Re: Latest news from VirtualAcorn

4 views
Skip to first unread message

Jess Hampshire

unread,
Mar 8, 2007, 9:56:08 AM3/8/07
to
In message <ap.244ee54eb9.a...@argonet.co.uk>
<ATim...@aol.com> wrote:

> VirtualAcorn extends support to include Windows Vista

Is the OS X version ever going to be released? If so is there a
timescale?

If I get to the position of having to use just a laptop, the chances
of it running windows natively are about the same as it running RISC
OS natively. It will be Macbook, almost certainly. Windows in a
virtual machine if needed and RISC OS in another if available, (but
certainly not in a VM within a VM).

RISC OS has a great user interface and is very good for certain tasks,
however it is not good enough to be worth suffering windows for.

--
Jess mailto:je...@itworkshop-nexus.net
sip:815...@draytel.org
icq: 91353267 msn: phant...@hotmail.com sms: 07891070734
http://jess.itworkshop-nexus.net Using RISC OS 5.11

Rob Kendrick

unread,
Mar 8, 2007, 10:09:33 AM3/8/07
to
On Thu, 08 Mar 2007 14:56:08 +0000, Jess Hampshire wrote:

> In message <ap.244ee54eb9.a...@argonet.co.uk>
> <ATim...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>> VirtualAcorn extends support to include Windows Vista
>
> Is the OS X version ever going to be released? If so is there a
> timescale?
>
> If I get to the position of having to use just a laptop, the chances
> of it running windows natively are about the same as it running RISC
> OS natively. It will be Macbook, almost certainly. Windows in a
> virtual machine if needed and RISC OS in another if available, (but
> certainly not in a VM within a VM).

I suspect the performance of Virtual Acorn would be pretty bloody nasty
when used inside something like VMware or Parallels, as neither provide
any support for the graphics acceleration that Virtual Acorn uses.

There's also an issue with the VM's JIT cache: JITing JITed code never
results in good performance, as it's a pain to cache.

B.

Jeremy Brayshaw

unread,
Mar 8, 2007, 11:13:11 AM3/8/07
to
In message <5f7d67c...@itworkshop.invalid>
Jess Hampshire <je...@itworkshop-nexus.net> wrote:

> In message <ap.244ee54eb9.a...@argonet.co.uk>
> <ATim...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>> VirtualAcorn extends support to include Windows Vista
>
> Is the OS X version ever going to be released? If so is there a
> timescale?

This is only my opinion, but it seems to me that RO developers seem to
target Windows users because of the sheer size of the userbase. I
think Ovation Pro has proved this is neither an advantage nor an easy
market to move in to. I suspect that Mac users are a far more willing
market, simply because they have the intelligence to choose the OS
they use based on features, and not on the 'everyone uses it so it
must be good' philosophy.

I also suspect that, if they are free to choose, most RO users will
move to MacOS rather than Windows for the same reason. (Not all have
that choice, of course.)

Therefore I am puzzled as to why there is such a reluctance for
'porting' (if that's the right word) RO software to Mac. I'd have
thought it would be logical (i.e more lucrative) to do that /before/
porting to Windows.

It's strange, and quite frustrating, to have some RO products on
Windows and not on Mac. Mac is a smaller market but with a bigger
willing customer base for such things.

So my plea to all active RO software authors is to consider the
motives of people buying a Mac, against those buying a Windows system.
Financially, it must be a better bet as most Mac users don't have cost
as the major reason for buying.

So, to my mind, both Aaron and Paul (VA and OPro) are missing huge
opportunities with their work by ignoring MacOS, and our loved RISC OS
suffers for it.

Jeremy.

--
Jeremy Brayshaw <><

Adam

unread,
Mar 8, 2007, 11:53:11 AM3/8/07
to
On Mar 8, 2:56 pm, Jess Hampshire <j...@itworkshop-nexus.net> wrote:
> In message <ap.244ee54eb9.a701a0a.m.con...@argonet.co.uk>

> <ATimbr...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > VirtualAcorn extends support to include Windows Vista
>
> Is the OS X version ever going to be released? If so is there a
> timescale?

I don't know, but I wish they'd get on with it since they've stated
they're not going to do any development (e.g. fix the bugs) on the
Windows version until after the Mac version's done :(

Adam

Tim Powys-Lybbe

unread,
Mar 8, 2007, 12:16:33 PM3/8/07
to

I missed that - where did they state it?

--
Tim Powys-Lybbe                                          t...@powys.org
             For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org/

Tim Powys-Lybbe

unread,
Mar 8, 2007, 12:14:51 PM3/8/07
to

Me too.

Might I add that I only bought a Mac because a program I had been using
on a PC was abandoned by its owners and development ceased. But the
original program continued on a Mac and development continues, so I
bought, and migrated that activity to, a Mac. I sometimes have to turn
the PC emulator on on the Mac but the PC here has not been turned on for
months now.

I will buy a VA for Mac tomorrow!

druck

unread,
Mar 8, 2007, 1:04:42 PM3/8/07
to
On 8 Mar 2007 Jeremy Brayshaw <jer...@brayshaw.org.uk> wrote:

> In message <5f7d67c...@itworkshop.invalid>
> Jess Hampshire <je...@itworkshop-nexus.net> wrote:
> > Is the OS X version ever going to be released? If so is there a
> > timescale?

[Snip]



> Therefore I am puzzled as to why there is such a reluctance for
> 'porting' (if that's the right word) RO software to Mac. I'd have
> thought it would be logical (i.e more lucrative) to do that /before/
> porting to Windows.
>
> It's strange, and quite frustrating, to have some RO products on
> Windows and not on Mac. Mac is a smaller market but with a bigger
> willing customer base for such things.

