...@pnyoung.ormail.co.uk>, Dr Peter Young
> <pny...@ormail.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 6 Mar 2011 Steve Fryatt <ne...@stevefryatt.org.uk> wrote:
>>> On 6 Mar, Dr Peter Young wrote in message
>>> <c255c6af5...@pnyoung.ormail.co.uk>:
>>>> On 6 Mar 2011 Doug Webb <doug....@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Also it has been implied that the machine may come with some
>>>>> pre-installed software so again this may add to the price.
>>>>
>>>> If the supplied software is similar to that which RComp put on my
>>>> RISCBookMini, it's all free.
>>> Free in the sense of Free Software, or free as in you didn't pay for
>>> it (explicitly)? If the latter, then it's a fair assumption that you
>>> /did/ pay for it, wrapped up in the overall cost of the machine.
>> Free, as in, for instance, NetSurf (for which continuing great thanks).
> I am sorry but we cannot justify the premium price of any hardware which
> includes software which is otherwise freely available.
I wonder if the point is being missed. The issue is not really the
free software (and does anyone actually know what software is being
talked about?). One is being offered a working machine with (drawing
on extensive personal experience with RComp's RiscCubes) an almost
indefinite amount of patient after-sales support. I know there are
lots of mailing lists and things for the Beagleboard, but there is
no-one who assumes responsibility for getting it to work as stated on
the box.
> Having said that, the sooner the two divergent OSes merge, probably the
> better. YMMV.
Agreed, though one shouldn't be optimistic. Earlier attempts to
negotiate this seem to have failed.
Philip.
--
Philip Draper
Tim Hill
<Phi...@borehamh.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <51b2c4...@invalid.org.uk> Tim Hill <t...@invalid.org.uk>
> wrote:
> > In article <09f21fb05...@pnyoung.ormail.co.uk>, Dr Peter Young
> > <pny...@ormail.co.uk> wrote:
> >> On 6 Mar 2011 Steve Fryatt <ne...@stevefryatt.org.uk> wrote:
> >>> On 6 Mar, Dr Peter Young wrote in message
> >>> <c255c6af5...@pnyoung.ormail.co.uk>:
> >>>> On 6 Mar 2011 Doug Webb <doug....@btinternet.com> wrote:
[Snip]
> >>>> If the supplied software is similar to that which RComp put on my
> >>>> RISCBookMini, it's all free.
> >>> Free in the sense of Free Software, or free as in you didn't pay
> >>> for it (explicitly)? If the latter, then it's a fair assumption
> >>> that you /did/ pay for it, wrapped up in the overall cost of the
> >>> machine.
> >> Free, as in, for instance, NetSurf (for which continuing great
> >> thanks).
> > I am sorry but we cannot justify the premium price of any hardware
> > which includes software which is otherwise freely available.
> I wonder if the point is being missed.
Yes. You missed it. I was responding /specifically/ to the issue of
paying for bundled otherwise free software. Or rather, NOT paying more
than an 'installation charge' for bundled otherwise free software.
> The issue is not really the
> free software
Elsewhere, no. Here, yes.
> (and does anyone actually know what software is being
> talked about?).
I have no idea but Netsurf was specifically mentioned as an example. Not
by me. Look above.
> One is being offered a working machine with (drawing
> on extensive personal experience with RComp's RiscCubes) an almost
> indefinite amount of patient after-sales support.
That's good to hear. You will find the other things which likely make up
the premium pricing listed elsewhere in this thread.
> I know there are
> lots of mailing lists and things for the Beagleboard, but there is
> no-one who assumes responsibility for getting it to work as stated on
> the box.
"Getting it to work" at the outset sounds like development and should be
complete before units are available for sale (!): fortunately, much of
that must have been done for BB. "Getting it to work" on an ongoing basis
sounds like a warranty or at least the minimum required by consumer
legislation to get it going if it breaks during a reasonable period.
Undoubtedly, both of these and other things contribute to unit cost. The
first should be measurable, the second is probably calculated with a wet
finger.
finger
--
Tim Hill Cs
...................................................
tjrh.eu
... "Good night, good night ! parting is such sweet sorrow, that I shall say good night till it be morrow" Rom & Jul, Act ii, Sc.2
Martin Wuerthner
Tim Hill <t...@invalid.org.uk> wrote:
> In article <cb1ec7b3...@borehamh.demon.co.uk>, Philip Draper
> <Phi...@borehamh.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <51b2c4...@invalid.org.uk> Tim Hill <t...@invalid.org.uk>
>> wrote:
>>> I am sorry but we cannot justify the premium price of any hardware
>>> which includes software which is otherwise freely available.
