Browser technology
Nigel Parker
Is anybody looking at using Mozilla source code, to aid development of
a decent acorn browser?
It's a huge job to port Mozilla (although it'd be good), but surely it
could help us to get a decent implementation of Javascript, wouldn't
it? By decent, I naturally mean non-standard IE or Netscape versions
:-)
My feeling is that RiscOS connectivity and browser clients are in a
pretty poor state, and are probably not helping in getting (and
keeping) new users...
Shouldn't internet connectivity (and perhaps a browser too) form an
integral part of the OS? Can't afford ROS4, so I don't know if things
have changed, but internet software (like ANT Suite) seems a little
too stand-alone (not integrated and a bit tricky to use) for my
liking.
Back to the point... Mozilla strikes me as a very valuable resource,
and an opportunity to catch up with the big guys! Are we exploiting
this? If not, why not?
Regards.
--
Nigel Parker
http://welcome.to/nigels
mailto:ni...@pukka-parker.co.uk
Why are our days numbered and not, say lettered. -- Woody Allen
Andrew Harmsworth
Nigel Parker <ni...@pukka-parker.co.uk> wrote:
> Is anybody looking at using Mozilla source code, to aid development of
> a decent acorn browser?
Yes. See the Cybervillage news page, and go back a few months... I think
it's called ROzilla (for obvious reasons).
> My feeling is that RiscOS connectivity and browser clients are in a
> pretty poor state, and are probably not helping in getting (and
> keeping) new users...
Look out for news from Oregan and Castle re: Oregano, then!
> Shouldn't internet connectivity (and perhaps a browser too) form an
> integral part of the OS?
Didn't M$ get into trouble for doing that?! :-)
> Back to the point... Mozilla strikes me as a very valuable resource,
> and an opportunity to catch up with the big guys! Are we exploiting
> this?
See above.
--
Andrew Harmsworth | Education a RISC? Join the discussion...
The Leys School | http://rougol.jellybaby.net/teach.html
Cambridge CB2 2AD | To reply personally: moc = com
Paul F. Johnson
>> Is anybody looking at using Mozilla source code, to aid development of
>> a decent acorn browser?
>
>Yes. See the Cybervillage news page, and go back a few months... I think
>it's called ROzilla (for obvious reasons).
But with TBA gone now, has Rozilla done the same?
>> Back to the point... Mozilla strikes me as a very valuable resource,
>> and an opportunity to catch up with the big guys! Are we exploiting
>> this?
Yes. Watch this space.
TTFN
Paul
Ben Brook
Nigel Parker <ni...@pukka-parker.co.uk> wrote:
> I naturally mean non-standard IE or Netscape versions
Erm, doesn't Netscape own Mozilla and isn't Netscape Navigator actually
Mozilla with another name?
--
Ben Brook
benb...@argonet.co.uk
http://www.ben-brook.co.uk
Peter Price
Andrew Harmsworth <har...@freeuk.moc> wrote:
> > Shouldn't internet connectivity (and perhaps a browser too) form an
> > integral part of the OS?
>
> Didn't M$ get into trouble for doing that?! :-)
Yes, but M$ have been told off for killing their competition (i.e. the
Netscape Corp.)
Can you honnestly say there is competition in the RISC OS
connectivity or browser software markets?!
Peter.
--
Peter Price, Speaking Personally pe...@drobe.co.uk
Nothing is foolproof to a talented fool.
dgs
Peter Price <pe...@drobe.co.uk> wrote:
> > > Shouldn't internet connectivity (and perhaps a browser too) form an
> > > integral part of the OS?
> >
> > Didn't M$ get into trouble for doing that?! :-)
>
> Yes, but M$ have been told off for killing their competition (i.e. the
> Netscape Corp.)
>
> Can you honnestly say there is competition in the RISC OS
> connectivity or browser software markets?!
Not until Oregano is released.
And the projected vendors of that product have competitors in
the field of RISC OS systems anyway.
--
d...@argonet.co.uk | RISC OS user in London? http://www.jellybaby.net/rougol/
"Nanny Ogg usually went to bed early. After all, she was an old lady.
Sometimes she went to bed as early as 6 a.m." - Terry Pratchett
Michael Gerbracht
> Andrew Harmsworth <har...@freeuk.moc> wrote:
> > > Shouldn't internet connectivity (and perhaps a browser too) form an
> > > integral part of the OS?