The frustrating thing is the Virtual Risc PC *has* been ported to the Mac,
its just needs a smaller amount of work to finish the user interface and
release it.

It was first previewed on Mac on PowerPC so there was the issue of the JIT
needing to be ported to a different processor which was a big job, but now
MAC is on Intel this task has evaporated as the x86 JIT code can be used.

---druck

--
The ARM Club Free Software - http://www.armclub.org.uk/free/
The 32bit Conversions Page - http://www.quantumsoft.co.uk/druck/

Rob Kendrick

unread,
Mar 8, 2007, 1:41:25 PM3/8/07
to
On Thu, 08 Mar 2007 18:04:42 +0000, druck wrote:

> It was first previewed on Mac on PowerPC so there was the issue of the JIT
> needing to be ported to a different processor which was a big job, but now
> MAC is on Intel this task has evaporated as the x86 JIT code can be used.

It's *quite* that simple - Both Apple and Microsoft are insane enough to
use bizarre (and rampantly differing) calling standards that might make
things tricky. Certainly though, you're right to suggest that it's
unlikely to be a lot of work.

There's a lot more to get working that just that though - things like
printing, and reliable host file system access etc need to be done as
well, and last time I asked anybody about this, this was precisely the
work that needed to be done.

I'm still hoping somebody will put the work into making RPCemu less
repugnant than it is, and adding a JIT to it, such that we have a nice
free alternative to use should ROOL ever actually manage to do anything.

B.

Dave Symes

unread,
Mar 8, 2007, 1:41:00 PM3/8/07
to
In article <398b6ec0...@pressxpress.co.uk>,
Jeremy Brayshaw <jer...@brayshaw.org.uk> wrote:
[Snippy]

> I also suspect that, if they are free to choose, most RO users will
> move to MacOS rather than Windows for the same reason. (Not all have
> that choice, of course.)

Not so!
From what I gather, the majority (Though obviously not all) RO user who
like me, run a dual machine setup, are using a MS-Win machine to
compliment their RO machine.

And... If you have a version of VRPC installed on the Win-PC you have a
double advantage.

Dave S

--

John Williams (News)

unread,
Mar 8, 2007, 2:14:55 PM3/8/07
to
In article <4ec07c...@ukgateway.net>,
Dave Symes <d...@ukgateway.net> wrote:

> the majority (Though obviously not all) RO user who like me, run a dual
> machine setup, are using a MS-Win machine to compliment their RO machine.

I've never heard any compliments either way!

Or was that a typo?

John

--
John Williams, Wirral, Merseyside, UK - no attachments to these addresses!
Non-RISC OS posters change user to johnrwilliams or put 'risc' in subject
for reliable contact! Who is John Williams? http://www.picindex.info/author/

Eddie

unread,
Mar 8, 2007, 2:23:48 PM3/8/07
to
In message <5f7d67c...@itworkshop.invalid>
Jess Hampshire <je...@itworkshop-nexus.net> wrote thus:

> In message <ap.244ee54eb9.a...@argonet.co.uk>
> <ATim...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>> VirtualAcorn extends support to include Windows Vista
>
> Is the OS X version ever going to be released? If so is there a
> timescale?

I hope so - been waiting ages for it to be released. However, when I
last asked Aaron (at the SE Show) he was very tight lipped about
possible dates (and quite rightly so). Still frustrating though,
although he did say development was continuing.

No doubt I shall be asking the same question at Wakefield:-)

--
Best Regards
Eddie

Eddie

unread,
Mar 8, 2007, 2:30:35 PM3/8/07
to
In message <eac078c0...@druck.freeuk.net>
druck <ne...@druck.freeuk.com> wrote thus:

> On 8 Mar 2007 Jeremy Brayshaw <jer...@brayshaw.org.uk> wrote:
>
>> In message <5f7d67c...@itworkshop.invalid>
>> Jess Hampshire <je...@itworkshop-nexus.net> wrote:
>> > Is the OS X version ever going to be released? If so is there a
>> > timescale?
>
> [Snip]
>
>> Therefore I am puzzled as to why there is such a reluctance for
>> 'porting' (if that's the right word) RO software to Mac. I'd have
>> thought it would be logical (i.e more lucrative) to do that /before/
>> porting to Windows.
>>
>> It's strange, and quite frustrating, to have some RO products on
>> Windows and not on Mac. Mac is a smaller market but with a bigger
>> willing customer base for such things.
>
> The frustrating thing is the Virtual Risc PC *has* been ported to the Mac,
> its just needs a smaller amount of work to finish the user interface and
> release it.
>
> It was first previewed on Mac on PowerPC so there was the issue of the JIT
> needing to be ported to a different processor which was a big job, but now
> MAC is on Intel this task has evaporated as the x86 JIT code can be used.

Mmm - Sounds logical - but Aaron did tell me that the first release
would be on the PowerPC versions. Which for the moment this suits me,
but my son has his sights firmly on my current machine and wants me to
upgrade to a newer intel machine.

--
Best Regards
Eddie

Graeme Wall

unread,
Mar 8, 2007, 2:15:14 PM3/8/07
to
In message <4ec07c...@ukgateway.net>
Dave Symes <d...@ukgateway.net> wrote:

> In article <398b6ec0...@pressxpress.co.uk>,
> Jeremy Brayshaw <jer...@brayshaw.org.uk> wrote:
> [Snippy]
>
> > I also suspect that, if they are free to choose, most RO users will
> > move to MacOS rather than Windows for the same reason. (Not all have
> > that choice, of course.)
>
> Not so!
> From what I gather, the majority (Though obviously not all) RO user who
> like me, run a dual machine setup, are using a MS-Win machine to
> compliment their RO machine.
>

Can I be the awkward sod who says he's running a RiscPC-G4 network?

