Project Phoenix
Project Phoenix
their Workstations Division and concentrate on their thin-client and
digital TV business has generated a lot of very mixed traffic on the
newsgroups. This means that it is difficult to seperate the constructive,
helpful postings from the general comment.
A group of dealers and developers are planing on getting 'Phoebe Risc PC
2' produced. They also have plans in hand for its longer term development.
To allow everyone to put forward suggestions in a sensible & efficient
way, it has been suggested that positive discussion on the future of
Acorn Computers should be moved to comp.sys.acorn.advocacy, so leaving
c.s.a.misc/hardware for general comment.
A suggested range of topics for discussion on c.s.a.advocacy would be:
* Project Phoenix (continuing production of RPC II)
* Project Phoenix: I'll buy it/Price (who'll buy it? for how much?)
* Project Phoenix: Software
* Project Phoenix: Hardware
* Project Phoenix: Marketing
* Project Phoenix: AW98 (alternative Acorn Show)
* Project Phoenix: Capital raising
* Project Phoenix: Future development (hardware, OS, multiprocessing etc.)
Postings to these threads should be confined to POSITIVE, CONSTRUCTIVE
comments and should attempt to stay on topic (off-topic discussion to
follow-up on c.s.a.misc/hardware). In keeping with general netiquette,
please do not cross-post articles to these threads, and try to post to
the correct thread. This is to allow those involved, who are pressed for
time, to put this rescue into operation and not waste their time unhelpful
comment.
Obviously, if interested parties are to be successful in continuing the
Acorn line, then this will need close relations with Acorn Computers
Ltd., so any unneccessary negative comments about Acorn, it's management
or personell should be avoided.
We hope that this will enable those taking an active role in Acorn's
future to hold meaningful, concise discussions without becoming bogged
down in politics or general chit-chat.
Please use THIS particular thread for suggestions regarding the
continuing production of Phoebe.
Andy Carter
Andrew Conroy <a.m.c...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
[snip]
> * Project Phoenix (continuing production of RPC II)
Seems best option to get things going quickly, and there seems to be
greater support now. Not going to be cheap I guess.
> * Project Phoenix: I'll buy it/Price (who'll buy it? for how much?)
Me, - the offer price was great, but I suppose unrealistic for a rescue. I
paid 1700UKP + VAT for this RPC 4 years ago. Maybe 1500?
A proposed option is for production/sale of motherboard etc only, this may
make it more affordable, especially for those with limited means.
> * Project Phoenix: Software
Do you mean bundled? Software is adequate for me ATM. Get the machine up
and selling first, then think about appealing software.
Big name games are at last appearing for RiscOS, they don't appeal to me, but
they're coming.
> * Project Phoenix: Hardware
> * Project Phoenix: Marketing
It would be useful to have a 'name' connected with it, apart from that,
it's very easy to spend a lot of money on marketing that could be spent
elsewhere in the early days when it's likely to be in short supply.
> * Project Phoenix: AW98 (alternative Acorn Show)
That would be nice, but again cost would have to be a major consideration.
Personally I wouldn't mind a low key event with no glitz or frills, even a
series of smaller local meets.
> * Project Phoenix: Capital raising
From the general tone of posts, it seems many users and dealers are
prepared to help in some way for a start. No doubt this will complicate
some issues, but it is a start.
> * Project Phoenix: Future development (hardware, OS, multiprocessing
> etc.)
An important consideration, but whatever is produced won't please everyone
all the time. Let's get this one going first.
There've been many suggestions around lately, maybe it would be nice to take
RiscOS away from one processor architecture, but this seems fraught with
complications.
There's going to come a time when RiscOS will need rebuilding for multi-
processing/new processors. Is this the time to start?
> Postings to these threads should be confined to POSITIVE, CONSTRUCTIVE
> comments and should attempt to stay on topic (off-topic discussion to
> follow-up on c.s.a.misc/hardware).
Hope these are.
[snip]
> Obviously, if interested parties are to be successful in continuing the
> Acorn line, then this will need close relations with Acorn Computers
> Ltd., so any unneccessary negative comments about Acorn, it's management
> or personell should be avoided.
Absolutely.
Andy
--
fr...@argonet.co.uk - http://www.argonet.co.uk/homepages/fruit/
for accessing Argo using PAP/CHAP authorisation
All contributions to my 'phone bill welcome.
Mik Towse
Andrew Conroy wrote:
> [snip]
> A suggested range of topics for discussion on c.s.a.advocacy would be:
> * Project Phoenix: Software
> * Project Phoenix: Hardware
What's the feasibility of developing RISC OS to run on an IBM PC
platform?
* Crime wouldn't pay, if the government ran it.
--
__ __ _ _ _____
| \/ (_) | __ |_ _|____ __ _____ ___
| |\/| | | |/ / | |/ _ \ V V (_-</ -_)
|_| |_|_|_|\_\ |_|\___/\_/\_//__/\___|
mik....@xemik.com * http://www.xemik.com/
Richard Walker
Project Phoenix <pho...@cje.co.uk> wrote:
> A suggested range of topics for discussion on c.s.a.advocacy would be:
>
> * Project Phoenix (continuing production of RPC II)
I really don't think this is a good idea. Who is actually going to put
down ~1500 notes for one? Who could actually make money (or even break
even!) creating and selling Phoebe?
> * Project Phoenix: I'll buy it/Price (who'll buy it? for how much?)
> * Project Phoenix: Software
This is what we need - software.
Let's start with RISC OS 4 for existing A7000 and Risc PC machines. I'm
sure this is possible, even if it involves taking chunks or RISC OS 3.71,
and gradually adding the Filer, WindowManager, Pinboard, etc. etc. to it.
There's also an opportunity for 3rd parties to add software: MovieFS,
SparkFS, Win95FS, ImageFS, 3DPatch, Zap/StrongEd, Socketeer, Impression
Junior etc. A new disc build could also include lots of freeware.
Then we can do a stock check of each application genre, and try to fill the
gaps in. i.e. spreadsheet(s).
What about getting hold of Advance? Could that become 'free' (or v. cheap)
software which could be bundled with new systems? Like MS Works - it's
naff, but it gets people started.
> * Project Phoenix: Hardware
'Make it a 7000' expansion cards for the NC? (this would include, say,
floppy drive, IDE, USB and serial port hardware) The NC would be sold to
the existing 'enthusiast' market, so there are less people using the 'old'
machines (A5000s and earlier). Because such a product would be cheap (~400
notes, plus a monitor) we could even attract new users.
Such an expansion card would also be useful for existing Risc PC and A7000
machines. Well, the USB and IDE would be handy (heck, even the extra
serial port would be).
Do Acorn have lots of NCs anywhere? Maybe NetProducts do?
Think about it: NC box (200-250ukp to trade) plus the above expansion card,
a mouse/keyboard (20ukp), and a hard disc (2.5" IDE mounted on the card, or
an external solution). OK, the hard disc would be the main cost problem,
but hey... it's cheaper than an A7000, and would get people off A5000s etc.
(so long as there's some new software, and RISC OS 4) and maybe even some
new users.
> * Project Phoenix: Marketing
Marketing?! We don't know about that here... :-)
> * Project Phoenix: AW98 (alternative Acorn Show)
What about Wakefield?
> * Project Phoenix: Future development (hardware, OS, multiprocessing
> etc.)
This is where Forbidden Technologies come in, I think. Their idea of
bolting on a RISC OS user interface to Linux is perfect, so long as the
system appears as easy and slick as an existing Risc PC.
> Postings to these threads should be confined to POSITIVE, CONSTRUCTIVE
> comments and should attempt to stay on topic (off-topic discussion to
> follow-up on c.s.a.misc/hardware). In keeping with general netiquette,
> please do not cross-post articles to these threads, and try to post to
> the correct thread. This is to allow those involved, who are pressed for
> time, to put this rescue into operation and not waste their time unhelpful
> comment.
I would like to think I've stuck to those 'rules'.
--
Richard.
"Oh, I believe in yesterday."
Rob Hemmings
turns out that restarting the Risc PC II is going to be impossible (e.g.
cost too high) then this could be a much cheaper alternative that would keep
users going while a longer term option is being explored.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------
Rob Hemmings Southport
Tel: +44 (0)1704 573210 ro...@argonet.co.uk
Neil Spellings
> I'd like to suggest a backup option of releasing Risc OS 4 only. If it
> turns out that restarting the Risc PC II is going to be impossible (e.g.
> cost too high) then this could be a much cheaper alternative that would keep
> users going while a longer term option is being explored.
All well and good, but the problem is that many of the improvements made to RISC
OS 4 rely on improvemenets made in the RISC OS kernel, which requires a
StrongARM Rev.T and thus would not work on your existing RiscPC.
It may be possible to extract the new Wimp, filer and pinboard, but that makes
it a minor upgrade with little performance enhancement and people may not be
willing to fork out the costs of the ROMS.
Cheers,
/Neil/
--
+-------------------------+---------------------------------+
| Neil Spellings | Spellings Computer Services Ltd |
| NT Systems Analyst | Telephone 0171 451 1960 |
+-------------------------+---------------------------------+
| StrongARM Acorn RiscPC Owner |
| Chairman, Association of Acorn User Groups (AAUG) |
+------------- http://www.argonet.co.uk/scs/ ---------------+
Views expressed are entirely my own...
Neil Spellings
> What's the feasibility of developing RISC OS to run on an IBM PC
> platform?
Virtually nill - the majority of RISC OS is written in ARM assembler and the
task of porting to x86 would be titanic.
What may be more feasible is a RISC OS-like windowing system that runs on
Linux, although this wouldn't be able to run any of your RISC OS software.
Of course what we all really want is RISC OS 4 running natively on a fast
ARM processor...
Steve Ellacott
> It may be possible to extract the new Wimp, filer and pinboard, but that makes
> it a minor upgrade with little performance enhancement and people may not be
> willing to fork out the costs of the ROMS.
>
No it is not. These are the bits the user actually sees, after all, and which
label RiscOS 3 as good but now old fashioned. Even if Phoenix flies, we still
need to encourage a RiscOS 4 upgrade for the older machines. The market is small
so we need to keep all we can.
--
Steve Ellacott, School of Computing and Mathematical Sciences,
University of Brighton, Moulsecoomb, BN2 4GJ, UK
Tel: Home (01273) 885845 Office: (01273) 642544 or 642414
Fax: Home (01273) 270183 Office: (01273) 642405
WWW: http://www.it.brighton.ac.uk/staff/swe
J.Zim...@whitehorse.de
Project Phoenix <pho...@cje.co.uk> wrote:
> Please use THIS particular thread for suggestions regarding the
> continuing production of Phoebe.
>
computers at Acorn, wich should basically be a Phoebe without HD,
RAM, CDROM, keyboard and mouse. This way all the standard PC
components wich get out of date or drop in price fastest are bought
by the enduser or the dealer when needed. And we get an up-to-date
computer within the next months.
- Julian Zimmerle
http://www.WhiteHorse.de/acornmag/
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
J.Zim...@whitehorse.de
> 2' produced. They also have plans in hand for its longer term development.