> >
> > Didn't M$ get into trouble for doing that?! :-)
> Can you honnestly say there is competition in the RISC OS
> connectivity or browser software markets?!
Yes: ANT, Webster XL, Oregano, RiscStation Browser...
RISC OS Ltd. already said, that they don't want to bundle a Browser with
the OS because they had to decide for one Browser which isn't fair. I
think they will add a new dialer to the next version of RISC OS, so that
you can get a connection and use the software you like.
But you can guess that Castle will deliver Oregano with new machines and
RiscStation with their browser (when they are available). So new users
will get internet-ready computers.
Look at the software supplied with RISC OS 4:
ImageFS - there is no other product
Vector - there will be no new version and so there is little competition.
Vantage is another program, or do you wnat to compare them?
Writer - There is only one wordprocessor for RISC OS: EW/TW, so this is no
problem.
Michael Gerbracht
--
Michael Gerbracht
German RISC OS news and magazin: http://www.arcsite.de
Acorn Newsletter: http://www.acornusers.org/ANS
RISC OS Wishlist: http://www.acornusers.org/wishlist
Andrew Harmsworth
Michael Gerbracht <m.ger...@cityweb.de> wrote:
> RISC OS Ltd. already said, that they don't want to bundle a Browser with
> the OS because they had to decide for one Browser which isn't fair.
Good call.
> I think they will add a new dialer to the next version of RISC OS, so that
> you can get a connection and use the software you like.
Again, neat.
> But you can guess that Castle will deliver Oregano with new machines and
> RiscStation with their browser (when they are available). So new users
> will get internet-ready computers.
This is vital.
> ImageFS - there is no other product
I don't find it useful at all. Perhaps that's just me?
> Vector - there will be no new version and so there is little competition.
> Vantage is another program, or do you wnat to compare them?
I used to teach using Vector, and do like it. However, I often found
myself reverting to Draw because it has that rather useful feature of
undo/redo! Thus, I have just bought DrawWorks Millennium, as it sits on
top of Draw - and am liking it. I'd not use Vector now. DrawWorks SE
(another bundled RISC OS 4 app) _IS_ competition for Vector. It's
better (IMHO)!
> Writer - There is only one wordprocessor for RISC OS: EW/TW, so this is no
> problem.
Agreed, but Ovation is okay!
Martin Longley
Andrew Harmsworth <har...@freeuk.moc> wrote:
> In message <49ad41b20f...@cityweb.de>
> Michael Gerbracht <m.ger...@cityweb.de> wrote:
[Snip]
> > Writer - There is only one wordprocessor for RISC OS: EW/TW, so this is no
> > problem.
> Agreed, but Ovation is okay!
OvationPro is a desktop publisher not a wordprocessor and it's more than ok -
a lot more than ok!
Martin Longley
--
mar...@lexiconlifeline.co.uk
Jim Lesurf
Michael Gerbracht <m.ger...@cityweb.de> wrote:
> Vector - there will be no new version and so there is little
> competition.
Why do you say that there will be no new versions of !Vector? I thought
that Jonathan Marten *was* still working on this...
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
Robert Chrismas
Jim Lesurf <jc...@st-and.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <49ad41b20f...@cityweb.de>,
> Michael Gerbracht <m.ger...@cityweb.de> wrote:
> > Vector - there will be no new version and so there is little
> > competition.
> Why do you say that there will be no new versions of !Vector? I thought
> that Jonathan Marten *was* still working on this...
Oh I hope so.
I use it more than any of the rivals.
I've got one or two suggestions for improvements.
--
Robert Chrismas e-mail : chrismas at argonet.co.uk
jim9
development of
>a decent acorn browser?
Has anyone considered doing a port of the Opera web browser?
Opera is the best web browser I have ever used, I consider it to
be far better than any version of NS or IE.
There are ports for Mac OS, EPOC, OS/2, BeOS and Linux, so I'm
sure a RISC OS port would be possible.
Jim
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
Andrew Harmsworth
Martin Longley <lexi...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> OvationPro is a desktop publisher not a wordprocessor and it's more than ok -
> a lot more than ok!
Ah, but you can wordprocess in it. :-)
Andrew Harmsworth
Robert Chrismas <chri...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> I use [Vector] more than any of the rivals. I've got one or two
> suggestions for improvements.