--
Graeme Wall

My genealogy website:
<http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/genealogy/index.html>

Jess Hampshire

unread,
Mar 8, 2007, 4:58:00 PM3/8/07
to
In message <f1357fc04e%Gra...@greywall.demon.co.uk>
Graeme Wall <Gra...@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:

> In message <4ec07c...@ukgateway.net>
> Dave Symes <d...@ukgateway.net> wrote:
>
>> In article <398b6ec0...@pressxpress.co.uk>,
>> Jeremy Brayshaw <jer...@brayshaw.org.uk> wrote:
>> [Snippy]
>>
>> > I also suspect that, if they are free to choose, most RO users will
>> > move to MacOS rather than Windows for the same reason. (Not all have
>> > that choice, of course.)
>>
>> Not so!
>> From what I gather, the majority (Though obviously not all) RO user who
>> like me, run a dual machine setup, are using a MS-Win machine to
>> compliment their RO machine.
>>
>
> Can I be the awkward sod who says he's running a RiscPC-G4 network?

Iyonix-G3 here

(And a friend has Risc PC-G5)

--
Jess
http://jess.itworkshop-nexus.net

Gary Locock

unread,
Mar 8, 2007, 5:24:32 PM3/8/07
to
In article <398b6ec0...@pressxpress.co.uk>,
Jeremy Brayshaw <jer...@brayshaw.org.uk> wrote:
> In message <5f7d67c...@itworkshop.invalid>
> Jess Hampshire <je...@itworkshop-nexus.net> wrote:

> > In message <ap.244ee54eb9.a...@argonet.co.uk>
> > <ATim...@aol.com> wrote:
> >
> >> VirtualAcorn extends support to include Windows Vista
> >
> > Is the OS X version ever going to be released? If so is there a
> > timescale?

> This is only my opinion, but it seems to me that RO developers seem to
> target Windows users because of the sheer size of the userbase. I
> think Ovation Pro has proved this is neither an advantage nor an easy
> market to move in to. I suspect that Mac users are a far more willing
> market, simply because they have the intelligence to choose the OS
> they use based on features, and not on the 'everyone uses it so it
> must be good' philosophy.

> I also suspect that, if they are free to choose, most RO users will
> move to MacOS rather than Windows for the same reason.

Entirely agree, and with the benefit of hindsight, so might David Pilling.

But it /is/ hindsight, because prior to the most recent versions the Mac had
a funny filesystem, and interworking with other computer systems (not only
RISC OS) was a bit iffy by reputation, and it put people off.

[Snip]

> It's strange, and quite frustrating, to have some RO products on
> Windows and not on Mac. Mac is a smaller market but with a bigger
> willing customer base for such things.

> So my plea to all active RO software authors is to consider the
> motives of people buying a Mac, against those buying a Windows system.
> Financially, it must be a better bet as most Mac users don't have cost
> as the major reason for buying.

Again, entirely agree, though Macs are no longer astronomically priced,
particularly if you can qualify for education pricing (got a student in the
family??). The Mac market is rather like the Acorn market was back in the
glory days; a lot of help and enthusiasm around. But the upswing has been
/very/ recent; OS X with its rock-solid Unix foundation... the iPod effect...
and now Intel for the much-needed speed boost. Nobody could have forecast
all this, even 3 years ago.

> So, to my mind, both Aaron and Paul (VA and OPro) are missing huge
> opportunities with their work by ignoring MacOS, and our loved RISC OS
> suffers for it.

(Paul??)

VA isn't /ignoring/ Mac OS AFAIK; they bring a demonstrator version of VA on
Mac OS to most shows these days (though like you, I am impatient for the
finished product).

There is a downside of course, for RO developers. Mac OS X is really rather
good, especially where RO is weakest, on the internet. Two first-rate free
browsers, and no virus worries. Don't want to encourage desertion, do we--?

However with all its strengths, the Mac still doesn't have a DTP app as nice
to use as OvnPro, AFAICS.

Gary

--
Gary Locock, Network Manager, Bablake Junior School
Coundon Road, Coventry CV1 4AU
School Website: http://www.bablakejs.co.uk
Private mail: g a r y (at) l o c o c k . c o . u k

Tim Powys-Lybbe

unread,
Mar 8, 2007, 5:21:53 PM3/8/07
to
In message of 8 Mar, Graeme Wall <Gra...@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:

> In message <4ec07c...@ukgateway.net>
> Dave Symes <d...@ukgateway.net> wrote:
>
> > In article <398b6ec0...@pressxpress.co.uk>,
> > Jeremy Brayshaw <jer...@brayshaw.org.uk> wrote:
> > [Snippy]
> >
> > > I also suspect that, if they are free to choose, most RO users will
> > > move to MacOS rather than Windows for the same reason. (Not all have
> > > that choice, of course.)
> >
> > Not so!
> > From what I gather, the majority (Though obviously not all) RO user who
> > like me, run a dual machine setup, are using a MS-Win machine to
> > compliment their RO machine.
> >
>
> Can I be the awkward sod who says he's running a RiscPC-G4 network?

Nothing awkward about such behaviour at all, there are at least two of
use doing this. Though I have been known on the RISC OS display to have
a window for Tiger and within that another window running a PC emulator;
a dual screen config makes this very leisurely.

Message has been deleted

Theo Markettos

unread,
Mar 8, 2007, 5:57:18 PM3/8/07
to
Rob Kendrick <nn...@rjek.com> wrote:
> I'm still hoping somebody will put the work into making RPCemu less
> repugnant than it is, and adding a JIT to it, such that we have a nice
> free alternative to use should ROOL ever actually manage to do anything.