>
Rob Hemmings
For example is this thread by the same people as the mailing list
acorn...@ask4.co.uk? Are Forbidden Technologies talking to anyone else?
What about the new Acorn User team?
I'd make a very strong plea for all the different people who are actually
able to do something to get together and ensure they are not working at
cross purposes. This would lead to disaster!
I was also surprised to see that Peter Bondar does not appear to have had
any involvement in the mailing list mentioned above. Surely it is vital to
use every bit of knowledge available about Acorn and how they work.
Please all of you *get together* and coordinate what you are doing.
If there is any way ordinary users such as myself can help then please tell
us.
dgs
Rob Hemmings <rhem...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
...
> I was also surprised to see that Peter Bondar does not appear to have had
> any involvement in the mailing list mentioned above.
(Apart from having subscribed to it and sent e-mail to it, I assume
you mean...)
Manchester Acorn User Group - http://www.acorn.manchester.ac.uk/
RPC x86 Card Info Pages - http://acorn.cybervillage.co.uk/pccard/
"Your machine is NOT dead until it stops working" - Ian Gledhill
Stuart Marshall
Neil Spellings <neil.sp...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> > What's the feasibility of developing RISC OS to run on an IBM PC
> > platform?
> Virtually nill - the majority of RISC OS is written in ARM
> assembler and the task of porting to x86 would be titanic.
Agreed. Risc OS running on a PC isn't going to happen.
Acorn themselves knew this - which is another reason project was
born. Acorn always had the aim to produce a popular operating
system that ran on any box.
Galileo was the only hope that our long serving RO applications
would ever run on a Pentium (or similar) based system.
> What may be more feasible is a RISC OS-like windowing system that
> runs on Linux, although this wouldn't be able to run any of your
> RISC OS software.
I seem to be out of touch a little here. I have little interest
(if any) in a Risc OS "clone" desktop environment being developed
for Linux.
Unless something can be done, most (all?) of us at some time or
other are going to have to change platform and OS - I can't see
many people switching from Risc OS to Linux (whatever it looks
like). I think we'll find that the majority will switch from Risc
OS to Windows - much as I'm loathed to say it.
> Of course what we all really want is RISC OS 4 running natively on a fast
> ARM processor...
Now that *would* be nice. Risc OS 4 doesn't even work on a
StrongARM though - although it works fine on an A7000+. It
shouldn't be *too* difficult to make the necessary changes to get
in running on a StrongARM.
Regards,
--
__ _
Stuart Marshall, Programmer. * PGP Key * (_ ._ o _| _ ._ _ _ _|_ _|_
http://www.spidersoft.co.uk/ * Available * __)|_)|(_|(/_| _>(_) | |_
Moderator of comp.sys.acorn announce. | stu...@spidersoft.co.uk
Tony Houghton
> Unless something can be done, most (all?) of us at some time or
> other are going to have to change platform and OS - I can't see
> many people switching from Risc OS to Linux (whatever it looks
> like). I think we'll find that the majority will switch from Risc
> OS to Windows - much as I'm loathed to say it.
It depends on what proportion of RISC OS users are reasonably
technical. The two things I hate about Windows are:
(a) Active windows having to be at the top of the stack. This isn't
too bad on a 1024x768 desktop, but horrible on 800x600.
(b) The computer takes over your tasks leaving you feeling you have no
control.
Linux has neither of these problems and I think any ex-RISC OS user
who is capable of installing and configuring it will find themselves
much more at home than with Windows.
But they'll keep Windows for games of course ;-).
Adam Evans
> I'm getting confused about who is doing what!
>
> For example is this thread by the same people as the mailing list
> acorn...@ask4.co.uk? Are Forbidden Technologies talking to anyone else?
> What about the new Acorn User team?
To my knowledge the Acorn User team isn't involved.
We are not to sure who is involved with acorn...@ask4.co.uk although
the 'Phoenix Project' is being co-ordinated ATM by many people.
The 'Phoenix Project' has strong contacts with the key/main people/companies
I don't know how much I can say!
> Please all of you *get together* and coordinate what you are doing.
That's what we are trying to do ATM. (Having a few difficulties though!).
Adam Evans
--
Webmaster and Sales Assistant
CJE, 78 Brighton Road, Worthing, mailto:ad...@cje.co.uk
West Sussex, BN11 2EN, England http://www.cje.co.uk/
Tel: +44 (0)1903 523666 Fax: +44 (0)1903 523679
* * * * Any views expressed by me are not necessarily those of CJE * * * *
Ted Lepley
<stu...@spidersoft.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Now that *would* be nice. Risc OS 4 doesn't even work on a
> StrongARM though - although it works fine on an A7000+. It
> shouldn't be *too* difficult to make the necessary changes to get
> in running on a StrongARM.
Am I misunderstanding this?
Wasn't Phoebe a Strongarm running RiscOS 4?
Ted.
--
ZFC S+ ted...@argonet.co.uk
Clan member East London. UK
Using Voyager V.2.0
Tue,22 Sep 1998.02:46:54
Liam Gretton
<URL:mailto:rhem...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> I'm getting confused about who is doing what!
You're not the only one...
> For example is this thread by the same people as the mailing list
> acorn...@ask4.co.uk? [...]
I've mailed this supposed mailing list twice, and haven't had a reply of any
sort yet. This doesn't bode well.
--
Liam Gretton l...@star.le.ac.uk
Space Research Centre, li...@binliner.demon.co.uk
Physics and Astronomy Dept, phone +44 (0) 116 223 1039
Leicester University, fax +44 (0) 116 252 2464
Leicester LE1 7RH, UK http://xmm4.xra.le.ac.uk/
Neil Spellings
> In article <36061753...@argonet.co.uk>
> Neil Spellings <neil.sp...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > > What's the feasibility of developing RISC OS to run on an IBM PC
> > > platform?
>
> > Virtually nill - the majority of RISC OS is written in ARM
> > assembler and the task of porting to x86 would be titanic.
>
> Agreed. Risc OS running on a PC isn't going to happen.
>
> Acorn themselves knew this - which is another reason project was
> born. Acorn always had the aim to produce a popular operating
> system that ran on any box.
I assume you mean Galileo by the above.
> Galileo was the only hope that our long serving RO applications
> would ever run on a Pentium (or similar) based system.
Indeed - and now that looks destined to be a microkernel OS embedded deep
withing some DiTV hardware.
> > What may be more feasible is a RISC OS-like windowing system that
> > runs on Linux, although this wouldn't be able to run any of your
> > RISC OS software.
>
> I seem to be out of touch a little here. I have little interest
> (if any) in a Risc OS "clone" desktop environment being developed
> for Linux.
See the 'Forbidden Technologies' thread in c.s.a.misc.
> > Of course what we all really want is RISC OS 4 running natively on a fast
> > ARM processor...
>
> Now that *would* be nice. Risc OS 4 doesn't even work on a
> StrongARM though - although it works fine on an A7000+. It
> shouldn't be *too* difficult to make the necessary changes to get
> in running on a StrongARM.
RISC OS 4 as it stand _does_ run on a StrongARM although you need Rev. T of the
processor, hence it won't work in existing SA RiscPC's.
The above paragraph was a not-so-subtle hint at what Phoebe was to be.
To get RISC OS 4 running on existing hardware would need some serious
jiggerly-pokerly in the kernel to remove all the fancy task swapping stuff that
was added. Not a simply task, given that several other parts of RISC OS 4 now
rely on these enhancements.
John Nolan
> I'd make a very strong plea for all the different people who are actually
> able to do something to get together and ensure they are not working at
> cross purposes. This would lead to disaster!
>
> to
> use every bit of knowledge available about Acorn and how they work.
>
>
>
>
> tell
> us.
Yes, Rob, I am similar to yourself. However, it is early days yet. There do
seem to be certain centres of "gravitational attraction". I am sure that,
little by little, different groups of people will form to co-ordinate
certain sorts of activity. It is already happening, and a good start os to
confine postings to c.s.a.adv.
Then, the idea of "Project Phoenix" as a general Subject heading seems a
good. Several ideas are being thrown into the ring. I am sure that
"gravitational attraction" will slowly pull them into shape.
John N.
--
__ __ __ _________________________________________________________
|__||__)/ __ /
| || \\__/onet/.A5000 - 4MB ZFC LX - with a Zip keeping fit just
_______________ AtomWide High Speed Port & USR 288 trying to keep up!:-|
Stuart Marshall
to...@tcp.co.uk (Tony Houghton) wrote:
> In <e984368948%stu...@spidersoft.co.uk>, Stuart Marshall
> <stu...@spidersoft.co.uk> wrote:
> > Unless something can be done, most (all?) of us at some time or
> > other are going to have to change platform and OS - I can't see
> > many people switching from Risc OS to Linux (whatever it looks
> > like). I think we'll find that the majority will switch from Risc
> > OS to Windows - much as I'm loathed to say it.
> It depends on what proportion of RISC OS users are reasonably
> technical.
Agreed, although that's where (IMHO) these newsgroups could be
*very* misleading. I'd say quite a large percentage of the Acorn
Internet community are fair technical - that's one reason why
they're using the Internet on an Acorn machine in the first place.
There are still, however, many Acorn computer users who do not use
the Internet - and these are more likely to be more none-technical
types who would still happily buy a new "Acorn" machine - but
wouldn't risk Linux or similar.
> The two things I hate about Windows are:
> (a) Active windows having to be at the top of the stack. This isn't
> too bad on a 1024x768 desktop, but horrible on 800x600.
Can't disagree here. I find windows unusable on anything below
800x600 - and as you suggest even that's awful to use. 1024x768
isn't too bad, but somehow my 17" monitor (whilst fine on my RPC
in 1024x768) doesn't quite work on the PC. The screen seems too
small - dunno why.
> (b) The computer takes over your tasks leaving you feeling you
> have no control.
I agree, but does this really effect the casual user?
> Linux has neither of these problems and I think any ex-RISC OS user
> who is capable of installing and configuring it will find themselves
> much more at home than with Windows.
They probably would/will, but they're going to need convincing
that's the way forward.
> But they'll keep Windows for games of course ;-).
Naturally :-)
Cheers,
Stuart Marshall
Ted Lepley <ted...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <e984368948%stu...@spidersoft.co.uk>, Stuart Marshall
> <stu...@spidersoft.co.uk> wrote:
> > Now that *would* be nice. Risc OS 4 doesn't even work on a
> > StrongARM though - although it works fine on an A7000+. It
> > shouldn't be *too* difficult to make the necessary changes to get
> > in running on a StrongARM.
> Am I misunderstanding this?
No, I'm probably being dreadfully unclear as usual.. :-(
> Wasn't Phoebe a Strongarm running RiscOS 4?
Yes, but (as Neil has written elsewhere in this thread) it won't
work on the current StrongARM's being used in the present RPCs -
sadly.