>> I wonder if the point is being missed.
> Yes. You missed it. I was responding /specifically/ to the issue of
> paying for bundled otherwise free software. Or rather, NOT paying more
> than an 'installation charge' for bundled otherwise free software.
That comment really mystifies me. Do you seriously believe it would
make this machine in any way cheaper if they did not put on any
bundled free software? When you buy this machine you could well be
paying for the heating in R-Comps office (and you probably are), but
why would you care? You have a product on offer at a given price. You
can decide whether you want to buy it at that price or not. How the
company has arrived at that price is immaterial. Would you be happier
if they offered the machine at the same price without the software?
--
Martin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Martin Wuerthner MW Software http://www.mw-software.com/
RISC OS Software for Design, Printing and Publishing
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Hill
<spam...@mw-software.com> wrote:
> In message <51b3cf...@invalid.org.uk> Tim Hill <t...@invalid.org.uk>
> wrote:
> > In article <cb1ec7b3...@borehamh.demon.co.uk>, Philip Draper
> > <Phi...@borehamh.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> >> In message <51b2c4...@invalid.org.uk> Tim Hill
> >> <t...@invalid.org.uk> wrote:
[SNIPPED]
> >>> I am sorry but we cannot justify the premium price of any hardware
> >>> which includes software which is otherwise freely available.
> >> I wonder if the point is being missed.
> > Yes. You missed it. I was responding /specifically/ to the issue of
> > paying for bundled otherwise free software. Or rather, NOT paying
> > more than an 'installation charge' for bundled otherwise free
> > software.
> That comment really mystifies me. Do you seriously believe it would
> make this machine in any way cheaper if they did not put on any
> bundled free software? When you buy this machine you could well be
> paying for the heating in R-Comps office (and you probably are), but
> why would you care? You have a product on offer at a given price. You
> can decide whether you want to buy it at that price or not. How the
> company has arrived at that price is immaterial. Would you be happier
> if they offered the machine at the same price without the software?
I'm not going to be drawn into this any more, particularly when posters
want to draw this discussion beyond the original standpoint of 'it's okay
to pay a premium price for hardware when said premium pays for free
software such as NetSurf'.
I don't think so.
That the margin above cost includes a proportion of the company's
overheads is a given. Justification of a margin in respect of valid costs
and expenses is easy: anything more than an 'installation cost' for free
software is not only taking the mickey, it probably flies in the face of
licensing.
Holger Palmroth
trevj <tr...@cwazy.co.uk> wrote:
> Also note that the ROOL logo switcher icon in the a4com.de shot
> previously quoted has been replaced by a slightly angled cyan 3D
> version of the RO cogwheel on the ARMini. It looks a little as if the
> ROOL cogwheel has been made to have a blue jellybean like Iyonix
> appearance. I'm sure that Andrew could elaborate.
Sounds like the switcher icon from:
ftp://www.a4com.dyndns.org/pub/Beagle/LdBglSprite
These icons were preinstalled on my BIK.
John Williams (News)
Holger Palmroth <h.pal...@gmx.de> wrote:
> Sounds like the switcher icon from:
> ftp://www.a4com.dyndns.org/pub/Beagle/LdBglSprite
> These icons were preinstalled on my BIK.
Oh dear - I'd have to get rid of them!
John
--
John Williams, Brittany, Northern France - no attachments to these addresses!
Non-RISC OS posters change user to johnrwilliams or put 'risc' in subject!
Who is John Williams? http://petit.four.free.fr/picindex/author/ Somewhere nice to stay in Brittany? http://petit.four.free.fr/visitors/locate
Doug Webb
Tim Hill <t...@invalid.org.uk> wrote:
Tim
I think I know what your getting at so bear with me whilst I check
that understanding as you have an important point.
So lets look at a company wishing to commercially sell a Beagleboard
based system with a Mini ITX case and RISC OS included.
£150 for the Beagleboard
£35-£40 for the case with PSU
£40-£50 for a hard drive
£15 for MicroSD card to install RISC OS on.