Daniel Clarke has done most of the legwork to add Risc PC emulation to qemu:
http://www.home.marutan.net/qemu/
The svn is a quite a bit further than that tarball, so ask peter@marutan if
you want newer sources (where there's some VIDC output, unlike those on the
above page)

The advantage of qemu is that it's a JIT and quite cross-platform (runs on
x86, x86_64, PowerPC, SPARC, Alpha, etc CPUs and Windows, Linux, MacOS,
Solaris, etc). It also has quite a lot of emulated hardware - full network
support, including an internal Samba server to serve local filesystems,
serial/parallel/floppy all implemented (just need wiring into the right
places for the RPC emulation), USB (OHCI, not sure if this matches Simtec or
Castle). I think it'd be fairly trivial to bring across RPCEmu's HostFS
too.

Currently it gets as far as booting RISC OS and displaying an abort message.
It looks like there's something wrong with either the timers or the CPU
emulation - the 26 bit CPU model was written for this port so there's quite
possibly something amiss, and there may still be holes in qemu's upstream 32
bit ARM emulation (RISC OS tends to use more varied instructions than ARM
Linux does, which finds bugs not exercised by GCC's ARM output).

I had a look and found a few bugs, but ran out of time. If anyone wants
help in understanding the code I'm happy to show them round.

Theo

Message has been deleted

Darren Salt

unread,
Mar 8, 2007, 7:11:53 PM3/8/07
to
I demand that Jeremy Brayshaw may or may not have written...

[snip]


> I also suspect that, if they are free to choose, most RO users will move to
> MacOS rather than Windows for the same reason.

Or Linux rather than Mac OS.

[snip]
--
| Darren Salt | d @ youmustbejoking,demon,co,uk | nr. Ashington, | Toon
| RISC OS, Linux | s zap,tartarus,org | Northumberland | Army
| Let's keep the pound sterling

sun lamp: n. Shortcut to skin cancer.

Kevin Wells

unread,
Mar 8, 2007, 7:30:05 PM3/8/07
to
In message <4ec0903b4...@locock.co.uk>
Gary Locock <gary...@locock.co.uk> wrote:


[snip]


>However with all its strengths, the Mac still doesn't have a DTP app as nice
>to use as OvnPro, AFAICS.
>

The answer is simple use Ovation Pro on RISC OS.

--
Kev Wells http://kevsoft.topcities.com
http://kevsoft.co.uk/
ICQ 238580561
Among those dark satanic mills?

Jeremy Brayshaw

unread,
Mar 9, 2007, 3:55:59 AM3/9/07
to
Darren Salt wrote:

> I demand that Jeremy Brayshaw may or may not have written...
>
> [snip]
>> I also suspect that, if they are free to choose, most RO users will move to
>> MacOS rather than Windows for the same reason.
>
> Or Linux rather than Mac OS.

Well, maybe. Personally, I find Linux far to 'geeky' to use seriously.
RO is logical and simple to use, whereas you need to have a degree in
technical things to use Linux! (My opinion only, before all you Linux
supporters have a go!)

Jeremy.

--
Jeremy Brayshaw <><

Jeremy Brayshaw

unread,
Mar 9, 2007, 3:49:08 AM3/9/07
to
In message <4ec0903b4...@locock.co.uk>
Gary Locock wrote:

> Jeremy Brayshaw wrote:
>
>> So, to my mind, both Aaron and Paul (VA and OPro) are missing huge
>> opportunities with their work by ignoring MacOS, and our loved RISC OS
>> suffers for it.
>
> (Paul??)

Oops, sorry - meant to say 'David' there.

> VA isn't /ignoring/ Mac OS AFAIK; they bring a demonstrator version of VA on
> Mac OS to most shows these days (though like you, I am impatient for the
> finished product).

But so much RO software has been promised and never actually
materialises - Oregano3, Cino, Cineroma, etc. It's understandable, but
very frustrating. I'm wondering if VA for Mac is also in this category
- we've had tantalising tasters of each of these, inc. VA, but the
'track record' suggests we'll never see any of them completed.

I was publicly pilloried for daring to suggest, two years ago, that
Cineroma would never appear. It hasn't. Will the same be true of VA
for MacOS? VA on Mac may be regularly publicly demonstrated, but so
was Oregano3 and that never became available.

I'm sure there are very good reasons for such software not appearing -
I'm not arguing that point - but we can't ignore the fact that it is
/not/ available, no matter how valid the reason.

> There is a downside of course, for RO developers. Mac OS X is really rather
> good, especially where RO is weakest, on the internet. Two first-rate free
> browsers, and no virus worries. Don't want to encourage desertion, do we--?

Well, if RO is lacking in important areas, and no developer can
justify correcting that, it would be silly to continue to do without
those facilities when they do exist on other systems. Nose, spite and
face come to mind! If people switch to Mac, then they're lost to RO.
But if VA on Mac appears sooner rather than later, those 'deserters'
may just stick with RO, at least in part. If it appears 'later', I
suspect those same people will have found other ways to achieve what
they want on MacOS and won't go back to RO.

All just my opinion, of course.

Jeremy.

--
Jeremy Brayshaw <><

Ned Abell

unread,
Mar 9, 2007, 4:25:59 AM3/9/07
to
In article <635acac0...@pressxpress.co.uk>,

I thought that too and then discovered Ubuntu which works "out
of the tin" and is designed for a non technical user...
www.ubuntu.com

HTH

--
besters
Ned

(this email address is unused)

Ray Dawson

unread,
Mar 9, 2007, 4:52:45 AM3/9/07
to
Jeremy Brayshaw <jer...@brayshaw.org.uk> wrote:

>
> I was publicly pilloried for daring to suggest, two years ago, that
> Cineroma would never appear. It hasn't. Will the same be true of VA
> for MacOS? VA on Mac may be regularly publicly demonstrated, but so
> was Oregano3 and that never became available.
>

With all due respect to those who do use a Mac here, you are in the
minority - perhaps too small a number to justify the continued development
cost of VA for the Mac.