Regards,
Stuart Marshall
Neil Spellings <neil.sp...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> Stuart Marshall wrote:
>
> > In article <36061753...@argonet.co.uk>
> > Neil Spellings <neil.sp...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> > > > What's the feasibility of developing RISC OS to run on an IBM PC
> > > > platform?
> > > Virtually nill - the majority of RISC OS is written in ARM
> > > assembler and the task of porting to x86 would be titanic.
> > Agreed. Risc OS running on a PC isn't going to happen.
> > Acorn themselves knew this - which is another reason project was
> > born. Acorn always had the aim to produce a popular operating
> > system that ran on any box.
> I assume you mean Galileo by the above.
Yep.
> > Galileo was the only hope that our long serving RO applications
> > would ever run on a Pentium (or similar) based system.
> Indeed - and now that looks destined to be a microkernel OS
> embedded deep withing some DiTV hardware.
Unfortunately, what's left of it anyway. I now don't believe that
Galileo will ever become what it could have been.
> > > What may be more feasible is a RISC OS-like windowing system that
> > > runs on Linux, although this wouldn't be able to run any of your
> > > RISC OS software.
> > I seem to be out of touch a little here. I have little interest
> > (if any) in a Risc OS "clone" desktop environment being developed
> > for Linux.
> See the 'Forbidden Technologies' thread in c.s.a.misc.
Thanks - I will. I've scanned over a few messages in it, but the
traffic at the moment is placing a serious strain on my time :-)
> > > Of course what we all really want is RISC OS 4 running natively
> > > on a fast ARM processor...
> > Now that *would* be nice. Risc OS 4 doesn't even work on a
> > StrongARM though - although it works fine on an A7000+. It
> > shouldn't be *too* difficult to make the necessary changes to get
> > in running on a StrongARM.
> RISC OS 4 as it stand _does_ run on a StrongARM although you need
> Rev. T of the processor, hence it won't work in existing SA
> RiscPC's.
Yep, sorry - should have been clearer.
Most of the actual code within RO4 does run however, it's the
clever RAM resident 4Mb image that causes the problems. Most of
the actual modules work fine - although WindowManager 3.99 is a
little flaky.
> The above paragraph was a not-so-subtle hint at what Phoebe was
> to be.
:-)
> To get RISC OS 4 running on existing hardware would need some
> serious jiggerly-pokerly in the kernel to remove all the fancy
> task swapping stuff that was added. Not a simply task, given that
> several other parts of RISC OS 4 now rely on these enhancements.
Personally, as long as RO3.71 runs on the new hardware that's good
enough. I still only view most of the changes in RO4 as tweaks.
Sure, longfilenames and lotsoffilesperdirectory(!) is nice - but
that can be achieved in other ways. Apart from that (and the new
FP module which is a touch faster) there isn't anything else
that's *needed*.
If someone can persuade Acorn to let us licence RO3.71 (as IMS
have obviously done for the Peanut) then wouldn't that be enough
to build a machine around?
Cheers,
Richard Walker
Neil Spellings <neil.sp...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> Rob Hemmings wrote:
>
> > I'd like to suggest a backup option of releasing Risc OS 4 only. If it
> > turns out that restarting the Risc PC II is going to be impossible (e.g.
> > cost too high) then this could be a much cheaper alternative that
> > would keep users going while a longer term option is being explored.
>
> All well and good, but the problem is that many of the improvements made
> to RISC OS 4 rely on improvemenets made in the RISC OS kernel, which
> requires a StrongARM Rev.T and thus would not work on your existing
> RiscPC.
Possibly, but I think that all of this could be worked-around. So long as
someone is willing.
> It may be possible to extract the new Wimp, filer and pinboard, but
> that makes it a minor upgrade with little performance enhancement and
> people may not be willing to fork out the costs of the ROMS.
Also the disc image. Include ALL of the cosmetic enhancements too (the new
icons, new Configure etc.).
--
Richard.
"The magical mystery tour is coming to take you away."
Brian Carroll
Neil Spellings <neil.sp...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
[snip]
> It may be possible to extract the new Wimp, filer and pinboard, but
> that makes it a minor upgrade with little performance enhancement
> and people may not be willing to fork out the costs of the ROMS.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Is there any reason why it cannot all be softloaded into RAM? Now
memory is so cheap (for the RiscPC at least) this may be a better
solution. We are after all doing quite a lot of that with the 'new'
Acorn Boot structure.
Brian.
--
______________________________________________________________
Brian Carroll, Ripon, North Yorkshire
br...@argonet.co.uk
______________________________________________________________
Rob Hemmings
<neil.sp...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
<snip>
> RISC OS 4 as it stand _does_ run on a StrongARM although you need Rev. T
> of the processor, hence it won't work in existing SA RiscPC's.
> The above paragraph was a not-so-subtle hint at what Phoebe was to be.
> To get RISC OS 4 running on existing hardware would need some serious
> jiggerly-pokerly in the kernel to remove all the fancy task swapping stuff
> that was added. Not a simply task, given that several other parts of RISC
> OS 4 now rely on these enhancements.
As another alternative what about releasing just Risc OS 4 with a new
StrongARM processor board to replace the current add-in board.
The advantage of this is that it would presumably be very much cheaper to
make than a complete Risc PC II, while still providing an significant
upgrade to keep things going until longer term plans can come to fruition.
Perhaps this should be done only if the plans to finance a proper Risc PC II
fail as otherwise it might provide too much competition.
Robert Todd
>
> Yes, but (as Neil has written elsewhere in this thread) it won't
> work on the current StrongARM's being used in the present RPCs -
> sadly.
>
Well it does if you don't deliberately break it to stop piracy....
Bob
--
Robert Todd, Todd Education Computer Services, Acorn Dealers
Scottish Show Organiser Telephone 0141 644 4952
E-mail in...@tecs.co.uk WWW http://www.tecs.co.uk
Tony Houghton
> In article <f22b08948%stu...@spidersoft.co.uk>, Stuart Marshall
> >
> > Yes, but (as Neil has written elsewhere in this thread) it won't
> > work on the current StrongARM's being used in the present RPCs -
> > sadly.
> >
>
> Well it does if you don't deliberately break it to stop piracy....
Eh? Are you thinking they've put self-modifying code in RISC OS 4 to
prevent pre-Phoebe users pirating it? That isn't the case. The problem
is that the vast majority of StrongARMs in Risc PCs (I think only a
subset of the later 233MHz models escaped) have a bug which affects
certain memory paging schemes, which haven't been used by RISC OS in
the past, but are used by RISC OS 4.
Richard Walker
to...@tcp.co.uk (Tony Houghton) wrote:
> In <e984368948%stu...@spidersoft.co.uk>, Stuart Marshall <stu...@spidersoft.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > Unless something can be done, most (all?) of us at some time or
> > other are going to have to change platform and OS - I can't see
> > many people switching from Risc OS to Linux (whatever it looks
> > like). I think we'll find that the majority will switch from Risc
> > OS to Windows - much as I'm loathed to say it.
>
> It depends on what proportion of RISC OS users are reasonably
> technical. The two things I hate about Windows are:
>
> (a) Active windows having to be at the top of the stack. This isn't
> too bad on a 1024x768 desktop, but horrible on 800x600.
Hmm... no. It's a bloomin' arse in ANY screen resolution.
> (b) The computer takes over your tasks leaving you feeling you have no
> control.
I think I know what you mean! :-)
Notice how the hard discs always thrashing? Why? The only time I see that
with RISC OS is when Newsbase decides it's due an expiry (and when it
processes new news) RISC OS slows down a bit ('cos of the disc access).
BUT, when I use Win95 or NT and it all gets disc-intensive, they slow down
too. Why? I thought they were not supposed to do that?
On another related point... why, when I exit a game (Quake 2, F1 Racing
Sim etc.) and return to the Win95 desktop, does the hard disc start
thrashing a /lot/ for about 30 secs to 1 min.?
> Linux has neither of these problems and I think any ex-RISC OS user
> who is capable of installing and configuring it will find themselves
> much more at home than with Windows.
Really? Windows don't jump to the front in Linux? Woo-hoo! (I always
thought it was only RISC OS which had the upper hand here)
> But they'll keep Windows for games of course ;-).
Oh, absolutely! :-) Unless Sega's new baby is /really/ good...
--
Richard.
"I'm back in the U.S.S.R. You don't know how lucky you are boy."
Tony Houghton
> In article <3606182C...@argonet.co.uk>,
> Neil Spellings <neil.sp...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> > It may be possible to extract the new Wimp, filer and pinboard, but
> > that makes it a minor upgrade with little performance enhancement
> > and people may not be willing to fork out the costs of the ROMS.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Is there any reason why it cannot all be softloaded into RAM? Now
> memory is so cheap (for the RiscPC at least) this may be a better
> solution. We are after all doing quite a lot of that with the 'new'
> Acorn Boot structure.
There is one compelling reason I'm afraid. Although it's a very
sensible idea, just about any Acorn user still interested enough in
the platform to buy a Phoebe is so stuffed with dogma, they simply
can't contemplate a soft-loaded OS, thinking that it will lead to the
hard drive needing reformatting every time there's an itty bitty
crash.
One thing that would have to be done though is that you'd need a
little partition formatted to the old (current) ADFS spec to load the
new OS from that before it would be able to read the main part of the
disc with long filenames etc.
The thing that worries me most about Project Phoenix is the conditions
under which RISC OS can be licensed. Surely Acorn will want to retain
full control of development, not releasing the source, leaving its
development dependent on an Acorn who have no real incentive to
develop the aspects of it relevant to desktop users. It'll probably
work out OK in another couple of years when Acorn go bankrupt because
STBs either fail to take off or they get pushed out by competition who
can deliver a tailor-made product in 6 months instead of taking 2
years to cobble something together by removing most of the best bits
from a 10-year-old OS.
Dave Mullard
> * Project Phoenix: I'll buy it/Price (who'll buy it? for how much?)
1500 ukp is OK for me. Do the obvious. Sell at a higher price to start, to
raise the maximum cash from those, like me, who will pay more to get one
straight away, and then, when sales start to drop, reduce the price for
those who will only buy for less. Don't announce this in advance of
course. Let genuine developers have them at cost.
> * Project Phoenix: Software
This is what we really buy them for and it has always been the weak spot.
How about selling RiscOS separately. Make software and hardware
upgrades independent, as on PCs.
What is desperately needed is better software development tools. The
toolbox was good, but it stopped dead after the initial release, apart
from the few tweaks for JAVA.
> * Project Phoenix: Hardware
Don't know much about this but faster. Oh, and 4 memory slots not two.
> * Project Phoenix: Marketing
This would be a novelty. Remember that marketing is not about telling the
truth, it's about getting people to buy. Sell to all of those people who
think a computer is a word processor. Don't sell what you have, sell what
people want to buy. You get cynical at 1.00 am.
> * Project Phoenix: AW98 (alternative Acorn Show)
Ask the dealers. It's their livelihood at stake. If there is one I will
spend some money. I always do. Acorn have only postponed it so wait a
month.
> * Project Phoenix: Capital raising
I will put a few thousand in if the plan looks good but someone must ask.