Like undo/redo facility as good as Draw's? This is my main reason for
not using it - you can't 'try things out'.
APH
Michael Gerbracht
Jim Lesurf <jc...@st-and.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <49ad41b20f...@cityweb.de>,
> Michael Gerbracht <m.ger...@cityweb.de> wrote:
> > Vector - there will be no new version and so there is little
> > competition.
> Why do you say that there will be no new versions of !Vector? I thought
> that Jonathan Marten *was* still working on this...
Oh, I thougt development stoped some month/years ago. But I can't really
say anything about that.
Michael Gerbracht
--
Written with Pluto on an Acorn StrongARM Risc PC 233 MHz running RISC OS 4
Jim Lesurf
Michael Gerbracht <m.ger...@cityweb.de> wrote:
> In article <49adac3...@st-and.demon.co.uk>,
> Jim Lesurf <jc...@st-and.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> > Why do you say that there will be no new versions of !Vector? I thought
> > that Jonathan Marten *was* still working on this...
> Oh, I thougt development stoped some month/years ago. But I can't really
> say anything about that.
At the time RO4 appeared and a version of !Vector was bundled with it I
exchanged a couple of emails with JM. IIRC he fully intended to keep on
developing !Vector beyond the versions then available. I haven't heard
more, so things may have changed, but my current assumption is that some
development has/is ocurring. I have no specific info, though.
Robert Chrismas
Andrew Harmsworth <har...@freeuk.moc> wrote:
> In message <49adb4e5b...@argonet.co.uk>
> Robert Chrismas <chri...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> > I use [Vector] more than any of the rivals. I've got one or two
> > suggestions for improvements.
> Like undo/redo facility as good as Draw's? This is my main reason for
> not using it - you can't 'try things out'.
I wouldn't like any comments I made to appear to be talking
down Vector, which I like a lot.
However Along with undo, I'd like the ability to
make control points of curves snap to the grid
(as they do in Draw).
Andy Pickering
Robert Chrismas <chri...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> I wouldn't like any comments I made to appear to be talking
> down Vector, which I like a lot.
its capabilities are impressive, I've never quite got up to speed with it
as much as with Vector.
> However Along with undo, I'd like the ability to
> make control points of curves snap to the grid
> (as they do in Draw).
They actually used to do this in an earlier version. I preferred this too.
Unfortunately he hasn't included it in the "backwards compatibility"
options :-(
--
Andy Pickering
********************************************************************
* StrongArm RiscPC / RISC OS 4 *
********************************************************************
Thomas Malcolm Smith
Are there any limitations/ rules to abide by?
TIA
Malcolm Smith
--
T M Smith tms...@ukgateway.net running an Acorn StrongARM and RiscOS 3.7
in North Yorkshire, UK.
Ian Fitzgerald
Thomas Malcolm Smith <tms...@ukgateway.net> wrote:
> Can anyone tell me the procedure for obtaining a domain name?
>
> Are there any limitations/ rules to abide by?
>
> TIA
>
> Malcolm Smith
>
Define
Administrative contact
Technical contact
Billing contact
Get NIC handle:
http://rs.internic.net/cgi-bin/itts/handle
Fill in the form
Define domain name
check availability, viz e.g.
whois domainname.uk
look at
http://rs.internic.net/cgi-bin/domain
fill in the forms
Mail will arrive from hostm...@internic.net
check details; reply
or get your ISP to do it for you.
do read
"The Complete FreeBSD" by Greg Leahy ch 21 Connecting to the Internet
(2nd ed).
Cheers
--
Ian Fitzgerald
e ia...@ligand.wow.aust.com
thomas_...@yahoo.co.uk
mai...@gmx.de wrote:
> Yes: ANT, Webster XL, Oregano, RiscStation Browser...
What browser are RiscStation providing ?
> RISC OS Ltd. already said, that they don't want to bundle a Browser
> the OS because they had to decide for one Browser which isn't fair. I
> think they will add a new dialer to the next version of RISC OS, so
> you can get a connection and use the software you like.
Is it not more likely that RISCOS Ltd is under restrictions from Pace
regarding internet technology ? It would certainly make more sense to
have a browser more closely coupled with the OS. It seems strange to
me that this responsibility is being left to hardware vendors.