I suppose statistically, given the ratio of Mac users to PC users
generally, the sale of a Mac VA would be several orders of magnitude less
than that of the Windows version.

Cheers,

Ray D

Aaron

unread,
Mar 9, 2007, 5:17:40 AM3/9/07
to
On Mar 9, 8:49?am, Jeremy Brayshaw <jer...@brayshaw.org.uk> wrote:

> But so much RO software has been promised and never actually
> materialises - Oregano3, Cino, Cineroma, etc. It's understandable, but
> very frustrating. I'm wondering if VA for Mac is also in this category
> - we've had tantalising tasters of each of these, inc. VA, but the
> 'track record' suggests we'll never see any of them completed.

I obviously can't comment on stuff being developed by others
but I can comment on VRPC for Mac.

It has been delayed for a number of reasons. The main one being
time. Both Graeme and I have been busy on other projects. Further
delays have been caused because I haven't been very well.

The current test version is far more advanced than anything that's
been seen in public. However I am not going to announce a
release date until we are happy with it and it's gone through the
QA test cycle. Currently there are still some things that need
to be fixed/implimented.

> I was publicly pilloried for daring to suggest, two years ago, that
> Cineroma would never appear. It hasn't. Will the same be true of VA
> for MacOS? VA on Mac may be regularly publicly demonstrated, but so
> was Oregano3 and that never became available.

We want to release the product. We've spent a lot of time and
money on it ans when it's completed to our satisfaction it
will be released.

Aaron

Jess Hampshire

unread,
Mar 9, 2007, 6:08:18 AM3/9/07
to
In message <4ec0903b4...@locock.co.uk>
Gary Locock <gary...@locock.co.uk> wrote:

> But it /is/ hindsight, because prior to the most recent versions the Mac had
> a funny filesystem, and interworking with other computer systems (not only
> RISC OS) was a bit iffy by reputation, and it put people off.

Prior to the current system the Mac wasn't actually very good. It had
most of the weaknesses that RISC OS has, but wasn't very fast and had
a poor user interface.

The good things it shared with RISC OS have were UI consistency, a
simple structure (simpler than current RISC OS) and good filetyping.
(All but the first now seriously diminished with OS X).

The current system looks superb, (And that *is* important, if I'm
doing a task that doesn't benefit from RISC OS' user interface, then
I'd prefer the aesthetics of a Mac while I work) and is very stable,
certainly a good foundation for a virtual machine.

--
Jess
http://jess.itworkshop-nexus.net

Jess Hampshire

unread,
Mar 9, 2007, 6:41:13 AM3/9/07
to
Hi

In message <1173435460.5...@t69g2000cwt.googlegroups.com>
"Aaron" <atim...@aol.com> wrote:
[snip]

> I obviously can't comment on stuff being developed by others
> but I can comment on VRPC for Mac.
>
> It has been delayed for a number of reasons. The main one being
> time. Both Graeme and I have been busy on other projects. Further
> delays have been caused because I haven't been very well.
>
> The current test version is far more advanced than anything that's
> been seen in public. However I am not going to announce a
> release date until we are happy with it and it's gone through the
> QA test cycle. Currently there are still some things that need
> to be fixed/implimented.

[snip]

> We want to release the product. We've spent a lot of time and
> money on it ans when it's completed to our satisfaction it
> will be released.

This is great news, but given the delays, perhaps you could do what A9
did and sell a pre release version at a discount, which can be
upgraded by paying the difference after proper release.

--
Jess
http://jess.itworkshop-nexus.net

Jess Hampshire

unread,
Mar 9, 2007, 6:32:23 AM3/9/07
to
In message <b8b9c9c0...@pressxpress.co.uk>

Jeremy Brayshaw <jer...@brayshaw.org.uk> wrote:
> Well, if RO is lacking in important areas, and no developer can
> justify correcting that, it would be silly to continue to do without
> those facilities when they do exist on other systems. Nose, spite and
> face come to mind! If people switch to Mac, then they're lost to RO.
> But if VA on Mac appears sooner rather than later, those 'deserters'
> may just stick with RO, at least in part. If it appears 'later', I
> suspect those same people will have found other ways to achieve what
> they want on MacOS and won't go back to RO.

Spot on.

Currently I see the ideal (as in with what *is* available) as a Mac
and RISC OS system networked side by side.

I have an old G3 (with panther) and an Iyonix.

A friend has a new G5 and a Risc PC. He has moved over to using
thunderbird as his email client. I'm pretty sure VA for Mac would have
prevented this.

And in the situation of someone who can't have two computers or needs
just a laptop the two obvious options currently are Windows with VA or
a Mac. Given that most RISC OS users dislike the chore of Windows (all
those who don't, got their coats years ago), it would make the Mac the
obvious choice.


--
Jess
http://jess.itworkshop-nexus.net

Finnybank Ltd

unread,
Mar 9, 2007, 6:49:31 AM3/9/07
to
In article <5177d6c...@itworkshop.invalid>, Jess Hampshire
<phant...@hotmail.com> wrote:
[about Macs]

> The current system looks superb, (And that *is* important, if I'm doing a
> task that doesn't benefit from RISC OS' user interface, then I'd prefer
> the aesthetics of a Mac while I work) and is very stable, certainly a good
> foundation for a virtual machine.