Avoid borrowing. It always has strings.
> * Project Phoenix: Future development (hardware, OS, multiprocessing etc.)
Wait a bit for that :)
--
Dave Mullard <dmul...@argonet.co.uk>
Neil Spellings
[big snip]
> Personally, as long as RO3.71 runs on the new hardware that's good
> enough.
..but it won't.
> I still only view most of the changes in RO4 as tweaks.
> Sure, longfilenames and lotsoffilesperdirectory(!) is nice - but
> that can be achieved in other ways. Apart from that (and the new
> FP module which is a touch faster) there isn't anything else
> that's *needed*.
You *need* things like the new hardware support (codec, PCI, IOMD etc).
> If someone can persuade Acorn to let us licence RO3.71 (as IMS
> have obviously done for the Peanut) then wouldn't that be enough
> to build a machine around?
It would still require alot of work to be done on 3.71 to get it working
on Phoebe (given the underlying hardware changes), and even more to get
it to use the hardware *efficiently* and as Acorn has already done this
with RISC OS 4 it would make no sense not to use it.
D.M. Forbes
|>
|> That would be nice, but again cost would have to be a major consideration.
|> Personally I wouldn't mind a low key event with no glitz or frills, even a
|> series of smaller local meets.
|>
My only thought on the whole topic is that the show *MUST* go on. Otherwise, people will have read the initial
argument, and gone on to find other computer systems (not everyone reads newsgroups - I've missed most of this
discussion) not realising that it isn't all over. More importantly, other people, who are not Acorn
users won't realise this. We need the show to make it clear that we're still here.
Acorn User used to run the show - could they take it on again?
David.
Sam Clayton
Richard Walker <runny...@mindless.com> wrote:
> Notice how the hard discs always thrashing? Why? The only time I see that
> with RISC OS is when Newsbase decides it's due an expiry (and when it
> processes new news) RISC OS slows down a bit ('cos of the disc access).
> BUT, when I use Win95 or NT and it all gets disc-intensive, they slow down
> too. Why? I thought they were not supposed to do that?
>
The reason, my friend, is bloatware.
Because PeeeCeee software is so large (interms of memory requirement,
reasons left to your imagination) it won't fit into RAM. Not only that
but even if the software in-question will fit into RAM Windows won't let
it, just in case you want to run another program as well. The rest of
the program is therefore stored in swap files on your harddrive to be
paged-in when required.
> On another related point... why, when I exit a game (Quake 2, F1 Racing
> Sim etc.) and return to the Win95 desktop, does the hard disc start
> thrashing a /lot/ for about 30 secs to 1 min.?
>
Because when you exit all those lovely swap files need to be cleaned up
and removed. This is why early versions of Win95 were so flackey (well
one reason anyway), they tended not to tidy up too well and forget where
they'd left bits of programs etc etc (not quite that simple but that's
the gist of it)
-Sam
--
J.Zim...@whitehorse.de
Stuart Marshall <stu...@spidersoft.co.uk> wrote:
> If someone can persuade Acorn to let us licence RO3.71 (as IMS
> have obviously done for the Peanut) then wouldn't that be enough
> to build a machine around?
>
why we shouldn't licence the newest version of it.
BTW, Acorn now is a pure technology company, so they want to
sell their machines in big quantities to other firms (Boca Research is
a good example for this) wich in turn sell it to the enduser. So why
don't we just order a few thousand Phoebes from Acorn? Of course
we should order it without RAM, HD, CDROM, monitor, keyboard
and mouse as these are the components wich prices fall fastest. We
would need the case because you can't buy NLX cases yet and also
the case has to be modified so that we can fit DEBI cards into it.
The CDROM-drive is nothing special anymore, you can buy drives
with slide-in-technology from Sony and Pioneer.
This way the basic machine would cost much less, so more people
could afford it and it would be out this year, so not so many users
buy a PC before the new machine is out and we can immediately take
advantage of falling prices of PC komponents.
J.Zim...@whitehorse.de
Rob Hemmings <rhem...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> As another alternative what about releasing just Risc OS 4 with a new
> StrongARM processor board to replace the current add-in board.
>
the new SA-2 wich should be out soon and build an SA-card with 2nd
level cache.
Brian Carroll
Tony Houghton <to...@tcp.co.uk> wrote:
> In <4889b73...@argonet.co.uk>, Brian Carroll <br...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
[snip]
> > Is there any reason why it cannot all be softloaded into RAM?
> > Now memory is so cheap (for the RiscPC at least) this may be a
> > better solution. .... etc
> There is one compelling reason I'm afraid. Although it's a very
> sensible idea, just about any Acorn user still interested enough in
> the platform to buy a Phoebe is so stuffed with dogma, they simply
> can't contemplate a soft-loaded OS,.....
I think people would soon learn to live with this. For example, I
have over 3Mb of modules in the RMA at the moment, mostly
soft-loaded, and that does not bother me at all. Modules clash
sometimes but never (well, hardly ever) crash :-)
> ........ thinking that it will lead to the hard drive needing
> reformatting every time there's an itty bitty crash.
OK. Hard discs are so cheap you can easily afford to keep an
immediately-working backup image. This is what I do; using an IDE
disk to mirror my main SCSI partition. *Con. FileSystem ADFS gets me
working quickly /if/ I get a SCSI crash (not unknown when I was beta
testing SCSI firmware).
> One thing that would have to be done though is that you'd need a
> little partition formatted to the old (current) ADFS spec to load
> the new OS from that before it would be able to read the main part
> of the disc with long filenames etc.
This would be analogous to using the loader for the big IDE discs
which was not too much of a problem.
I'm not saying I /want/ to go down this route, but if it would allow
use of a new RISC OS on my old machine I could easily live with it.
> The thing that worries me most about Project Phoenix is the
> conditions under which RISC OS can be licensed....... [snip]
I share your concern :-((
Tony Houghton
> Really? Windows don't jump to the front in Linux? Woo-hoo! (I always
> thought it was only RISC OS which had the upper hand here)
It depends on the window manager of course, but in fvwm2 they don't by
default (it's proabbly optional). They do in KDE, but I would have
thought it would be a bit more sensible than Windows and have an
option somewhere.
Tony Houghton
> Because PeeeCeee software is so large (interms of memory requirement,
> reasons left to your imagination) it won't fit into RAM. Not only that
> but even if the software in-question will fit into RAM Windows won't let
> it, just in case you want to run another program as well. The rest of
> the program is therefore stored in swap files on your harddrive to be
> paged-in when required.
Is its VM truly that naive?
Tony Houghton
> In article <slrn70gbbq...@tonyh.tcp.co.uk>,
> Tony Houghton <to...@tcp.co.uk> wrote:
> > In <4889b73...@argonet.co.uk>, Brian Carroll <br...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> > > Is there any reason why it cannot all be softloaded into RAM?
> > > Now memory is so cheap (for the RiscPC at least) this may be a
> > > better solution. .... etc
>
> > There is one compelling reason I'm afraid. Although it's a very
> > sensible idea, just about any Acorn user still interested enough in
> > the platform to buy a Phoebe is so stuffed with dogma, they simply
> > can't contemplate a soft-loaded OS,.....
>
> I think people would soon learn to live with this. For example, I
> have over 3Mb of modules in the RMA at the moment, mostly
> soft-loaded, and that does not bother me at all. Modules clash
> sometimes but never (well, hardly ever) crash :-)
Yes, but you should have seen the stick I got here a few months ago
when I suggested RISC OS ought to be soft-loaded!
Mik Towse
> Brian Carroll wrote:
> > Neil Spellings wrote:
> > [snip]
> > > It may be possible to extract the new Wimp, filer and pinboard, but
> > > that makes it a minor upgrade with little performance enhancement
> > > and people may not be willing to fork out the costs of the ROMS.
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> An beta that 'escaped' before the ROM version.
RISC OS is designed to run from RAM anyway. Look at the new toolbox for
example. Remember that Draw/Paint etc were disk-based for a short while,
but put back in ROM when ppl complained.
The ROM modules can be unplugged & the new ones loaded from disk, so this
is not even a consideration, IMO.
* Telephathy: now there's a thought.
--
__ __ _ _ _____
| \/ (_) | __ |_ _|____ __ _____ ___
| |\/| | | |/ / | |/ _ \ V V (_-</ -_)
|_| |_|_|_|\_\ |_|\___/\_/\_//__/\___|
mik....@xemik.com * http://www.xemik.com/
Neil Spellings
>
> In article <f22b08948%stu...@spidersoft.co.uk>, Stuart Marshall
> >
> > Yes, but (as Neil has written elsewhere in this thread) it won't
> > work on the current StrongARM's being used in the present RPCs -
> > sadly.
> >
>
> Well it does if you don't deliberately break it to stop piracy....
You mean Acorn have deliberately broken the softloadable RO4 to stop it
being copied?
How have they done this then? I wouldn't though piracy would be a
problem, given that RO4 won't work on an existing SA RiscPC.
Neil Spellings
>
> In article <3607AFAB...@argonet.co.uk>, Neil Spellings
> <neil.sp...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > of the processor, hence it won't work in existing SA RiscPC's.
>
> > The above paragraph was a not-so-subtle hint at what Phoebe was to be.
>
> > To get RISC OS 4 running on existing hardware would need some serious
> > jiggerly-pokerly in the kernel to remove all the fancy task swapping stuff
> > that was added. Not a simply task, given that several other parts of RISC
> > OS 4 now rely on these enhancements.
>
> StrongARM processor board to replace the current add-in board.
>
> make than a complete Risc PC II, while still providing an significant
> upgrade to keep things going until longer term plans can come to fruition.
Would solve the StrongARM problem, but you've also got alot of RISC OS 4
expecting a new IOMD.
It would also be a bloody expensive upgrade, just to get a relatively
small extra functionality and speed.
Richard Walker
Sam Clayton <s.j.c...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <fb2c58948%runny...@breckonhill.demon.co.uk>
> Richard Walker <runny...@mindless.com> wrote:
>
> > Notice how the hard discs always thrashing? Why? The only time I
> > see that with RISC OS is when Newsbase decides it's due an expiry (and
> > when it processes new news) RISC OS slows down a bit ('cos of the disc
> > access). BUT, when I use Win95 or NT and it all gets disc-intensive,
> > they slow down too. Why? I thought they were not supposed to do that?
>
> The reason, my friend, is bloatware.
I thought that might just have something to do with it...
> Because PeeeCeee software is so large (interms of memory requirement,
> reasons left to your imagination) it won't fit into RAM. Not only that
> but even if the software in-question will fit into RAM Windows won't let
> it, just in case you want to run another program as well. The rest of
> the program is therefore stored in swap files on your harddrive to be
> paged-in when required.
But I really don't understand. I'm sitting at a blank Windows desktop, and
doing something really trivial makes the hard disc go mad.
There's THIRTY TWO MEGABYTES of RAM in there for goodness sake...
~~~~~~~~~~
I've done things and thought 'my BBC would be more responsive', and that's
got thirty two KILOBYTES of RAM!