However, I am very interested to follow the progress of the desktop
release of Oregano. Is anyone organising a mailing list or discussion
group prior to its release ?
-- Thomas
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Thomas Malcolm Smith
I have registered with Ghoulnet.com
Malcolm Smith
--
Richard Walker
thomas_...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> In article <49ad41b20f...@cityweb.de>,
> mai...@gmx.de wrote:
>
> > Yes: ANT, Webster XL, Oregano, RiscStation Browser...
>
> What browser are RiscStation providing ?
*Apparently* they are porting Mozilla. I'd *love* to see that, for several
reasons:
- how on earth will it ever compile?
- won't RiscStation have to re-distribute it freely? :-O
- according to mozilla.org, Mozilla is totally full of bugs
> Is it not more likely that RISCOS Ltd is under restrictions from Pace
> regarding internet technology ? It would certainly make more sense to
> have a browser more closely coupled with the OS. It seems strange to me
> that this responsibility is being left to hardware vendors.
I disagree. Why not include, say, an Office suite as well?!
In my opinion, RISCOS Ltd. should provide a dialler, complete with
email/news fetcher, as part of RISC OS. Users would just add a browser,
terminal, FTP client, or email/news client etc.
--
Richard.
"All you need is love, love. Love is all you need."
D. M. Gillard B.A.
<URL:mailto:runny...@mindless.com> wrote:
> In message <8damd8$nc$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>
> thomas_...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>
> > In article <49ad41b20f...@cityweb.de>,
> > mai...@gmx.de wrote:
> >
> > > Yes: ANT, Webster XL, Oregano, RiscStation Browser...
> >
> > What browser are RiscStation providing ?
RiscStation Ltd. do not currently include or endorse any particular
Internet access software for use with the new R7500 machines. At the
moment, users may choose from the various freeware, shareware, or
commercial titles which are readily available (but as an additional
option rather than anything being included as standard). However, we
are looking into the possibile provision and inclusion of such
software and we shall make appropriate annoncements when the time is
right.
- Mark Gillard.
RiscStation Project Manager
===========================
--
Mailto:dra...@cableinet.co.uk
Simon Challands
D. M. Gillard B.A. <dra...@cableinet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:ant161140d07Q9#H...@agnw24478.cableinet.co.uk...
> In article <795edeaf49%ric...@nctv.freeserve.co.uk>, Richard Walker
> <URL:mailto:runny...@mindless.com> wrote:
> > In message <8damd8$nc$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>
> > thomas_...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> >
> > > In article <49ad41b20f...@cityweb.de>,
> > > mai...@gmx.de wrote:
> > >
> > > > Yes: ANT, Webster XL, Oregano, RiscStation Browser...
> > >
> > > What browser are RiscStation providing ?
>
> RiscStation Ltd. do not currently include or endorse any particular
> Internet access software for use with the new R7500 machines. At the
> moment, users may choose from the various freeware, shareware, or
> commercial titles which are readily available (but as an additional
> option rather than anything being included as standard). However, we
> are looking into the possibile provision and inclusion of such
> software and we shall make appropriate annoncements when the time is
> right.
How about including a voucher that can be used to get a browser of
your choice?
Or include all of them :-)
Simon Challands
Thomas Huang
Richard Walker <runny...@mindless.com> wrote:
> > What browser are RiscStation providing ?
> *Apparently* they are porting Mozilla. I'd *love* to see that, for
> reasons:
> - how on earth will it ever compile?
> - won't RiscStation have to re-distribute it freely? :-O
> - according to mozilla.org, Mozilla is totally full of bugs
It will also be very big and slow, which is not usable for STB
requirements. Would Geko not be a better source, or is this what they
are using ?
I had heard that porting C++ code on RISCOS was very difficult though.
> I disagree. Why not include, say, an Office suite as well?!
I think that a browser is more closely linked to the GUI of modern OS
today though.
I think as long as the hardware vendors are taking responsibility for
this, then it is OK, but shipping a PC that is not fully internet
capable is silly.
Justin Fletcher
> In article <49ad41b20f...@cityweb.de>,
> mai...@gmx.de wrote:
[snip]
> > RISC OS Ltd. already said, that they don't want to bundle a Browser
> > the OS because they had to decide for one Browser which isn't fair. I
> > think they will add a new dialer to the next version of RISC OS, so
> > you can get a connection and use the software you like.