Total outlay = £255
All of the above costs a DIY person would have.
Now for the additional costs for a commercial sale
£50-60 labour costs for building, Installing RISC OS hard drive and
ROM images, testing. Based on a couple of hours work.
£30 RISC OS Commercial Licence
£20 Sales, Marketing, After Sales support, storage and advance
purchase cost per unit
Add this all up and then add 20% VAT = £365 *1.2 = £438
So it can be seen that before profit is added a commercial system can
be 80% plus of a non-commercial DIY one.
I guess you are saying have no issue with those sort of added costs
but you would not expect to pay a premium price for the inclusion of
free of cost to supply software but again it comes down to customer
choice and the fact that if a commercial company has to spend time to
install it then it it does cost the business something to do it.
Doug
--
Using an IYONIX pc and RISC OS 5.16, the thinking person's alternative
operating system to Microsoft Windows.
charles
<doug....@btinternet.com> wrote:
> I think I know what your getting at so bear with me whilst I check that
> understanding as you have an important point.
> So lets look at a company wishing to commercially sell a Beagleboard
> based system with a Mini ITX case and RISC OS included.
> £150 for the Beagleboard £35-£40 for the case with PSU £40-£50 for a hard
> drive £15 for MicroSD card to install RISC OS on.
> Total outlay = £255
> All of the above costs a DIY person would have.
> Now for the additional costs for a commercial sale £50-60 labour costs
> for building, Installing RISC OS hard drive and ROM images, testing.
> Based on a couple of hours work. £30 RISC OS Commercial Licence £20
> Sales, Marketing, After Sales support, storage and advance purchase cost
> per unit
> Add this all up and then add 20% VAT = £365 *1.2 = £438
not quite since the hardware items would all have had VAT on them in the
first place. extra VAT would only be incurrd on the developers time and
profit.
Matthew Phillips
on 14 Mar 2011 Martin Wuerthner wrote:
> In message <51b3cf...@invalid.org.uk>
> Tim Hill <t...@invalid.org.uk> wrote:
>
> > Yes. You missed it. I was responding /specifically/ to the issue of
> > paying for bundled otherwise free software. Or rather, NOT paying more
> > than an 'installation charge' for bundled otherwise free software.
>
> That comment really mystifies me. Do you seriously believe it would
> make this machine in any way cheaper if they did not put on any
> bundled free software? When you buy this machine you could well be
> paying for the heating in R-Comps office (and you probably are), but
> why would you care? You have a product on offer at a given price. You
> can decide whether you want to buy it at that price or not. How the
> company has arrived at that price is immaterial. Would you be happier
> if they offered the machine at the same price without the software?
Indeed, it would probably cost R-Comp more in post-sales support if they
*didn't* include a free software bundle, as many users whose last real
ARM-based machine was a RISC PC will have difficulties in tracking down
compatible software.
Perhaps they should offer a more expensive option without bundled software!
--
Matthew Phillips
Durham
trevj
>
> Sounds like the switcher icon from:ftp://www.a4com.dyndns.org/pub/Beagle/LdBglSprite
Yep, that's the one.
> These icons were preinstalled on my BIK.
Out of interest, are they softloaded as per the LdBglSprite
application, or coded into the ROM image itself? Detlef's done a nice
job of putting that together, and I didn't know the theme had its
roots in the A9home.
However, I see that some of the toolsprites have reverted previous
design work done by Richard Hallas:
http://www.richardhallas.freeuk.com/iyonix/#Tools
But it's a case of horses for courses, I guess.
Doug Webb
charles <cha...@charleshope.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <aed2f2b351...@btinternet.com>, Doug Webb
> <doug....@btinternet.com> wrote:
[snip]
>> Total outlay = £255
>> All of the above costs a DIY person would have.
>> Now for the additional costs for a commercial sale £50-60 labour costs
>> for building, Installing RISC OS hard drive and ROM images, testing.
>> Based on a couple of hours work. £30 RISC OS Commercial Licence £20
>> Sales, Marketing, After Sales support, storage and advance purchase cost
>> per unit
>> Add this all up and then add 20% VAT = £365 *1.2 = £438
> not quite since the hardware items would all have had VAT on them in the
> first place. extra VAT would only be incurrd on the developers time and
> profit.