> ...when you exit all those lovely swap files need to be cleaned up and
> removed. This is why early versions of Win95 were so flackey (well one
> reason anyway), they tended not to tidy up too well and forget where
> they'd left bits of programs etc etc (not quite that simple but that's
> the gist of it)
Bleugh!
I remember, back in 1990/91... I would finish playing Bubble Fair on the
floppy-only A3000... and a CTRL-RESET would have about, erm, 2 seconds...
and I'd be back in a CLEAN desktop. Interesting...
--
Richard.
"And of course Henry The Horse dances the waltz!"
Greg Hennessy
wrote:
>In <14842f8a48%s.j.c...@argbq16.argonet.co.uk>, Sam Clayton <s.j.c...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Because PeeeCeee software is so large (interms of memory requirement,
>> reasons left to your imagination) it won't fit into RAM. Not only that
>> but even if the software in-question will fit into RAM Windows won't let
>> it, just in case you want to run another program as well. The rest of
>> the program is therefore stored in swap files on your harddrive to be
>> paged-in when required.
>
>Is its VM truly that naive?
No. His interpretation of it is.
greg
The Sherratt Clan
So why not tell us _why_ this interpretation is naive, and why Win95/98
murders the disc for about a minute after playing, eg Red Alert, and why a
90Mb machine still swaps with only Word loaded? And dont tell me it
doesnt, I've _seen_ it.
TTFN, Karl
Iain Williamson
to...@tcp.co.uk (Tony Houghton) wrote:
> In <14842f8a48%s.j.c...@argbq16.argonet.co.uk>, Sam Clayton
> <s.j.c...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> > Not only that but even if the software in-question will fit into RAM
> > Windows won't let it, just in case you want to run another program as
> > well. The rest of the program is therefore stored in swap files on your
> > harddrive to be paged-in when required.
>
> Is its VM truly that naive?
>
I have seen a PC with 16Mb and win95 that would constantly page in and
out when only word was loaded, and was idle. I daren't think how long
that hard disc will last. It was a Compaq, mind, which probably explains
a lot!
--
To aviod being sent to my spam bin, simply remove XXX from my address
Iain Williamson --- Acorn and Netware networks
* Go directly to gaol. Do not pass GO. Do NOT collect ukp200
Mik Towse
The Sherratt Clan <kshe...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> Greg Hennessy wrote:
> > Tony Houghton wrote:
> > > Sam Clayton wrote:
> > >Is its VM truly that naive?
> > No. His interpretation of it is.
> So why not tell us _why_ this interpretation is naive, and why Win95/98
> murders the disc for about a minute after playing, eg Red Alert, and
> why a 90Mb machine still swaps with only Word loaded? And dont tell me
> it doesnt, I've _seen_ it.
While your at it, why do I need 10Mb of HD space to run something from a
CD! The Acorn doesn't need any, unless I want to save something of course.
* I'd love to, but I have to check the freshness dates on my dairy products.
Tony Houghton
> I remember, back in 1990/91... I would finish playing Bubble Fair on the
> floppy-only A3000... and a CTRL-RESET would have about, erm, 2 seconds...
> and I'd be back in a CLEAN desktop. Interesting...
Unfortunately, quite a number of games authors seem to think that's
still the way RISC OS works and gets used :-(.
al...@see.the.sig
<URL:mailto:to...@tcp.co.uk> wrote:
> In <fb2c58948%runny...@breckonhill.demon.co.uk>, Richard Walker <runnyhunny@mindless
> .com> wrote:
>
> > Really? Windows don't jump to the front in Linux? Woo-hoo! (I always
> > thought it was only RISC OS which had the upper hand here)
>
> It depends on the window manager of course, but in fvwm2 they don't by
> default (it's proabbly optional). They do in KDE, but I would have
> thought it would be a bit more sensible than Windows and have an
> option somewhere.
>
All X window managers that I've come across in linux are extremely
configurable. You can get the mouse and keyboard to do just about anything
you like. It wouldn't be very difficult at all to create a configuration
for fvwm/mwm/etc that has exactly the same look and feel as the RISC OS
desktop - I'll have a go one day.
--
Alex Blamey | <mailto:al...@blamey.demon.co.uk>
BSc Hon Physics with Astronomy - Got! |---------------------------------
BSc Hon Comp Sys & Networks - Getting! | <http://www.blamey.demon.co.uk>
Thomas Boroske
The Sherratt Clan <kshe...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <360c03f6...@nntp.netcomuk.co.uk>,
> Greg Hennessy <cmk...@cix.compulink.co.uk> wrote:
> > On Wed, 23 Sep 1998 20:03:29 +0100, to...@tcp.co.uk (Tony Houghton)
> > wrote:
>
> > >In <14842f8a48%s.j.c...@argbq16.argonet.co.uk>, Sam Clayton
> > <s.j.c...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > >Is its VM truly that naive?
>
> > No. His interpretation of it is.
>
> So why not tell us _why_ this interpretation is naive, and why Win95/98
> murders the disc for about a minute after playing, eg Red Alert, and why a
> 90Mb machine still swaps with only Word loaded? And dont tell me it
> doesnt, I've _seen_ it.
Does it really swap, as in VM ? Use some system monitor sometimes.
Just watch the swap file size - it'll very probably stay at zero K.
Still, Win95 will access the disc, but that's probably because
Word loads lots of resources (menus, icons, dialogue boxes, all those
smart xyz assistants) as you access them, not at the start.
If I load Win95 and Word on my PC (card) with 32MB assigned, there's
still 10+MB free after that ....
So: Disc accesses in this case have nothing to do with VM. In the case
of Red Alert (or other games, like Quake 2) that may be different.
Kind regards,
--
Thomas Boroske
Erik Theisen
> All well and good, but the problem is that many of the improvements made to RISC
> OS 4 rely on improvemenets made in the RISC OS kernel, which requires a
> StrongARM Rev.T and thus would not work on your existing RiscPC.
Is this the 'S' stepping CPU's DATA_ABORT errata? That bug seems to only affect
demand paged memory management systems. Does this mean they (Acorn) were
creating a new virtual memory subsystem for Risc OS 4?
Virtual memory would be a pretty good argument for people to upgrade their hardware
and OS.
If this is the case, your conclusions about not working with existing RiscPC would
seem to be true as it has a 'S' step level CPU, i.e. the one with the bug. I'd
also be concerned that the raw I/O throughput in the existing Risc PC would
adversely affect page out/in performance.
Ciao,
Erik
--
"Where do WE want YOU to go today..." - Microsoft
Erik "Crayon" Theisen Glenayre Electronics, Inc. (W) +1 770 2832648
11360 Lakefield Drive (F) +1 770 4973984
Duluth, GA 30096 (H) +1 770 6225354
USA
Tom Hughes
Erik Theisen <ethe...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> In article <3606182C...@argonet.co.uk>, Neil Spellings
> <URL:mailto:neil.sp...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:#
>
> > All well and good, but the problem is that many of the improvements made
> > to RISC OS 4 rely on improvemenets made in the RISC OS kernel, which
> > requires a StrongARM Rev.T and thus would not work on your existing
> > RiscPC.
>
> Is this the 'S' stepping CPU's DATA_ABORT errata? That bug seems to only
> affect demand paged memory management systems. Does this mean they (Acorn)
> were creating a new virtual memory subsystem for Risc OS 4?
No but lazy task swapping relies on trapping and handling data aborts
in much the same way as a VM system does. That's why lazy task swapping
was going to be disabled under RISC OS 4 if you didn't have rev T silicon.
Tom
--
Tom Hughes (t...@compton.demon.co.uk)
http://www.compton.demon.co.uk/
...A metaphor is like a simile.
Greg Hennessy
<kshe...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
>So why not tell us _why_ this interpretation is naive, and why Win95/98
>murders the disc for about a minute after playing, eg Red Alert, and why a
>90Mb machine still swaps with only Word loaded? And dont tell me it
>doesnt, I've _seen_ it.
Add the following 3 lines to the system.ini file.
[vcache]
MinFileCache=1024
MaxFileCache=4096
95 ( Just like Linux) by default has a dynamically sized disk cache
that will use all free memory for caching. The above will leave a
significant pool of free memory for application loading.
greg
Greg Hennessy
wrote:
>While your at it, why do I need 10Mb of HD space to run something from a
>CD! The Acorn doesn't need any, unless I want to save something of course.
Whose to say. The application in question is more than likely creating
temporary files.
greg
Greg Hennessy
<y000...@ws.rz.tu-bs.de> wrote:
>Does it really swap, as in VM ? Use some system monitor sometimes.
>Just watch the swap file size - it'll very probably stay at zero K.
Of course.
>Still, Win95 will access the disc, but that's probably because
>Word loads lots of resources (menus, icons, dialogue boxes, all those
>smart xyz assistants) as you access them, not at the start.
I believe its possible to tag the binary to either load all the
resources at runtime, With a consequential hit on load time & resource
usage, Or to dynamically do it as needed.
>If I load Win95 and Word on my PC (card) with 32MB assigned, there's
>still 10+MB free after that ....
>
>So: Disc accesses in this case have nothing to do with VM. In the case
>of Red Alert (or other games, like Quake 2) that may be different.
Pay a visit to www.sysinternals.com & have a look at the 'filemon' &
'regmon' utilities for both NT & 95. These excellent tools can allow
one to monitor disk & registry access right down to an individual
process level.
greg
Philip XP Talbot
>All X window managers that I've come across in linux are extremely
>configurable. You can get the mouse and keyboard to do just about anything
>you like. It wouldn't be very difficult at all to create a configuration
>for fvwm/mwm/etc that has exactly the same look and feel as the RISC OS
>desktop - I'll have a go one day.
This bit has got me thinking....
I think that Linux is the future for Acorn users. My reason is this:
(Please bear with me - this is a bit long!)
When I first started computing on my first computer (VideoGenie (TRS80
clone)) it was exciting and I had that special *BUZZ* that you feel
when you explore somthing stimulating. If you are a programmer then
you know what I am talking about.
The second computer I had was an Amstrad CPC464. I used to hack around
that machine like a demon - still feeling that *BUZZ*.
(Apologies if this is getting rather repetative!)
The third computer was an Amiga1000 - (along with a forth, an Amiga
2000, a fifth, an Amiga 1200) . I really loved those beasties - again
still that *BUZZ* feeling from programming them under Intuition (the
Amiga GUI - well a part of it anyway).
(Almost getting to the point!)
Unfortunately Commodore when bust and stopped producing Amigas (almost
the present Acorn owners situation). I was faced with a dialemma - to
continue to use Amigas with the software base rapidly drying up or to
jump ship to something else. At the time there was nothing around that
matched the user base of IBM PC's. I thought 'these are not likely to
go away in a hurry' and so I ditched my Amigas and bought PC stuff
instead.