>
> Is it not more likely that RISCOS Ltd is under restrictions from Pace
> regarding internet technology ? It would certainly make more sense to
> have a browser more closely coupled with the OS. It seems strange to
> me that this responsibility is being left to hardware vendors.
I'd like to point out a minor trial that is going on in the states at the
moment which is dealing with the issue of browser/OS coupling. I mean, you
might have missed it. It's not like it's important or anything.
--
Gerph {djf0-.3w6e2w2.226,6q6w2q2,2.3,2m4}
URL: http://www.movspclr.co.uk/
... I don't feel small, and insignificant anymore
Darren Salt
> In article <49ad41b20f...@cityweb.de>,
> mai...@gmx.de wrote:
[snip]
>> RISC OS Ltd. already said, that they don't want to bundle a Browser the OS
>> because they had to decide for one Browser which isn't fair. I think they
>> will add a new dialer to the next version of RISC OS, so you can get a
>> connection and use the software you like.
> Is it not more likely that RISCOS Ltd is under restrictions from Pace
> regarding internet technology? It would certainly make more sense to have a
> browser more closely coupled with the OS.
Now I'm /sure/ that there was some huge company which did that and may well
pay heavily for having done so... its name escapes me right now... ;-)
> It seems strange to me that this responsibility is being left to hardware
> vendors.
And, hopefully, the choice of browser is left to the user.
--
| Darren Salt | d youmustbejoking,demon,co,uk | Acorn | nr. Ashington,
| RPC, Spec+3, A3010 | s zap,uk,eu,org ** anti-UBE | Club | Northumberland
| BBC M128, Linux PC | @ retrospec,co,uk | NE | Toon Army
| Let's keep the pound sterling
Drilling for oil is boring.
Thomas Huang
ge...@movspclr.co.uk wrote:
> > Is it not more likely that RISCOS Ltd is under restrictions from
Pace
> > regarding internet technology ? It would certainly make more sense
to
> > have a browser more closely coupled with the OS. It seems strange
to
> > me that this responsibility is being left to hardware vendors.
> I'd like to point out a minor trial that is going on in the states at
the
> moment which is dealing with the issue of browser/OS coupling. I
mean, you
> might have missed it. It's not like it's important or anything.
I am not an expert in these matters, but I do not think you can make a
direct comparison. There are other issues in the MS litigation.
After all, many other OS vendors also supply a browser, that is coupled
to some extent and excluding a competitor. Vxworks, QNX, Nucleus, and
others are good example.
Peter Naulls
Thomas Huang <thomas_...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> It will also be very big and slow, which is not usable for STB
> requirements. Would Geko not be a better source, or is this what they
> are using ?
>
> I had heard that porting C++ code on RISCOS was very difficult though.
It's not. Not using g++, anyway. What it is, is very slow to compile.
Peter
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Naulls - pe...@erble.freeserve.co.uk
Homepage - http://free.prohosting.com/~chocky/
Java for RISC OS and ARM - http://free.prohosting.com/~chocky/java/
Debian Linux on RiscPCs - http://www.erble.freeserve.co.uk/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Richard Walker
"D. M. Gillard B.A." <dra...@cableinet.co.uk> wrote:
> RiscStation Ltd. do not currently include or endorse any particular
> Internet access software for use with the new R7500 machines. At the
> moment, users may choose from the various freeware, shareware, or
> commercial titles which are readily available (but as an additional
> option rather than anything being included as standard).
I see.
> However, we are looking into the possibile provision and inclusion of
> such software and we shall make appropriate annoncements when the time
> is right.
OK then, deny this: You are porting Mozilla.
Also, wouldn't it have to be re-released for free, since Mozilla itself is?
(although I have not checked the license conditions)
Oh, and what about playing MP3s on RiscStation? Java programming?
--
Richard.
"Someday when I'm lonely. Wishing you weren't so far away."
Justin Fletcher
Thomas Huang <thomas_...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <62b728b0...@gerph.riscos.com>,
> ge...@movspclr.co.uk wrote:
>
> > > Is it not more likely that RISCOS Ltd is under restrictions from Pace
> > > regarding internet technology ? It would certainly make more sense to
> > > have a browser more closely coupled with the OS. It seems strange to
> > > me that this responsibility is being left to hardware vendors.