There needs to be a balance between looking good and being 'in your face'. A
good GUI (for working with) will not bring attention to itself. To do that it
must both look good and be unobtrusive. If you're working you need to
concentrate on the work, not the GUI. A poor GUI will attract your attention
because it's bad - but no better is the one that attracts your attention with
beautifully crafted art. A good GUI will not jump up in front of you and shout
"hey look at me!" but rather will be unobtrusive and allow you to get on with
your work.

--
John Cartmell jo...@finnybank.com 0845 006 8822 or 0161 969 9820
Qercus magazine FAX +44 (0)8700-519-527 www.finnybank.com
Qercus - the best guide to RISC OS computing

Eddie

unread,
Mar 9, 2007, 8:32:48 AM3/9/07
to
In message <gemini.jemrfw0...@magray.freeserve.co.uk>
Ray Dawson <r...@magray.freeserve.co.uk> wrote thus:

But Mac users traditionally are more than willing to try other
operating systems, so are probably more likely to give it a go.
--
Best Regards
Eddie

Eddie

unread,
Mar 9, 2007, 8:34:10 AM3/9/07
to
In message <1173435460.5...@t69g2000cwt.googlegroups.com>
"Aaron" <atim...@aol.com> wrote thus:

> On Mar 9, 8:49?am, Jeremy Brayshaw <jer...@brayshaw.org.uk> wrote:
>
>> But so much RO software has been promised and never actually
>> materialises - Oregano3, Cino, Cineroma, etc. It's understandable, but
>> very frustrating. I'm wondering if VA for Mac is also in this category
>> - we've had tantalising tasters of each of these, inc. VA, but the
>> 'track record' suggests we'll never see any of them completed.
>
> I obviously can't comment on stuff being developed by others
> but I can comment on VRPC for Mac.
>
> It has been delayed for a number of reasons. The main one being
> time. Both Graeme and I have been busy on other projects. Further
> delays have been caused because I haven't been very well.
>
> The current test version is far more advanced than anything that's
> been seen in public. However I am not going to announce a
> release date until we are happy with it and it's gone through the
> QA test cycle. Currently there are still some things that need
> to be fixed/implimented.

Thanks Aaron. I await its release with interest.
>

--
Best Regards
Eddie

Eddie

unread,
Mar 9, 2007, 8:37:49 AM3/9/07
to
In message <04acd8c...@itworkshop.invalid>
Jess Hampshire <phant...@hotmail.com> wrote thus:

> In message <b8b9c9c0...@pressxpress.co.uk>
> Jeremy Brayshaw <jer...@brayshaw.org.uk> wrote:
>> Well, if RO is lacking in important areas, and no developer can
>> justify correcting that, it would be silly to continue to do without
>> those facilities when they do exist on other systems. Nose, spite and
>> face come to mind! If people switch to Mac, then they're lost to RO.
>> But if VA on Mac appears sooner rather than later, those 'deserters'
>> may just stick with RO, at least in part. If it appears 'later', I
>> suspect those same people will have found other ways to achieve what
>> they want on MacOS and won't go back to RO.
>
> Spot on.
>
> Currently I see the ideal (as in with what *is* available) as a Mac
> and RISC OS system networked side by side.
>
> I have an old G3 (with panther) and an Iyonix.
>
> A friend has a new G5 and a Risc PC. He has moved over to using
> thunderbird as his email client.

I'm surprised he didn't go for Gemini, which is very similar to
Messenger and has the same original author, Mark Sawle.

--
Best Regards
Eddie

Eddie

unread,
Mar 9, 2007, 8:40:01 AM3/9/07
to
In message <5177d6c...@itworkshop.invalid>

Jess Hampshire <phant...@hotmail.com> wrote thus:

> In message <4ec0903b4...@locock.co.uk>

I agree.
Things like iPhoto and iDVD are very intuitive IMHO.


--
Best Regards
Eddie

Rob Kendrick

unread,
Mar 9, 2007, 9:30:40 AM3/9/07
to
On Fri, 09 Mar 2007 13:37:49 +0000, Eddie wrote:

>> friend has a new G5 and a Risc PC. He has moved over to using
>> thunderbird as his email client.
>
> I'm surprised he didn't go for Gemini, which is very similar to
> Messenger and has the same original author, Mark Sawle.

Because Thunderbird's perfectly adequate, and 35 quid cheaper.

B.

Jess Hampshire

unread,
Mar 9, 2007, 9:42:12 AM3/9/07
to
In message <db27e4c0...@eddie.brookhaven.plus.com>
Eddie <ef...@invalid.org.uk> wrote:

>> A friend has a new G5 and a Risc PC. He has moved over to using
>> thunderbird as his email client.
>
> I'm surprised he didn't go for Gemini, which is very similar to
> Messenger and has the same original author, Mark Sawle.

Simple answer - Thunderbird is free.

I bought Gemini for my parents for their mac for christmas. It's quite
good, but not a patch on Messenger pro, obviously a lot of why it is
good is down to the RISC OS UI.

Gemini is better than thunderbird because of its netiquette checks,
but otherwise for simple use I couldn't say it's a must.

--
Jess
http://jess.itworkshop-nexus.net

Jess Hampshire

unread,
Mar 9, 2007, 9:45:58 AM3/9/07
to
In message <pan.2007.03.09....@rjek.com>
Rob Kendrick <nn...@rjek.com> wrote:

Then, 15 quid cheaper now.

--
Jess
http://jess.itworkshop-nexus.net

Rob Kendrick

unread,
Mar 9, 2007, 9:49:32 AM3/9/07
to

Assuming you don't want usenet or calendaring.

B.

Ray Dawson

unread,
Mar 9, 2007, 11:06:14 AM3/9/07
to
Rob Kendrick <nn...@rjek.com> wrote:

I tried Thunderbird on the PC but didn't like because 1 - it doesn't have
news as well and 2 - it didn't wrap quoted text IIRC.