However, this proved to be a bit of a bad move! While I could buy the
latest games and so on for my PC it was *DULL* *DULL* *DULL* !! There
wasn't that *BUZZ* in programming it AT ALL! This was because it had
Windows installed on it. Anyway I forgot about programming it and just
used it to surf the net, play games etc. Then came the upgrading. To
run the newer software I upgraded or was forced to suffer a slowing
down of my machine. So I bought and bought - and before I knew it I
had enough discarded bits and bobs to almost make another PC. So I
thought, what the hell, and bought another case to make a second PC
(This has happend again and I now have a third PC).
I then heard of another operating system that was floating around
called Linux (actually I had heard of it back in the Amiga days) and I
gave it a go. Wow! There was that *BUZZ* again when I did a bit of
programming - and on my PC!!! Linux was very configurable. If I did
not like the desktop I changed it for another one.
(My point)
I know that you Acorn users out there like nice stable machine that is
*FUN* to use and interesting. So why not give Linux a try on your
RiscPC's or if you have an old IBM PC lying around (or you could buy
one cheap!) give it a new lease of life. I promise you that you will
feel that *BUZZ* as you explore the operating system and desktop.
There is a wealth of software out there ( and a lot of it is free
(free as in freely available/modifiable)). If you cannot find what you
want then get programming and realease it. The Linux community is
friendly and will usually provide helpful hints (especially if it gets
them thinking!) and there is a real feeling of belonging.
Sam Clayton
The Sherratt Clan <kshe...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <360c03f6...@nntp.netcomuk.co.uk>,
> Greg Hennessy <cmk...@cix.compulink.co.uk> wrote:
> > On Wed, 23 Sep 1998 20:03:29 +0100, to...@tcp.co.uk (Tony Houghton)
> > wrote:
>
> > >In <14842f8a48%s.j.c...@argbq16.argonet.co.uk>, Sam Clayton
> > <s.j.c...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > >Is its VM truly that naive?
>
> > No. His interpretation of it is.
A truely witty retort.
My 'over-simplification' of the PC memory management was not intended to
be a 100% accurate model fo the inner workings of windows. It was
intended to give those unfamiliar with general 'techie-stuff' an idea of
why their PCs thrash the harddisc.
Personally I wouldn't waste my time typing out a true techie report on
it in a newsgroup such as this, I might in a PC newsgroup dealing with
'techie' issues.
PC memory management is improving but it still isn't perfect and whilst
people are willing to put more memory into their machines to make up for
the sub-standard memory management it's unlikely to change.
>
> So why not tell us _why_ this interpretation is naive, and why Win95/98
> murders the disc for about a minute after playing, eg Red Alert, and why a
> 90Mb machine still swaps with only Word loaded? And dont tell me it
> doesnt, I've _seen_ it.
>
> TTFN, Karl
>
--
Paul Vigay
<URL:mailto:mik....@xemik.com> wrote:
> While your at it, why do I need 10Mb of HD space to run something from a
> CD! The Acorn doesn't need any, unless I want to save something of course.
Not to mention being able to run applications from inside ZIP archives from a
CD without even the need for *any* hard disc installation or use at all.
--
Paul Vigay Computer Resources Manager,
__\\|//__ Bohunt Community School
http://www.matrix.clara.net (` o-o ') Liphook, Hampshire
---------------------------------ooO-(_)-Ooo-----------------------------
All views my own and I reserve the right to change them without warning!
Remove ".vogonpoetry" to reply by email.
John Ward
Andrew Conroy <a.m.c...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> The recent shock decision by Acorn to cancel production of Phoebe,
> close their Workstations Division and concentrate on their thin-client
> and digital TV business has generated a lot of very mixed traffic on
> the newsgroups. This means that it is difficult to seperate the
> constructive, helpful postings from the general comment.
One thing you might find worthwhile doing is setting up a separate group
for the Phoenix traffic. I'd suggest making it (auto?) moderated to keep
out the anti-Acorn/RISC OS dross that tends to infect our NGs. This would
solve what are probably the two biggest problems in separating the wheat
from the chaff:
1. it's all mixed up with day-to-day Acorn-related articles, and everyone
who wants to follow/contribute to the Phoenix threads ends up having to
d/l at least all the headers for everything else;
2. anyone can contribute, regardless of any requests, suggestions or
posting rules.
--
John M Ward : ZFC A and a member of Convergence International
Greg Hennessy
<s.j.c...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
>
>PC memory management is improving but it still isn't perfect and whilst
>people are willing to put more memory into their machines to make up for
>the sub-standard memory management it's unlikely to change.
>
Please define what you mean by 'Sub Standard' ?
greg
Darren Durbin
wrote:
>In article <as.2981679570...@spidersoft.co.uk>,
> Andrew Conroy <a.m.c...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
>> The recent shock decision by Acorn to cancel production of Phoebe,
>> close their Workstations Division and concentrate on their thin-client
>> and digital TV business has generated a lot of very mixed traffic on
>> the newsgroups. This means that it is difficult to seperate the
>> constructive, helpful postings from the general comment.
>
>One thing you might find worthwhile doing is setting up a separate group
>for the Phoenix traffic.
Probably a good idea for posts directed solely at organising a rescue
for the Risc PC 2
>I'd suggest making it (auto?) moderated to keep
>out the anti-Acorn/RISC OS dross that tends to infect our NGs.
Yes, much better to make the entire c.s.a.acorn.* hierarchy an insular
collection of self congratulatory newsgroups where anyone who dares to
suggest that other OS's/companies may do something better than RISC
OS/Acorn be kept out lest they infect the minds of others and lead
them astray from The One True Way.
If you'd prefer c.s.a.advocacy to become a group where people simply
assured themselves that "Yes, RISC OS is still as perfect as the day
God created it" then fine. However, if you believe that RISC OS has a
future then you should be prepared to argue your view with others, or,
heaven forfend, accept that RISC OS and its apps can learn from other
OS's/apps.
Darren
Stuart Marshall
cmk...@cix.compulink.co.uk (Greg Hennessy) wrote:
I thought he already had! See Sam's original posting.
Regards,
--
__ _
Stuart Marshall, Programmer. * PGP Key * (_ ._ o _| _ ._ _ _ _|_ _|_
http://www.spidersoft.co.uk/ * Available * __)|_)|(_|(/_| _>(_) | |_
Moderator of comp.sys.acorn announce. | stu...@spidersoft.co.uk
Tony Houghton
> All X window managers that I've come across in linux are extremely
> configurable. You can get the mouse and keyboard to do just about anything
> you like. It wouldn't be very difficult at all to create a configuration
> for fvwm/mwm/etc that has exactly the same look and feel as the RISC OS
> desktop - I'll have a go one day.
I keep meaning to do something like that, but the more I use fvwm2 in
out-of-the-box configuration, the more I like it, even though its
window furniture looks worryingly like Windows 3.1. Despite that it's
very functional, and as for launching programs from menus and
toolbars, I don't tend to stray from the shell much anyway.
I only this week discovered something about the way the window toggle
size icon is configured. If I click the left button it resizes only
vertically, the right button only horizontally, and the middle button
both (a la RISC OS and Windows). Very neat.
Tony Houghton
> In article <488abd24e...@argonet.co.uk>, Mik Towse
> <URL:mailto:mik....@xemik.com> wrote:
>
> > While your at it, why do I need 10Mb of HD space to run something from a
> > CD! The Acorn doesn't need any, unless I want to save something of course.
>
> Not to mention being able to run applications from inside ZIP archives from a
> CD without even the need for *any* hard disc installation or use at all.
Doesn't ZipMagic do that for Windows now?
The Sherratt Clan
Thomas Boroske <y000...@ws.rz.tu-bs.de> wrote:
> In message <488ab2d36...@argonet.co.uk>
> The Sherratt Clan <kshe...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> Just watch the swap file size - it'll very probably stay at zero K.
> Word loads lots of resources (menus, icons, dialogue boxes, all those
> smart xyz assistants) as you access them, not at the start.
> still 10+MB free after that ....
Well, it loaded bits every now and then which is acceptable, but it
definitly was hammering the disc - two docs loaded, switch between them
- disc chudders away for a few seconds, other doc appears. Didnt use the
system monitors to look though.
Mik Towse
Greg Hennessy <cmk...@cix.compulink.co.uk> wrote:
> Mik Towse wrote:
> >While your at it, why do I need 10Mb of HD space to run something from
> >a CD! The Acorn doesn't need any, unless I want to save something of
> >course.
> Whose to say. The application in question is more than likely creating
> temporary files.
Possibly, but this was before it was used. BTW have you seen Creatures 2?
It needs 300Mb of hd space. Eek.
* 2 + 2 = 5 ; with suitably large values of 2.
Mik Towse
Darren Durbin wrote:
> John Ward wrote:
> >I'd suggest making it (auto?) moderated to keep
> >out the anti-Acorn/RISC OS dross that tends to infect our NGs.
> Yes, much better to make the entire c.s.a.acorn.* hierarchy an insular
> collection of self congratulatory newsgroups where anyone who dares to
> suggest that other OS's/companies may do something better than RISC
> OS/Acorn be kept out lest they infect the minds of others and lead
> them astray from The One True Way.
John is getting pointing a finger at are the many posts which simply
denograte Acorn & RISC OS (altho' there are as many which do likewise for
other OS's)
> If you'd prefer c.s.a.advocacy to become a group where people simply
> assured themselves that "Yes, RISC OS is still as perfect as the day
> God created it" then fine.
As an
Acorn user of many years I'd be the first to admit that is missung many
> However, if you believe that RISC OS has a future then you should be
> prepared to argue your view with others,
As long as we are prepared to listen to each other.
> or, heaven forfend, accept that RISC OS and its apps can learn from
> other OS's/apps.
As indeed W95 did from RISC OS & System 7.
* Why do you always find something in the last place you look?
Andrew P. Harmsworth Esq.
Houghton) wrote:
> Doesn't ZipMagic do that for Windows now?
Yeah, I think so. It was on the cover of Comp Shopper about 6 months ago in
a blaze of glory - "Run software without unzipping!" or some such. I thought
- BIG DEAL!
APH
--
Manchester Acorn:MAUG http://move.to/MAUG * A P Harmsworth * * *
Science Coursework http://start.at/scirep * Warwick School Physics Dept
Warwick School http://welcome.to/warwick * WARWICK * 01926 776464
Solar System http://travel.to/theplanets * CV34 6PP, UK * * * *
* * * * * * my own views * * * a...@warwick.warwks.sch.uk *
Paul Vigay
<URL:mailto:to...@tcp.co.uk> wrote:
> In <ant2509530b0q#HZ@localhost>, Paul Vigay <pvi...@bohunt.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > In article <488abd24e...@argonet.co.uk>, Mik Towse
> >
> > > While your at it, why do I need 10Mb of HD space to run something from a
> > > CD! The Acorn doesn't need any, unless I want to save something of course.
> >
> > CD without even the need for *any* hard disc installation or use at all.
>
Erm, RISC OS owners have been able to do this for the past 10 years nearly.
Perhaps it's time to welcome Windows users into the real world. I don't
believe ZipMagic allows you to run applications straight off a CD though
(without installing on the local HD, wasting space), so perhaps in another 10
years Windows users might have caught up.