>
> > I'd like to point out a minor trial that is going on in the states at
> > the moment which is dealing with the issue of browser/OS coupling. I
> > mean, you might have missed it. It's not like it's important or
> > anything.
>
> I am not an expert in these matters, but I do not think you can make a
> direct comparison. There are other issues in the MS litigation.
There are many issues involved, but a major part is the tying of the
operating system and the browser such that they are in effect one and the
same thing. The fact that the public sees them as separate products, that
Microsoft proposed to perform the split and that there are ways and means
of removing the coupling relatively easily has a large influence on the
case.
Personally, I see very good reasons for integrating technologies into
systems and I'm very much in favour of such things, where such integration
means that the system is made more complete and more useful for all. Where
integration requires internal hooks preventing external use it stifles
development. Where integration provides the facilities to all uses, things
are greatly improved for everyone.
I'd personally say that the IE integration is actually really very nice from
a programmers and users point of view. However, the problem is not that the
integration is a good thing for users, but whether its integration has
restricted the markets of the other browser developers. By implicitly tying
the user to one particular browser, Microsoft does not allow fair competition
within that market - that they claim that being part of the OS means it is
not in the same market is something that has been set aside by Judge Jackson
as I understand it.
So, to make the direct comparison to RISC OS, we have an operating system
which 'could' have a browser coupled with it. Why would that happen ? Because
it would make the whole internet thing easier. What would it do for
programmers ? It would make the playing field more level. What would it do
for users ? It would give them a browser they could use with the OS. What
would it do for competition ? It would be very damaging for the browser
area. We have, potentially, six browsers - ArcWeb, Fresco, Browse, WebsterXL
(and if you're being picky, Webster) Webite and Oregano. Coupling any of those
would require that it be in active development, which counts out Browse,
Fresco (to most intents), ArcWeb and Webite (IMO, the work that has been
done so far doesn't bring it up to scratch). Leaving WebsterXL and Oregano.
Fresco, if you think that ANT would even be vaguely interested. I'm ignoring
the suggestions from RiscStation as there have been no further announcements
on that score and therefore it's safest just to ignore until concrete facts
become available.
Of these, Oregano is a rapidly developing product - you keep seeing many
advertisements for them wanting people, which must say something for its
development. WebsterXL is a continuing product, and already supports the
plugin protocol such that the browser can be embedded in other applications.
I would guess that there is at least one product trying to take advantage of
this, but I'm doing no more than applying some educated guesswork there.
Others could use the same method. Fresco... is the whole ANT situation. Make
of that what you will.
To couple any of these with the OS would be of detriment to the others. This
ties directly to the issues mentioned above.
In any case, each of these products has its price. It's not free. It's not
going to be 'given away' whatever anyone may think. So there is the
additional problem there. For all of these people that say that RISC OS
should come with a browser, you wonder how many would pay for it to be
included ? Pay a tenner ? Twenty ? Thirty ? Fourty ? Fifty quid ? At what
point does it begin to become feasible ? I don't know.
With regard to your previous comments about Pace, I think it is generally
unwise for people to speculate about the Pace-RISCOS Ltd relationship as, in
generally, most comments are based on speculation, guesswork and have very
little factual content.
Robert Chrismas
Justin Fletcher <ge...@innocent.com> wrote:
> In message <8damd8$nc$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>
> thomas_...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> > In article <49ad41b20f...@cityweb.de>,
> > mai...@gmx.de wrote:
> [snip]
> > > RISC OS Ltd. already said, that they don't want to bundle a Browser
> > > the OS because they had to decide for one Browser which isn't fair. I
> > > think they will add a new dialer to the next version of RISC OS, so
> > > you can get a connection and use the software you like.
> >
> > Is it not more likely that RISCOS Ltd is under restrictions from Pace
> > regarding internet technology ? It would certainly make more sense to
> > have a browser more closely coupled with the OS. It seems strange to
> > me that this responsibility is being left to hardware vendors.
> I'd like to point out a minor trial that is going on in the states at
> the moment which is dealing with the issue of browser/OS coupling. I
> mean, you might have missed it. It's not like it's important or anything.
Leaving aside legal considerations -
a close coupling isn't such a good design idea is it?
I'd have thought a strongly modular approach would
make design and development easier, and the finished
product more robust.
Robert Seago
> > I had heard that porting C++ code on RISCOS was very difficult though.