Cheers,

Ray D

Jess Hampshire

unread,
Mar 9, 2007, 11:10:45 AM3/9/07
to
In message <pan.2007.03.09...@rjek.com>
Rob Kendrick <nn...@rjek.com> wrote:

> On Fri, 09 Mar 2007 14:45:58 +0000, Jess Hampshire wrote:
>
>> In message <pan.2007.03.09....@rjek.com>
>> Rob Kendrick <nn...@rjek.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 09 Mar 2007 13:37:49 +0000, Eddie wrote:

>>>> I'm surprised he didn't go for Gemini, which is very similar to
>>>> Messenger and has the same original author, Mark Sawle.
>>>
>>> Because Thunderbird's perfectly adequate, and 35 quid cheaper.
>>
>> Then, 15 quid cheaper now.
>
> Assuming you don't want usenet or calendaring.

Which would have been a correct assumption in his case.


--
Jess
http://jess.itworkshop-nexus.net

Darren Salt

unread,
Mar 9, 2007, 12:23:59 PM3/9/07
to
I demand that Ray Dawson may or may not have written...

It's also known to mess with the spacing in patches and to rewrap them
(examples can readily be found in Linux-related mailing lists), and doesn't
seem to preserve Mail-Followup-To (based on replies sent from Thunderbird
users).

For me, these reasons are good enough not to use it.

--
| Darren Salt | d @ youmustbejoking,demon,co,uk | nr. Ashington, | Toon
| RISC OS, Linux | s zap,tartarus,org | Northumberland | Army

| + Lobby friends, family, business, government. WE'RE KILLING THE PLANET.

File not open, 0:1

Rob Kendrick

unread,
Mar 9, 2007, 1:05:27 PM3/9/07
to
On Fri, 09 Mar 2007 17:23:59 +0000, Darren Salt wrote:

> It's also known to mess with the spacing in patches and to rewrap them
> (examples can readily be found in Linux-related mailing lists), and doesn't
> seem to preserve Mail-Followup-To (based on replies sent from Thunderbird
> users).
>
> For me, these reasons are good enough not to use it.

I'm not advocating its use, simply pointing out why somebody might choose
it over Gemini.

(Personally, I use Pan for usenet.)

B.

David H Wild

unread,
Mar 9, 2007, 2:17:41 PM3/9/07
to
In article <gemini.jen8qe0...@magray.freeserve.co.uk>,

Ray Dawson <r...@magray.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> I tried Thunderbird on the PC but didn't like because 1 - it doesn't have
> news as well and 2 - it didn't wrap quoted text IIRC.

I have used Thunderbird to look at newsgroups on my laptop.

--
David Wild using RISC OS on broadband

Gary Locock

unread,
Mar 9, 2007, 4:00:27 PM3/9/07
to
In article <4ec0941448inval...@invalid-domain.co.uk>,
Paul Vigay <invalid-em...@invalid-domain.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <4ec0903b4...@locock.co.uk>,
> Gary Locock <gary...@locock.co.uk> wrote:
> [Snip]

[Snip]

> > There is a downside of course, for RO developers. Mac OS X is really
> > rather good, especially where RO is weakest, on the internet. Two
> > first-rate free browsers, and no virus worries. Don't want to encourage
> > desertion, do we--?

> Not at all. The GUI sucks compared to RISC OS. You still have all the
> irritating things like mouse pointers 'slipping' off scroll bars

Not on OS X Tiger, which is all I can speak for

> windows
> jumping to the front when you click on them

True, but not really a show-stopper

> and all manner of other
> irritating things

I /prefer/ RO menus to the Mac top-of-screen menu bar, but I can live with it.

OS X user permissions can be a pain, in preventing actions which are easy on
RO. But it is the same as Unix; Windows is heading in that direction, and is
(or seems to be) the price for robust security. RO is by common consent a
very insecure system, relying on obscurity... maybe none the worse for that
in practical terms.

I can't think of many other 'irritations'; indeed Mac OS X is very like RO in
lots of ways. It has an 'icon bar' which is actually miles better than RISC
OS's. Apps live in an Applications folder as they should; installation is by
drag and drop; there is a 'Choices' -type structure; apps don't quit when you
close the last open window. Text files from RO can be read without adding
Windows line ends. Mac OS X is a pretty good effort IMHO, and rock-solid IME.
I'm afraid that RO is nowhere in sight in that respect..

Oh, and OS X talks English. Unlike Windows which is awful, and RO which is
middling, messages from Mac OS are well written and comprehensible to
ordinary mortals. It is a highly user-friendly system, I reckon.

> and filetype management is a real chore compared to
> RISC OS.

I'm not entirely sure what you mean, but if it is setting filetype
associations (e.g. getting Open Office to open Word docs by double-clicking)
it is no worse than Windows, and not hard at all, assuming the file has a
correct extension. It only has to be done once; hardly a chore.

> > However with all its strengths, the Mac still doesn't have a DTP app as
> > nice to use as OvnPro, AFAICS.

> Or a text editor as good as Zap, or an FTP client as nice and easy as FTPc

An ordinary user doesn't need either of these; might use FTP once in a blue
moon. One of the pleasures of the Mac is /not/ having to hack around in
script files to get it to behave; things 'just work'.

> or a diary app as nice as Organizer, or an email client as nice as Pluto,

OS X has a very nice diary app. OK, I still use Organizer and Pluto, so I
can't comment on Mac mail clients, but RO is moribund as far as anything
internet-related is concerned; that's why I bought a Mac Mini, and I haven't
regretted it. How long it will be sensible to continue to browse on the Mac
and read mail on RO I don't know.