Dave Harrington
>Erm, RISC OS owners have been able to do this for the past 10 years nearly.
>Perhaps it's time to welcome Windows users into the real world. I don't
>believe ZipMagic allows you to run applications straight off a CD though
>(without installing on the local HD, wasting space), so perhaps in another
10
>years Windows users might have caught up.
Interesting history lesson, but not very useful for the real world, Paul.
That's about as useful as saying that RISC-OS had a task bar ten years ago
whereas Windows has only had one for three years - isn't the present
situation the only relevant one unless you are just interested in petty
points scoring? As for the usefulness of being able to run applications
direct from archives, (although I will try ZipMagic and others) what happens
when it needs to write back to the archived application directory?
Regards,
Dave Harrington.
Andy McMullon
<URL:mailto:david_ha...@qsp.co.uk> wrote:
> As for the usefulness of being able to run applications
> direct from archives, (although I will try ZipMagic and others) what happens
> when it needs to write back to the archived application directory?
That's not a problem with archiveFSs on RiscOS. ArcFS2 does this and I
think SparkFS does too.
--
Andy: skyp...@bigfoot.com / http://www.mcfamily.demon.co.uk
Paul Herrold
>direct from archives, (although I will try ZipMagic and others) what
happens
>when it needs to write back to the archived application directory?
ZipMagic does this all automatically, although I'm not certain why ZipMagic
is being discussed here, I must've missed something above. All it does is
unzip the data you need into memory, and alter then write the parts of the
zip file that have changed back to disk if need be when you make a change.
This is done seemlessly with things like SparkFS as well, using the RiscOS's
built in ability to use files as file systems.
Derek Haslam
Dave Harrington <david_ha...@qsp.co.uk> wrote:
> As for the usefulness of being able to run applications
> direct from archives, (although I will try ZipMagic and others) what happens
> when it needs to write back to the archived application directory?
> Regards,
> Dave Harrington.
Works just fine with ArcFS under RiscOS. Just tried it with a
Powerbase database, adding 2 new records to the file without
de-archiving. No problem at all.
Derek Haslam
--
__ __ __ __ __
/ \ | ||__ |__)/ | | |_ Derek Haslam: Acorn Computer Enthusiast
\_\/ |__||__ | \\__ |__| __| que...@argonet.co.uk
\ Mastery of the rules is a pre-requisite for creatively breaking them.
Derek Haslam
Andy McMullon <skyp...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
> In article <6unsg4$f6o$1...@triton.qsp.co.uk>, Dave Harrington
> > As for the usefulness of being able to run applications
> > direct from archives, (although I will try ZipMagic and others) what
> happens
> > when it needs to write back to the archived application directory?
> That's not a problem with archiveFSs on RiscOS. ArcFS2 does this and I
> think SparkFS does too.
Yep! They both work in this way just fine.
Willie Stott
"Dave Harrington" <david_ha...@qsp.co.uk> wrote:
> Paul Vigay wrote in message ...
> >Erm, RISC OS owners have been able to do this for the past 10 years nearly
> > I don't believe ZipMagic allows you to
[snip]
]
> direct from archives, (although I will try ZipMagic and others)
Don't you find it amusing (if not pathetic) that it zip _magic_
and install _wizard_ etc all over windoze. Seems to me that that's
what's needed to get W95/98 to work properly, like RiscOS :)
Just my thoughts
Willie
--
------ wst...@argonet.co.uk -----
Roy A Howard
Acorn workstations.
Like many I awaited the actual existence of the Phoebe b4 committing to purchaseAlso one of those caught out by purchasing Acorn machines at high prices only to find them MUCH cheaper ;ater in the year.
A price of only about 1200/1300 would make me almost certain to stick with the RiscPC.
Some positive announcement of a PC board would also help to persuade me.
--
Roy A Howard
iain truskett - koschei
<URL:mailto:david_ha...@qsp.co.uk> wrote:
> As for the usefulness of being able to run applications
> direct from archives, (although I will try ZipMagic and others) what happens
> when it needs to write back to the archived application directory?
And why would a program need to do that? Choices go inside !Boot (or
wherever you happen to have Choices$Write set to).
--
iain, aka koschei <http://koschei.shada.com/>
Happiness is a hard disc
that expands in proportion to how much you wish to store on it.
John Fenton
"Paul Herrold" <ithi...@none.com> wrote:
> ZipMagic does this all automatically... All it does is
> unzip the data you need into memory, and alter then write the parts of the
> zip file that have changed back to disk if need be when you make a change.
> This is done seemlessly with things like SparkFS as well, using the
> RiscOS's built in ability to use files as file systems.
KDE can open up gzip files in the KFM (K File Manager), too
(I've discovered, recently).
--
John Fenton http://www.gnarumen.demon.co.uk/
==============================================================
This message sent using an Acorn Risc PC 600 (+StrongARM)
Acorn : RISC based desktop computers since 1987
John Ward
I suspect that it would be more accurately described as one possible
future for some current users, but by no means a universal "next step".
John Ward
Darren Durbin <dar...@icode.co.uk> wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Sep 1998 13:50:09 +0100, John Ward <john...@argonet.co.uk>
> wrote:
> >In article <as.2981679570...@spidersoft.co.uk>,
> > Andrew Conroy <a.m.c...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> >> The recent shock decision by Acorn to cancel production of Phoebe,
> >> close their Workstations Division and concentrate on their
> >> thin-client and digital TV business has generated a lot of very
> >> mixed traffic on the newsgroups. This means that it is difficult to
> >> seperate the constructive, helpful postings from the general comment.
> >
> >One thing you might find worthwhile doing is setting up a separate
> >group for the Phoenix traffic.
>
> Probably a good idea for posts directed solely at organising a rescue
> for the Risc PC 2
Exactly what I was suggesting -- nothing more, nothing less. Full marks
for comprehending my simple, clear sentence above.
As for the irrelevant garbage that followed...well, I've snipped it to
avoid repeating the potential embarrassment to you };->
Darren Durbin
wrote:
>In article <360b6862...@news.kvaerner.com>,
> Philip XP Talbot <philip...@kvaerner.com> wrote:
>> I think that Linux is the future for Acorn users.
>
>I suspect that it would be more accurately described as one possible
>future for some current users, but by no means a universal "next step".
I strangely find myself in complete agreement with Mr Ward here.
RISC OS is 'sold' on its ease of use. This hardly describes Linux,
even with the recent improvements ( eg, KDE )
Darren
Darren Durbin
wrote:
>As for the irrelevant garbage that followed...well, I've snipped it to
>avoid repeating the potential embarrassment to you };->
If I would find repitition of my views embarrassing I wouldn't have
posted them in the first place.
Darren
John Ward
Darren Durbin <dar...@icode.co.uk> wrote:
> >In article <360b6862...@news.kvaerner.com>,
> > Philip XP Talbot <philip...@kvaerner.com> wrote:
> >> I think that Linux is the future for Acorn users.
> >
> >I suspect that it would be more accurately described as one possible
> >future for some current users, but by no means a universal "next step".
> I strangely find myself in complete agreement with Mr Ward here.
<fx: falls off chair in surprise>
> RISC OS is 'sold' on its ease of use. This hardly describes Linux,
> even with the recent improvements ( eg, KDE )
Ah, that's something of a shame. I have been hearing encouraging noises
about KDE, but no details, so had been hoping it would at last make this
ancient OS have at least something of the feel of a 'nineties system
suitable for ordinary end-users, rather than just the "techies".
Still, I'm going to have a go at installing Linux any day now (I think I
have all the necessary bits now), after my intensive disk-shuffling
activities of the last few days to make room for it. There's nothing like
personal experience of something to really find out about it.
Rogue
<wst...@argonet.co.uk> writes
>In message <6unsg4$f6o$1...@triton.qsp.co.uk>
> "Dave Harrington" <david_ha...@qsp.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Paul Vigay wrote in message ...
>> >Erm, RISC OS owners have been able to do this for the past 10 years nearly
>> > I don't believe ZipMagic allows you to
>[snip]
>]
>
>and install _wizard_ etc all over windoze. Seems to me that that's
>what's needed to get W95/98 to work properly, like RiscOS :)
>
>Just my thoughts
>
>Willie
Sorry, I have to spring to the defence of ZipMagic here, though I think
you'll find I'm far from a blind Windows fanatic (ref: Hewson spouts
thread).
Once installed, Zipmagic is highly configurable and affords the power
user a high degree of control over the filesystem and the zipping
process. The first thing to do once installed is disable the wizard
stuff and the entries in the filer menus.
A few features which, imho, make zipmagic superior to SparkFS.
1) Decompression/compression on the fly by remving adding the zip
extension on a folder.
2) Userconfigurable list of apps that zipmagic prevents from seeing zips
as folders.
3) Local option to turn off view as folder from any filer window (via
widget button).
4) Ability to disable/unload/reload zipmagic at leisure via a properties
control progrm (dll) that is part of the main app.
5) List of recent zipfolders for easy access.
6) Ability to install applications straight into a zip (set path to
C:\whatever\inhere.zip (of course RISCOS obviates the need for this by
most s/w being able to be run from floppy.. no installation required.
Regards,
--
Rogue
Paul Vigay
<URL:mailto:john...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> Still, I'm going to have a go at installing Linux any day now (I think I
> have all the necessary bits now), after my intensive disk-shuffling
> activities of the last few days to make room for it. There's nothing like
> personal experience of something to really find out about it.
If anyone is interested, I've just revised my "Dummies Guide to Installing
ARMLinux" page at http://www.matrix.clara.net/Acorn/linux.html to include
solutions for two of the most common problems and have clarified a couple of
the points along the way.
As usual, please feel free to comment.
regards
Thomas Boroske
John Ward <john...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <361b3894...@news.demon.co.uk>,
> Darren Durbin <dar...@icode.co.uk> wrote:
> > On Wed, 30 Sep 1998 13:28:53 +0100, John Ward <john...@argonet.co.uk>
> > wrote:
>
> > >In article <360b6862...@news.kvaerner.com>,
> > > Philip XP Talbot <philip...@kvaerner.com> wrote:
> > >> I think that Linux is the future for Acorn users.
> > >
> > >I suspect that it would be more accurately described as one possible
> > >future for some current users, but by no means a universal "next step".
>
> > I strangely find myself in complete agreement with Mr Ward here.
>
> <fx: falls off chair in surprise>
>
> > RISC OS is 'sold' on its ease of use. This hardly describes Linux,
> > even with the recent improvements ( eg, KDE )
>
> Ah, that's something of a shame. I have been hearing encouraging noises
> about KDE, but no details, so had been hoping it would at last make this
> ancient OS have at least something of the feel of a 'nineties system
> suitable for ordinary end-users, rather than just the "techies".
It does - with KDE installed on the system, the user can log in
and after that use the computer without ever touching a shell
(OK, might not be possible for exotic config tasks ...) as
long as he's got all the apps he needs. That's non-techie.