>
> It's not. Not using g++, anyway. What it is, is very slow to compile.
>
> Peter
>
But is there a way to deal with the user interface with g++ yet?
Regards from : Using a : Software for RiscOS:Conservation Pages
Robert Seago : StrongArm RiscPC : http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/rjseago/
--
Peter Naulls
Robert Seago <rjs...@zetnet.co.uk> wrote:
> > > I had heard that porting C++ code on RISCOS was very difficult though.
> >
> > It's not. Not using g++, anyway. What it is, is very slow to compile.
> >
> But is there a way to deal with the user interface with g++ yet?
No more so than most other RO tools of a similar nature. i.e., it's not
hard to put a DDE front end wotsit on top of it (like guavac for
instance), but generally C(++) compilers are called from makefiles,
(ok, that's not much of an interface improvement :-).
Perhaps you might care to explain what you're after - a Windows like
IDE?
Paul F. Johnson
> > However, we are looking into the possibile provision and inclusion of
> > such software and we shall make appropriate annoncements when the time
> > is right.
>
> OK then, deny this: You are porting Mozilla.
Why should RiscStation have to deny or confirm what they are
porting/clean writing?
> Also, wouldn't it have to be re-released for free, since Mozilla itself is?
> (although I have not checked the license conditions)
No. The licence conditions allow for a charge to be made (AFAIK)
> Oh, and what about playing MP3s on RiscStation? Java programming?
Being worked on (both scores)
TTFN
Paul
*speaking personally*
---------
Sent from the newest RISC OS based technology - 100% British, 110% reliable
The future is here, the RiscStation has arrived.
Joseph Heenan
"Paul F. Johnson" <paulf....@redhotant.com> wrote:
> > Also, wouldn't it have to be re-released for free, since Mozilla
> > itself is? (although I have not checked the license conditions)
>
> No. The licence conditions allow for a charge to be made (AFAIK)
Yes, but you if you sell code generated from any of the mozilla
source files, you must also release the changes you have made, for
free. Or words to that general effect. You'll notice that, for
example, ROS Ltd. have one of the math files from mozilla on their
website because it is used in the filer_action code. (or it certainly
was a few months ago.)
So, basically, yes, you can charge for a port of mozilla, but you
must also make any source largely derived from the mozilla licenced
code freely available.
Well, that's how I understand it, anyway. IANAL, YMMV, etc.
bfn,
Joseph
--
Joseph Heenan, Coventry, UK http://www.ping.demon.co.uk/
David J. Ruck
<URL:mailto:rjs...@zetnet.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <676d2fb049%pe...@erble.freeserve.co.uk>, Peter Naulls
>> It's not. Not using g++, anyway. What it is, is very slow to compile.
> But is there a way to deal with the user interface with g++ yet?
There is a C++ class library system in development, which will provide an
encapulation of window objects and powerfull event model for dealing with the
Wimp and toolbox.
See the group website: http://www.egroups.com/group/ro-guilib
The problem with gcc is it still doesn't support the production of modules,
although I expect this change soon.
---druck
David J. Ruck
<URL:mailto:chri...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <8damd8$nc$1...@nnrp1.deja.com> thomas_...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>>> In article <49ad41b20f...@cityweb.de>, mai...@gmx.de wrote:
>>>> RISC OS Ltd. already said, that they don't want to bundle a Browser the
>>>> OS because they had to decide for one Browser which isn't fair.
>>> regarding internet technology ? It would certainly make more sense to
>>> have a browser more closely coupled with the OS.
> a close coupling isn't such a good design idea is it?
>
> I'd have thought a strongly modular approach would
> make design and development easier, and the finished
> product more robust.
If browsers used PCA protocol, any application could transparently use which
ever browser rendering engine and plug-ins which the user has installed.
Thats about as closely coupled as is needed and doesn't involve the OS.
Where the OS comes in is to provide a standard interface for applications to
lauching URLs and to the underling URL transport mechanism (dialing an
fetching etc). The demise of Browse has unfortunately left Acorn URI system
in limbo too, and hense ANT use a different system Fresco, and unboubtely
Oregan/o wont use the code now belonging to Pace.
This is the area RISC OS Ltd needs to concentrate and bundle code. So browser
developers do not have to reinvent the wheel, leading to incompaitble and
often buggy systems.
---druck
Richard Walker
> > deny this: You are porting Mozilla.
>
> Why should RiscStation have to deny or confirm what they are
> porting/clean writing?
You don't have to. I'm just asking if you would.
Interesting how you mention 'clean writing'...
> > Also, wouldn't it have to be re-released for free, since Mozilla itself
> > is? (although I have not checked the license conditions)
>
> No. The licence conditions allow for a charge to be made (AFAIK)
Just looked at the license... are you *sure*?
> > Oh, and what about playing MP3s on RiscStation? Java programming?
>
> Being worked on (both scores)
Great. Now why doesn't the 'bladeenc' link work on the RS web site?
--
Richard.
"I'm back in the U.S.S.R. You don't know how lucky you are boy."
Paul F. Johnson
> Great. Now why doesn't the 'bladeenc' link work on the RS web site?
No idea - email webm...@riscstation.co.uk
You can also get it from the cbsa website
(http://www.acornusers.org/cbsa/Audio.html)
TTFN
Paul
Robert Seago
<URL:mailto:pe...@erble.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <ant16172...@R.zetnet.co.uk>
> Robert Seago <rjs...@zetnet.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > >
> > > It's not. Not using g++, anyway. What it is, is very slow to compile.
> > >
> > But is there a way to deal with the user interface with g++ yet?
>
> hard to put a DDE front end wotsit on top of it (like guavac for
> instance), but generally C(++) compilers are called from makefiles,
> (ok, that's not much of an interface improvement :-).
>
> Perhaps you might care to explain what you're after - a Windows like
> IDE?
>
> Peter
>
with a RISC OS user interface. I have done several command line
programs, as I did in uni on g++.
What I need is a way to interface with templates , for example to read
the contents of icons etc. Just as I have done in BASIC.
Paul F. Johnson
> > What browser are RiscStation providing ?
>
> *Apparently* they are porting Mozilla. I'd *love* to see that, for several
> reasons:
>
> - how on earth will it ever compile?
With the aid of a large hammer, some cleverly written riscos version
libraries and a pile of patience.
> - won't RiscStation have to re-distribute it freely? :-O
No. The licence says if you port it, you can charge for it. However,
changes to the code released by mozilla have to be made public.
> - according to mozilla.org, Mozilla is totally full of bugs
Ah, but then you are assuming that it is Mozilla being ported ;-p
> In my opinion, RISCOS Ltd. should provide a dialler, complete with
> email/news fetcher, as part of RISC OS. Users would just add a browser,
> terminal, FTP client, or email/news client etc.
I'd disagree. It is not up to the operating system to provide such
things. The OS is there to do what it says it is to do - operate the
system. M$ got into deep dung over this.
Michael Gerbracht
> > email/news fetcher, as part of RISC OS. Users would just add a
> > browser, terminal, FTP client, or email/news client etc.
> I'd disagree. It is not up to the operating system to provide such
> things. The OS is there to do what it says it is to do - operate the
> system. M$ got into deep dung over this.
I think you can add it to the system. We have apps like Draw and Paint
which are not necesarry for an OS but they are great. I agree that there
sould not be a browser or something but a dialer is ok. There is also
Access in the ROMs for network connections.
Michael Gerbracht
--
Written with Pluto on an Acorn StrongARM Risc PC 233 MHz running RISC OS 4
Simon Challands
Michael Gerbracht <m.ger...@cityweb.de> wrote in message news:49b2a14d76...@cityweb.de...
> In article <ant20142...@redhotant.com>,
> Paul F. Johnson <paulf....@redhotant.com> wrote:
> > > In my opinion, RISCOS Ltd. should provide a dialler, complete with
> > > email/news fetcher, as part of RISC OS. Users would just add a
> > > browser, terminal, FTP client, or email/news client etc.
>
> > I'd disagree. It is not up to the operating system to provide such
> > things. The OS is there to do what it says it is to do - operate the
> > system. M$ got into deep dung over this.
>
> I think you can add it to the system. We have apps like Draw and Paint
> which are not necesarry for an OS but they are great. I agree that there
> sould not be a browser or something but a dialer is ok. There is also
> Access in the ROMs for network connections.
And if people don't like what's built in to the system it doesn't
always mean that they stick with it anyway. How many people use
Edit as much as Zap or StrongEd? Although that situation might be
different if they weren't free.
Simon Challands