Good point but still I think this would make the machine around the
£400 mark and anything else is RComp's profit to play with which given
that size and the size of the market does not seem to me at least an
excessive margin. Also we don't know what the RISC OS licence costs
are or what added extra's amy be in there like ROL/Select features or
so until it is fully announced we can only speculate.
The thing about all of this is that either you take the DIY option and
sort out your own issues or you take the PreBuilt/Support provided
route.
Personally I think RComp are doing the right thing in giving the
market an option and then it is up to end users to decide if that
option and price point is right for them.
Kevin Wells
Doug Webb <doug....@btinternet.com> wrote:
>In message <51b3f5ad...@charleshope.demon.co.uk>
> charles <cha...@charleshope.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> In article <aed2f2b351...@btinternet.com>, Doug Webb
>> <doug....@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>[snip]
>
>
>>> Total outlay = £255
>
>>> All of the above costs a DIY person would have.
>
>>> Now for the additional costs for a commercial sale £50-60 labour costs
>>> for building, Installing RISC OS hard drive and ROM images, testing.
>>> Based on a couple of hours work. £30 RISC OS Commercial Licence £20
>>> Sales, Marketing, After Sales support, storage and advance purchase cost
>>> per unit
>
>>> Add this all up and then add 20% VAT = £365 *1.2 = £438
>
>> not quite since the hardware items would all have had VAT on them in the
>> first place. extra VAT would only be incurrd on the developers time and
>> profit.
>
>Good point but still I think this would make the machine around the
>£400 mark and anything else is RComp's profit to play with which given
>that size and the size of the market does not seem to me at least an
>excessive margin. Also we don't know what the RISC OS licence costs
>are or what added extra's amy be in there like ROL/Select features or
>so until it is fully announced we can only speculate.
>
Also as far as I'm aware we do not know what software will be included
with the new machine
[snip]
--
Kev Wells http://riscos.kevsoft.co.uk/
http://kevsoft.co.uk/ http://kevsoft.co.uk/AleQuest/
ICQ 238580561
Bring me my spear! O clouds, unfold!
Holger Palmroth
trevj <tr...@cwazy.co.uk> wrote:
> Out of interest, are they softloaded as per the LdBglSprite
> application, or coded into the ROM image itself? Detlef's done a nice
> job of putting that together, and I didn't know the theme had its
> roots in the A9home.
Yes, they are softloaded. I just tweaked the BASIC icon to make it more
noticeable and added a alternative scsi-floppy icon to match with the other
drives.
>
> However, I see that some of the toolsprites have reverted previous
> design work done by Richard Hallas:
> http://www.richardhallas.freeuk.com/iyonix/#Tools
>
> But it's a case of horses for courses, I guess.
I replaced the toolsprites with the MorphOS theme from
http://www.stronged.iconbar.com/fjg/ just to have a bit of eye candy.
Folderol
With so little fixed information it's too early to say yet, but I'm inclined to
seriously consider the RComp option. I've looked at the idea of working from
scratch with a Beagle Board but it seems just too much hard work for an
uncertain result.
For those making price comparisons I would suggest you add in the *total* hours
you would spend on the D.I.Y. option - don't forget to add in the time just
sourcing all the materials. Two 8 hr days (optimistic) at £20/hr (cheapskate)
is still going to knock you back and equivalent £320.
--
Will J G
Ollie Clark
> On Mar 11, 9:21 am, glavallin <glaval...@gjlavallin.plus.com> wrote:
>
>> Even so I would have preffered the choice. The O.S. is essentially a
>> development 5.17 or an unproven 5.18 release so the fewer the unnecessary
>> complications the better.
>
> Perhaps R-Comp could optionally sell the hardware alone (at a reduced
> price), and leave the user to download and install the non-custom-
> built ROOL ROM.
Isn't that equivalent to just buying a Beagleboard, a box and a few
other bits of hardware?
Cheers,
Ollie
trevj
Yes, but with the ease of buying everything from just one supplier.
Ollie Clark
> In message <51b0224d...@charleshope.demon.co.uk>
> charles <cha...@charleshope.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>> Why is the Beagle board made of so a strange size that it doesn't fit
>>> into a standard case or hut, does someone know?
>
>> What's a "standard case"?
>
> ATX, or one of the smaller variants.
Because it would be completely ridiculous to have made the Beagleboard
305x244mm (ATX size).
The Beagleboard is 75x75mm. The closest "standard" size is probably PC/104
(96x90mm) which is too big. Qseven is too small (70x70mm). Neither of
those have cases easily available anyway. The closest size with easily
available cases is Mini-ITX which is 170x170. They could fit 4 beagleboards
on that...
It's an embedded development board. It's not designed to fit in standard
PC cases.
Cheers,
Ollie
charles
Stuart <Spa...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <20110314214541.41b42719@debian>,
> Folderol <fold...@ukfsn.org> wrote:
> > With so little fixed information it's too early to say yet, but I'm
> > inclined to seriously consider the RComp option. I've looked at the idea
> > of working from scratch with a Beagle Board but it seems just too much
> > hard work for an uncertain result.
> And have we all forgotton the price of the RIsc PC when we bought them ?
not short of �2000, ISTR
Bill (Adopt)
Huh! ..rich plutocrat.. ;'))
:))
Bill ZFC
--
Adoption InterLink UK with -=- http://www.billsimpson.com/
Domain Host Orpheus Internet -=- http://www.orpheusinternet.co.uk/
Vince M Hudd
> In article <20110314214541.41b42719@debian>,
> Folderol <fold...@ukfsn.org> wrote:
> > inclined to seriously consider the RComp option. I've looked at the idea
> > of working from scratch with a Beagle Board but it seems just too much
> > hard work for an uncertain result.
Indeedy yes - as I said on the riscository.com page waaaaay back up-thread:
"However, even at £600 including VAT, this machine would be cheaper than, I
think, most of the hardware options that have been available to us over the
years – going right back to the days of Acorn."
Let's not forget that this isn't a definite price - Andrew said it's
expected to be *about* £500, *probably* plus VAT. There are costs that at
the time I spoke to him were unknown - the comments about the RISC OS
licencing, and the hoped for plan to have components from RISCOS Ltd sitting
on top of an OS from RISC OS Open Ltd, for example. With these issues not
being finalised, the licensing cost would be unknown and so Andrew's
costings will be based on guesstimates.
Better to wait and find out the final specs and price than to argue whether
or not it's worth the price, when we don't even know for sure what those
specs and price are, let alone whether or not R-Comp - a business - is
allowed to make a profit (because that's almost how some of the posts I've
read in this thread seem to be coming across.)
--
Soft Rock Software: http://www.softrock.co.uk
Vince M Hudd: http://misc.vinceh.com/about-vinceh/
Bristol RISC OS Users second meeting: http://www.riscository.com/?p=147
South West Show report: http://www.riscository.com/?p=169
Vince M Hudd
Holger Palmroth
Ollie Clark <use...@ollieclark.com> wrote:
> The Beagleboard is 75x75mm. The closest "standard" size is probably PC/104
> (96x90mm) which is too big. Qseven is too small (70x70mm). Neither of
> those have cases easily available anyway. The closest size with easily
> available cases is Mini-ITX which is 170x170. They could fit 4
> beagleboards on that...
On the other hand it's nice to hid all the cable-and-hub stuff that surrounds
a BeagleBoard in the spacious Mini-ITX case of the BIK.
Dr Peter Young
> Vince M Hudd <vin...@softrock.co.uk> wrote:
>> licencing
>> licensing
> Both in the same paragraph. Bah.
Did you cross the Atlantic in the course of that paragraph, by any
chance? :-)
With best wishes,
Peter.
--
Peter \ / zfc Lu \ Prestbury, Cheltenham, Glos. GL52
and \/ __ __ \ England.
family / / \ | | |\ | / _ \ http://pnyoung.orpheusweb.co.uk
/ \__/ \_/ | \| \__/ \______________ pny...@ormail.co.uk
Ollie Clark
Yes it's an elegant solution and one I'd be quite happy with.
The question I was answering though was "Why didn't they make the
Beagleboard a standard size?"
Doug Webb
Vince M Hudd <vin...@softrock.co.uk> wrote:
[snip]
>
> Better to wait and find out the final specs and price than to argue whether
> or not it's worth the price, when we don't even know for sure what those
> specs and price are, let alone whether or not R-Comp - a business - is
> allowed to make a profit (because that's almost how some of the posts I've
> read in this thread seem to be coming across.)
Vince
Good post and you are spot on.
Entirely agree with you in that RComp are a business and they do need
to do things with a profit so they stay around and continue to support
this market.