The problem with KDE is that, as a GUI, it's rather closer to
Win95 than to RiscOS - that doesn't mean it hasn't got some
good points over RiscOS, but still. Oh, and it's slow, IMHO.
> Still, I'm going to have a go at installing Linux any day now (I think I
> have all the necessary bits now), after my intensive disk-shuffling
> activities of the last few days to make room for it. There's nothing like
> personal experience of something to really find out about it.
Yes, do that :-)
Kind regards,
--
Thomas Boroske
Mik Towse
> [snip]
> Sorry, I have to spring to the defence of ZipMagic here, [...]
This App's name makes me smile... it implies something amazing &
wonderful; altho' it's something RISC OS users take for granted. But,
then, perhaps it is so to Windoze users.;-)
* The only difference between an unclear war and a nuclear war is the way you use the UN.
Richard Walker
r...@rhoward.demon.co.uk (Roy A Howard) wrote:
> Alas only heard of new £500 discount scheme after announcement of
> demise of Acorn workstations.
Like every Acorn user (small 'u'!) who does not read these news groups, or
certain web sites (Acorn Arcade, Cybervillage, AcornUsers.urg etc.)
> Like many I awaited the actual existence of the Phoebe b4 committing
> topurchaseAlso one of those caught out by purchasing Acorn machines at
> high prices only to find them MUCH cheaper ;ater in the year.
True, and that's partly why Acorn made the 500ukp offer...
Interestingly, I wasn't terribly impressed when I first heard about Phoebe.
But, now, the more I read about 'her', the more I want... something like
"You don't know what you had 'till it's gone", springs to mind... :-/
--
Richard.
"And of course Henry The Horse dances the waltz!"
The Sherratt Clan
Rogue <king...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> In article <9447c68c48%wst...@argonet.co.uk>, Willie Stott
> <wst...@argonet.co.uk> writes
> >In message <6unsg4$f6o$1...@triton.qsp.co.uk>
> > "Dave Harrington" <david_ha...@qsp.co.uk> wrote:
> >Don't you find it amusing (if not pathetic) that it zip _magic_
> >and install _wizard_ etc all over windoze. Seems to me that that's
> >what's needed to get W95/98 to work properly, like RiscOS :)
> you'll find I'm far from a blind Windows fanatic (ref: Hewson spouts
> thread).
I dont think Dave was slagging ZipMagic[1], but was pinting out that
windows is full of wizards and things are called ****magic, thus a touch
of the black arts was needed to use WinWhateverŒ
TFFN, Karl
[1] Cant possibly comment, never used it.
Willie Stott
Rogue <king...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Sorry, I have to spring to the defence of ZipMagic here, though I think
> you'll find I'm far from a blind Windows fanatic
[snip]
Calm down old bean. I dare say ZipMagic is wonderful, I was referring
to the name, the _Magic_ bit of it.
(next bit in Swiss accent)
You do however seem a bit too pro PC for my liking, I suggest a visit
to Dr Solomon :-)
Liam Gretton
<URL:mailto:l...@lmrsale.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> Why is everyone saying that RISC OS is going to die? Just because Acorn
> aren't developing desktop machines (ATM), it does not mean that RISC OS
> will be scrapped too. Thin clients (NCs with network cards) use RISC OS,
> and will eventually have RISC OS 4..
This is cold comfort for those of us who would like to continue using RISC OS
on our desktops, even if it does happen the way you suggest.
> BTW, don't buy a PC to get Linux, you can run it on an Acorn (ARM Linux).
Why?
--
Liam Gretton
li...@binliner.demon.co.uk
l...@star.le.ac.uk
Peter Smith
The Sherratt Clan <kshe...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <KlqxJGAp...@chromatics.demon.co.uk>,
> Rogue <king...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > In article <9447c68c48%wst...@argonet.co.uk>, Willie Stott
> > <wst...@argonet.co.uk> writes
> > >In message <6unsg4$f6o$1...@triton.qsp.co.uk>
> > > "Dave Harrington" <david_ha...@qsp.co.uk> wrote:
> > >Don't you find it amusing (if not pathetic) that it zip _magic_
> > >and install _wizard_ etc all over windoze. Seems to me that that's
> > >what's needed to get W95/98 to work properly, like RiscOS :)
> > Sorry, I have to spring to the defence of ZipMagic here, though I think
> > you'll find I'm far from a blind Windows fanatic (ref: Hewson spouts
> > thread).
>
> I dont think Dave was slagging ZipMagic[1], but was pinting out that
> windows is full of wizards and things are called ****magic, thus a touch
> of the black arts was needed to use WinWhateverŒ
>
> TFFN, Karl
>
> [1] Cant possibly comment, never used it.
I can because I have, and its actually quite nice! It certainly beats Winzip
for "niceness" of use. Shame it stops working after the 30 day trial period.
Winzip just insists you click the "I agree" button :->
Peter
--
To reply by mail, change .com to .co in my email address
54 things to do in a lift....
45. Announce in a demonic voice: "I must find a more suitable host body."
Phillip Jones
The Sherratt Clan wrote in message <488f52dad...@argonet.co.uk>...
> [big old snip]
>I dont think Dave was slagging ZipMagic[1], but was pinting out that
pinting out? All you ever think of is beer ;)
Pip.
John Watson
wrote:
>In article <as.2981679570...@spidersoft.co.uk>,
> Andrew Conroy <a.m.c...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
>
>[snip]
>
>> * Project Phoenix: I'll buy it/Price (who'll buy it? for how much?)On Sun, 20 Sep 1998 10:26:41 +0100, Andy Carter <fr...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
>In article <as.2981679570...@spidersoft.co.uk>,
> Andrew Conroy <a.m.c...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
>
>[snip]
>
>> * Project Phoenix: I'll buy it/Price (who'll buy it? for how much?)
>
>Me, - the offer price was great, but I suppose unrealistic for a rescue. I
>paid 1700UKP + VAT for this RPC 4 years ago. Maybe 1500?
>
>A proposed option is for production/sale of motherboard etc only, this may
>make it more affordable, especially for those with limited means.
>
I think there should be an aim to get the price under £1000. Pick up
computer shopper the Prices of 200mmx can easily be bought at £399. I
think cheaper it is the better.
>> * Project Phoenix: Software
>
>Do you mean bundled? Software is adequate for me ATM. Get the machine up
>and selling first, then think about appealing software.
>
Well fowk wont by the machine of there is'nt much software. I think
one are should be looked on is JAVA. Currently theres more than 7000
java programs out there. (www.javasoft.com) I think if JAVA is
integrated into the OS the better. Currently RISC OS java software
is'nt being updated enough or on time.
john
>
Well fowk wont by the machine of there is'nt much software. I think
one are should be looked on is JAVA. Currently theres more than 7000
java programs out there. (www.javasoft.com) I think if JAVA is
intergrated into the OS the better. Currently RISC OS java software
is'nt being updated engouh or on time.
john
Web Page: jgw.fsn.net
icq: 13900644
Nike name on irc: jgw
Poor student with no money. All donations accepted.
Rogue
<pvi...@bohunt.demon.co.uk> writes
>Erm, RISC OS owners have been able to do this for the past 10 years nearly.
>Perhaps it's time to welcome Windows users into the real world. I don't
>believe ZipMagic allows you to run applications straight off a CD though
>(without installing on the local HD, wasting space), so perhaps in another 10
>years Windows users might have caught up.
That depends entirely on the application. As you well know, Paul, the
majority of applications written for 9x/NT use the registry to store all
their system variables, so installation is required. As an aside, did
you know you can run Word etc straight from a zip *without* installation
and the resultant sh*te being dumped on your system. Anyway, there are
quite a few applications that happily run staright from a zip, be it on
cd, floppy, whatever.
As regards Windows users catching up, I think the issue is more "When
programmers realise that the registry is a Bad Thing" and don't bother
using it. I can't see Microsoft doing away with the registry and the
wealth of information about a user's system it contains. I beleive the
registry is just a backdoor for snooping dressed up as a nice way for
applications to register themselves..
--
Paranoia does have its advantages: at least you know you're always the centre of
attention.
Rogue
> As for the usefulness of being able to run applications
>direct from archives, (although I will try ZipMagic and others) what happens
>when it needs to write back to the archived application directory?
No problem for ZipMagic, unless you've configured it to treat read only
archives as exactly that. Opening a word document inside a zip always
creates a temporary file within the zip that's deleted once the
document's closed. ZipMagic integrates so tightly with the kernel that
from an application's point of view, it's just writing to a normal
directory. And quite a smooth implemetation it is.
Darren Winsper
> archives as exactly that. Opening a word document inside a zip always
> creates a temporary file within the zip that's deleted once the
> document's closed. ZipMagic integrates so tightly with the kernel that
> from an application's point of view, it's just writing to a normal
> directory. And quite a smooth implemetation it is.
Wow, how modern :)
Graham 'Jades' Thurlwell
<snip>
> ZipMagic integrates so tightly with the kernel that from
> an application's point of view, it's just writing to a
> normal directory. And quite a smooth implemetation it is.
I have ZipMagic 98 on my PC, and I agree entirely. It's
very stable, almost transparent (there is a _small_
drop in performance when working in the archive),
stupidly small for a PC app, and is one of those
rare PC apps that I really can't understand how
I managed without it.
Not only that, but it it's very cheap too.
If you _have_ to buy a PC program, get it.
Jochen Lueg
<ja...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
> I have ZipMagic 98 on my PC, and I agree entirely. It's
> very stable, almost transparent (there is a _small_
> drop in performance when working in the archive),
> stupidly small for a PC app, and is one of those
> rare PC apps that I really can't understand how
> I managed without it.
>
Can anybody tell me why terms lika Magic, Wonder, Wizard and so on are so
common in the PC world? Are they trying to tell us that the fact that the
programs work is somehow magical?
It anoys the hell out of me. So much so that I wouldn't dream of using a
program with a name like that.
Jochen
--
------------------------------------------------------------
Margaret and/or Jochen Lueg (ZFC B) tu...@argonet.co.uk
http://www.argonet.co.uk/users/tudor
------------------------------------------------------------
Both working in: Limavady College lim.c...@argonet.co.uk
http://www.argonet.co.uk/users/lim.college
Paul Vigay
<URL:mailto:tu...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> Can anybody tell me why terms lika Magic, Wonder, Wizard and so on are so
> common in the PC world? Are they trying to tell us that the fact that the
> programs work is somehow magical?
I've a video documentary from a few years back where they took a camera around
Microsoft Headquarters and interviewed people with exotic job descriptions
like software guru and programming wizard etc etc. They just came across as a
bunch of geekish losers.
> It anoys the hell out of me. So much so that I wouldn't dream of using a
> program with a name like that.
I avoid any programs with any description of wizards in them - unless they're
set in Dungeons and involve shooting things! :-)
--
Paul Vigay Computer Resources Manager,
__\\|//__ Bohunt Community School
Web: http://www.matrix.clara.net (` o-o ') Liphook, Hampshire
BBS: +44 (0)1705 871531 (ansi,8n1) ----ooO-(_)-Ooo---------------------------