> or ..... I could go on, but you get the picture! :-)

Well, yes. The Mac isn't RISC OS, and never will be, but it /is/ a much
better bet for a RO user than Windows as the OP said (and indeed as you
yourself have often said) so I don't think we are are arguing about
fundamentals; maybe just viewing it through different ends of the telescope.

Gary

--
Gary Locock, Network Manager, Bablake Junior School
Coundon Road, Coventry CV1 4AU
School Website: http://www.bablakejs.co.uk
Private mail: g a r y (at) l o c o c k . c o . u k

David Love

unread,
Mar 9, 2007, 1:47:58 PM3/9/07
to
In message <4ec0cd1...@weatherpost.org.uk>
Ned Abell <ne...@weatherpost.org.uk> wrote:

I feel the same about openSuse 10.2. Worked out of the box and I do
like KDE :-)

Regards from New Zealand on a cool Friday morning.

David
--
David Love
Glass, china and reputations are easily cracked, but never well
mended.

Adam

unread,
Mar 10, 2007, 4:39:41 AM3/10/07
to
In message <775874c...@south-frm.demon.co.uk>, Tim Powys-Lybbe wrote:

> In message of 8 Mar, "Adam" <ne...@snowstone.org.uk> wrote:
>
> > On Mar 8, 2:56 pm, Jess Hampshire <j...@itworkshop-nexus.net> wrote:
> > > In message <ap.244ee54eb9.a701a0a.m.con...@argonet.co.uk>
> > > <ATimbr...@aol.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > VirtualAcorn extends support to include Windows Vista
> > >
> > > Is the OS X version ever going to be released? If so is there a
> > > timescale?
> >
> > I don't know, but I wish they'd get on with it since they've stated
> > they're not going to do any development (e.g. fix the bugs) on the
> > Windows version until after the Mac version's done :(
>
> I missed that - where did they state it?

Half way down here (re. MouseSync) for instance:
http://www.virtualacorn.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=304

Other places too...

Adam

--
Adam Richardson Carpe Diem
http://www.snowstone.org.uk/riscos/

Aaron

unread,
Mar 10, 2007, 8:55:48 AM3/10/07
to
On Mar 10, 9:39�am, Adam <n...@snowstone.org.uk> wrote:
> In message <775874c04e....@south-frm.demon.co.uk>, Tim Powys-Lybbe wrote:

>
>
>
>
>
> > In message of 8 Mar, "Adam" <n...@snowstone.org.uk> wrote:
>
> > > On Mar 8, 2:56 pm, Jess Hampshire <j...@itworkshop-nexus.net> wrote:
> > > > In message <ap.244ee54eb9.a701a0a.m.con...@argonet.co.uk>
> > > >           <ATimbr...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > VirtualAcorn extends support to include Windows Vista
>
> > > > Is the OS X version ever going to be released? If so is there a
> > > > timescale?
>
> > > I don't know, but I wish they'd get on with it since they've stated
> > > they're not going to do any development (e.g. fix the bugs) on the
> > > Windows version until after the Mac version's done :(

That's a mis-representation. If you look you here:

http://www.virtualacorn.co.uk/news.htm

You will see that a number of free updates have been
released for all Windows versions of VRPC in the
last few months. Some of these (as it says in the news
articles) are bug fixes. e.g. HostFS2 on dual core CPUs.

Now what else, apart from Windows, runs on Dual
Core Intel processors.

> > I missed that - where did they state it?
>
> Half way down here (re. MouseSync) for instance:http://www.virtualacorn.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=304

Yes, and that statement relates to Mousesync.dll only.

Aaron

Adam

unread,
Mar 10, 2007, 12:01:30 PM3/10/07
to
In message <1173534948.1...@t69g2000cwt.googlegroups.com>, Aaron wrote:

> On Mar 10, 9:39?am, Adam <n...@snowstone.org.uk> wrote:
> > In message <775874c04e....@south-frm.demon.co.uk>, Tim Powys-Lybbe wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > In message of 8 Mar, "Adam" <n...@snowstone.org.uk> wrote:
> >
> > > > On Mar 8, 2:56 pm, Jess Hampshire <j...@itworkshop-nexus.net> wrote:
> > > > > In message <ap.244ee54eb9.a701a0a.m.con...@argonet.co.uk>

> > > > > ? ? ? ? ? <ATimbr...@aol.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > > > VirtualAcorn extends support to include Windows Vista
> >
> > > > > Is the OS X version ever going to be released? If so is there a
> > > > > timescale?
> >
> > > > I don't know, but I wish they'd get on with it since they've stated
> > > > they're not going to do any development (e.g. fix the bugs) on the
> > > > Windows version until after the Mac version's done :(
>
> That's a mis-representation. If you look you here:
>
> http://www.virtualacorn.co.uk/news.htm

Yes, OK, sorry. I exaggerated.


> > > I missed that - where did they state it?
> >
> > Half way down here (re. MouseSync) for instance:http://www.virtualacorn.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=304
>
> Yes, and that statement relates to Mousesync.dll only.

Fair enough, though there are a number of other outstanding bugs which
have been reported in the forums - for instance the fact you can't start
in full screen mode without the pointer getting stuck.

Aaron

unread,
Mar 11, 2007, 1:19:29 PM3/11/07
to
On 10 Mar, 17:01, Adam <n...@snowstone.org.uk> wrote:
>
> Fair enough, though there are a number of other outstanding bugs which
> have been reported in the forums - for instance the fact you can't start
> in full screen mode without the pointer getting stuck.

Which is again caused by MouseSync.dll as far as I am
aware.

Both this and CallWin32 are rather devious (and frankly
flippin' clever). Once we get a chance we will have
another look at MouseSync.dll - but it's not our product, it's
a third party add on.

Aaron


Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages