RISC OS4 Released!
John Munro
there is a press release on Acorns website announcing the release of RISCOS4
- probably in january.
http://www.acorn.com/acorn/news/press/riscos4.html
hmmmm........
--
John Munro
I'm making a home movie called
"The Thing That Grew in My Refrigerator".
Peter Neal
<jmu...@foulis.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> Surprised I haven't seen mention of this on usenet yet -
>
> there is a press release on Acorns website announcing the release of
> RISCOS4
> - probably in january.
What I find even more interesting are referances to "Acorn's worksations
division" which I thought had been disbanded and the satatement "Acorn is a
technology design company" - no mention of Digital TV.
Humm....
Cheers,
Peter
--
? Everything I say is true - I'm not a compulsive liar ?
,_, ,_,
,˜˜˜˜˜(_) Soft Option : Peter Neal pn...@argonet.co.uk (_)˜˜˜˜˜,
{______) http://www.argonet.co.uk/business/pneal/softoption (______}
(( (( )) ))
Rob Hemmings
<jmu...@foulis.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Surprised I haven't seen mention of this on usenet yet -
>
> there is a press release on Acorns website announcing the release of
> RISCOS4
> - probably in january.
>
<snip>
Thanks for pointing this out - I've just been to look.
Well this looks encouraging - it is a press release from Acorn that seems
proud to admit that they have expertise in producing computers - after the
last few months that is a very welcome change indeed.
Maybe it is going to be a good 1999 after all :-)
--
-------------------------------------------------------------
Rob Hemmings Southport
Tel: +44 (0)1704 573210 ro...@argonet.co.uk
pstewart
Peter Neal <pn...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <ant232118868Q4#n...@foulis.freeserve.co.uk>, John Munro
> <jmu...@foulis.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> > Surprised I haven't seen mention of this on usenet yet -
> >
> > there is a press release on Acorns website announcing the release of
> > RISCOS4
> > - probably in january.
What I find interesting is that the URL www.acorn.com and
www.acorn.co.uk both relate to the Workstations division, not the old
main page. I know Acorn is about to change it's name, but to me it
looks like the Acorn name is going to survive through the workstations
division.
Any thoughts about this.
The news about RISC OS 4 is good though.
--
------With suppliers like Acorn(may be not), who needs competitors-----
------48MB SA RISC PC------
------ http://www.pstewart.freeserve.co.uk ------
Paul Clark
> http://www.acorn.com/acorn/news/press/riscos4.html
[Middle-click] ;-)
==
Cambridge, 23rd December 1998 - Acorn Computers Ltd, today
announced their intention to release RISC OS 4 - the latest
version of their acclaimed 32-bit modular operating system. With
an anticipated release date in mid January, Acorn will be
making this latest version of RISC OS available to existing
StrongARM RiscPC owners through the normal dealer channels.
Originally launched in 1988, RISCOS is celebrating its tenth
anniversary this year.
RISCOS 4 gives the computer a whole new look and feel - complete
new icon sets have been created for devices, the filer
applications and their toolboxes. The operating system now has a
faster kernel to support better task swapping, as well as a
new filecore which supports up to 80,000 files per directory, and
offers long file names as well as support for bigger discs. Like
all Acorn operating systems, RISCOS 4 is stable, scaleable and
supports a multitasking environment.
In addition to the core improvements, this latest version of
RISC OS includes many new features such as an enhanced pinboard,
screen savers and easy configuration, these will all be supplied
as part of a new disc image.
Ray Pinchard, of Acorn's Workstations division, said "We are
delighted to announce the release of RISC OS 4 now - as we
would like to reaffirm our support for the Acorn community."
He added, "Acorn have recently been compelled to make some
disappointing statements, but we want our customers to know
that we remain dedicated to supporting their needs, long into
the future."
About Acorn
Acorn is a technology design company, and one of its most
valuable assets lies in its in-depth knowledge and experience
as a computer manufacturer. Acorn was responsible for designing,
manufacturing and marketing the famous BBC microcomputer, which
had a remarkable million-selling life of more than a decade and
was the most popular computer in UK schools.
Established in 1978, Acorn has been supplying superior quality
hardware and software for more than twenty years.
==
After six months of trying to bury their history altogether, this is
surreal. I can only assume there either is some serious blood on the
floor, or, as others have suggested, that this isn't really the Acorn we
know speaking here, and the name has changed hands.
P.
--
Paul Clark mailto:p...@sysmag.com $ whois pc52
Systems Magic Ltd. http://www.sysmag.com
Vincent Lefevre
Paul Clark <p...@sysmag.com> wrote:
> applications and their toolboxes. The operating system now has a
> faster kernel to support better task swapping, as well as a
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
If they wrote it, this means that it works with any StrongARM.
Can this be confirmed?
--
Vincent Lefevre <Vincent...@ens-lyon.fr> - PhD stud. in Computer Science
Web: http://www.ens-lyon.fr/~vlefevre/ - 100% validated HTML - Acorn Risc PC,
Yellow Pig 17, Championnat International des Jeux Mathematiques et Logiques,
TETRHEX, Faits divers insolites, etc...
Sveinung W. Tengelsen
> [Select]
> > http://www.acorn.com/acorn/news/press/riscos4.html
>
> [Middle-click] ;-)
>
> ==
> Cambridge, 23rd December 1998 - Acorn Computers Ltd, today
> announced their intention to release RISC OS 4 - the latest
> version of their acclaimed 32-bit modular operating system. With
> an anticipated release date in mid January, Acorn will be
> making this latest version of RISC OS available to existing
> StrongARM RiscPC owners through the normal dealer channels.
> Originally launched in 1988, RISCOS is celebrating its tenth
> anniversary this year.
>
> RISCOS 4 gives the computer a whole new look and feel - complete
> new icon sets have been created for devices, the filer
> faster kernel to support better task swapping, as well as a
If there be blood, better it had not be Mr. Pinchards' - he's an Anorak
Inside with Common Sense I suspect, from experience. :) The release of RO4
will certainly give us some monumentum, but it's depending on new improved
hardware in order to *progress*. The speed gain from kernel improvements
is most significant, but won't do anything to speed up the *demanding* tasks
one would like to run on the RPC (online videoediting springs to mind).
But the language in the release begs a few questions, for instance if the
Acorn name is going to be exonerated by a transferral to the WS-division:
the fact that its etymological roots belong more to the "heathen" aspect of
British history (Oak;Acorn;fertility rites) than to classical Greeks'
perceptions as to what it represents (a bit more "explicit", ref. S.B.s
recent railings in "The Register") and not least, in recognition of it being
a trademark representing 20 years of technological heritage and experience.
I hope it implies that *something* is resurrected from the ashes resulting
from all the recent "restructurings" and "downsizing". If Mr. Pinchard is at
the helm, things couldn't be better, IMO. :)
--
Regards,
Sveinung W. Tengelsen
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
mailto:pixe...@online.no | I have one illusion;
http://www.sn.no/~pixeleye/Index.htm | I have no illusions.
Simon John
Paul Clark <p...@sysmag.com> wrote:
[snip]
> After six months of trying to bury their history altogether, this is
> surreal. I can only assume there either is some serious blood on the
> floor, or, as others have suggested, that this isn't really the Acorn we
> know speaking here, and the name has changed hands.
Yes, I was wondering if this was an employee speaking on his/her own or if
this was a bought-out Workstations Division trading as 'Acorn' or someting....
--
Simon E. John
Email: sim...@argonet.co.uk
WWW: http://surf.to/simonsite
ICQ: 15267939
I canna do it cap'n, I just doont ha' the pooer!
Andy McMullon
<URL:mailto:pa...@pstewart.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> What I find interesting is that the URL www.acorn.com and
> www.acorn.co.uk both relate to the Workstations division, not the old
> main page. I know Acorn is about to change it's name, but to me it
> looks like the Acorn name is going to survive through the workstations
> division.
>
> Any thoughts about this.
>
> The news about RISC OS 4 is good though.
Well we do still need a machine to run it on!
--
Andy: skyp...@bigfoot.com / http://www.mcfamily.demon.co.uk
Ernst Dinkla
<URL:mailto:pixe...@sn.spamtrap.no> wrote:
> (online videoediting springs to mind). But the language in the release
> begs a few questions, for instance if the Acorn name is going to be
> exonerated by a transferral to the WS-division: the fact that its
> etymological roots belong more to the "heathen" aspect of British
> history (Oak;Acorn;fertility rites) than to classical Greeks'
> perceptions as to what it represents (a bit more "explicit", ref.
> S.B.s recent railings in "The Register") and not least, in recognition
> of it being a trademark representing 20 years of technological heritage
> and experience. I hope it implies that *something* is resurrected from
> the ashes resulting from all the recent "restructurings" and
> "downsizing". If Mr. Pinchard is at the helm, things couldn't be better,
> IMO. :)
I wonder what they paid for the brand name? If it was so loaded with
baggage does that make it more expensive or not ;-) I'm glad the Dutch
didn't seize it, a translation to 'eikel' would have given it a lot more
negative connotations.
Good news, too late for the Xmas shoppers but giving hope in dark days.
Ernst
--
Ernst Dinkla Serigrafie,Zeefdruk edi...@inter.nl.net
Sig couldn't keep up with the events.
Richard Adkins
> Surprised I haven't seen mention of this on usenet yet -
>
> there is a press release on Acorns website announcing the release of RISCOS4
> - probably in january.
Well having read to press release, this is either a remarkable turn around
in Acorn's business plans, or someone has bought the Acorn name and the
Workstations division, which would seem very unlikely.
But I feel the real problem which would have to be tackled is the total lack
of confidence in the future of Acorn computing since Phoebe was cancelled.
Even if RISC-OS 4 is released as an upgrade, there needs to be a more firm
commitment from who ever to the platform. As far as can be seen it is
software which makes a platform, not just a new version of the OS. There
needs to be a comitment from Acorn or who ever, to the software developers.
Without this I am sure many will earn a living by developing for other
platforms.
Also there is the issue of the cost of this upgrade. Looking at Acorn's
track record, it will be over priced, and not justified because really RO 4
is not that radical and does not deliver a major advance. This move could be
viewed in a light that, Acorn is trying to realise some return from the
investment in RO 4, even although they are not seriously commited desktop
computers.
TTFN
--
Richard Adkins
Using British computer technology with ARM power, made by the
technology manufacturer formally known as Acorn!
Acorn @ adkins dot demon dot co dot uk
Andy McMullon
<URL:mailto:Ac...@adkins.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> Well having read to press release, this is either a remarkable turn around
> in Acorn's business plans, or someone has bought the Acorn name and the
> Workstations division, which would seem very unlikely.
"We would like to re-affirm our support for the Acorn Community"
Forgive me for my cynicism but........!
Reading the press release makes me quite fearful. None of us trust
Acorn any more after the way they have acted in the last six months.
If *Acorn* are going to release RISC OS 4 just to prise more money out
of the remaining loyal fans then I'm rather worried. This now needs to
be done by a new/spin-off company under an enthusiastic new management
with a committment to and a belief in the future of RISC OS.
Launching Acorn Workstations as an independent new company could do it
but RISC OS must be prised out of the hands of 'old Acorn'. Are there
signs that somthing is happening along these very lines? Have the board
developed a guilty conscience about their treatment of Acorn users?
Have they realised that DiTV is not going to bring in the money?
Watch this space!
James Sargent
: As far as can be seen it is
: software which makes a platform, not just a new version of the OS. There
: needs to be a comitment from Acorn or who ever, to the software developers.
As a person who is just a *user* of these machines, I find myself
thinking that if the software I use is no longer supported I will *have*
to change to a PC. I'm thinking especially of Sibelius in this
instance, I would like the newer Sibelius VMP as it offers the benefits
of being supported and of having enhancements and bug fixes that are
useful to me. I mean, will my copies of Sibelius 7 and Impression
Publisher still work on RO 4? At least I can buy a replacement WP
package, but I can't do that with Sibelius. So a PC is the only way
out. And that is not a nice thought.
So, yes, new OS and new hardware are nice - but the existing developers
need a lot more support along the way too.
James
--
James Sargent (jsar...@uk.oracle.com)
Not the opinions of my employer, except by coincidence.
Darren Winsper
What, no comment from Tony ;)
> scaleable and
> supports a multitasking environment.
And there was me being told CMT isn't proper multi-tasking ;)
Stuart Bell
> Ray Pinchard, of Acorn's Workstations division, said "We are
> delighted to announce the release of RISC OS 4 now - as we
> would like to reaffirm our support for the Acorn community."
> He added, "Acorn have recently been compelled to make some
> disappointing statements, but we want our customers to know
> that we remain dedicated to supporting their needs, long into
> the future."
Yer what? What _is_ going on? How does this fit in with RPCs made to
order only, the proposed Risc OS Foundation, etc etc?
Presumably, this is what certain people were hinting at yesterday, but
couldn't say anything?
--
Stuart Bell working in a Wintel-free zone.
PB-100 FAQ at www.argonet.co.uk/users/sabell/pb100.html
JR's Duo FAQ at www.argonet.co.uk/users/sabell/duo.html
Looking for an LC575 logic board - or a cheap LC630!
Richard. Watson
1. "Ok, so we havn't got any revenue comming in, and we've just
forked out 2 million for ST Microlectronics, why not release
that RO4 upgrage anyway and make a bob or two - we can use
the usual corporate waffle to justify it."
2. "Ok here's our buisness plan for the next year."
Holds up blank sheet.
"Better try and flog a few Risc-PC's then, hadn't we?"
--
__ __ __ __ __ ___ _____________________________________________
|__||__)/ __/ \|\ ||_ | /
| || \\__/\__/| \||__ | /...Internet access for all Acorn RISC machines
___________________________/ series3...@argonet.co.uk
Dave Clare - Home
Richard. Watson <series3...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> Being a completely cinical I go for one of two theories:
>
> 1. "Ok, so we havn't got any revenue comming in, and we've just
> forked out 2 million for ST Microlectronics, why not release
> that RO4 upgrage anyway and make a bob or two - we can use
> the usual corporate waffle to justify it."
>
> 2. "Ok here's our buisness plan for the next year."
> Holds up blank sheet.
> "Better try and flog a few Risc-PC's then, hadn't we?"
This is rather cynical yes.
Having visited Acorn in the immediate aftermath of the last shakeup I can
tell you that Ray Pinchard and Peter Henry were even then looking at the
possibilities for RO4 and from what I hear they have been fighting our
corner ever since.
Ray and Peter both go back a long way (Peter wrote our Replica series on the
BBC) and are dedicated Acorn enthusiasts.
Give them some credit for getting RO4 this far.
Dave
--
Dave Clare - at home
Dave Cooper
jsar...@uksn24.uk.oracle.com (James Sargent) wrote:
>
> So, yes, new OS and new hardware are nice - but the existing developers
> need a lot more support along the way too.
>
> James
>
So I for one am not going to pour cold water over it.
Regards, Dave C.
--
__ __ __ __ __ ___ ______________________________________________
|__||__)/ __/ \|\ ||_ | / StrongArm Risc Pc (586 PcCard) Clan & MAUG.
| || \\__/\__/| \||__ | / ArgoRing.AcornRing.Interests-Comp.Sat.AV.SF
___________________________/ Classical music & Wine. d...@argonet.co.uk
Homepage (inc.free photos) http://www.argonet.co.uk/users/dac/index.html
Stuart Bell
> As a person who is just a *user* of these machines, I find myself
> thinking that if the software I use is no longer supported I will *have*
> to change to a PC.
[snip]
> So a PC is the only way
> out. And that is not a nice thought.
It is _not_ the only way out. There are other alternatives besides PCs,
and I'm pretty sure that Sibelius is/will be available for Macs.
pstewart
> Being a completely cinical I go for one of two theories:
>
> 1. "Ok, so we havn't got any revenue comming in, and we've just
> forked out 2 million for ST Microlectronics, why not release
> that RO4 upgrage anyway and make a bob or two - we can use
> the usual corporate waffle to justify it."
>
> 2. "Ok here's our buisness plan for the next year."
> Holds up blank sheet.
> "Better try and flog a few Risc-PC's then, hadn't we?"
>
I'm forced to agree with you on both points. I mean for a company that
in Septmeber stopped(as far as the community's concerned) being a PC
maker to become a company specialising in DiTV, to suddenly back track
and announce the launch of a new operating system, for the very PC's it
no longer wants to build, market or have anything else to do with. The
very PC's whose company name carries so much baggage that it wants to
dump it. Something is certainly up.
For a company that has not made a profit for a number of years, to spend
2 million pounds developing a computer, dumping it at the eleventh hour,
spending 1 million pounds to close down the PC division, finding another
2 million pounds to buy a microeletronics team - thats an quite a lot of
money for such a cash deprieved company. How do they get some of
it back? Well I believe that's covered by the 2 points made above.
Paul
--
------With suppliers like Acorn, who needs competitors-----
David Marston
Paul Clark <p...@sysmag.com> wrote:
One of the other interesting lines in this is :
> these will all be supplied as part of a new disc image.
So is this implying the whole thing will be disc based, or just that there
will be a new disc image to go with it? Am I just being paranoid and reading
too much into it?
--
David Marston
david....@physics.org
Fred Bambrough
David Marston <david....@physics.org> wrote:
I think you're reading too much into it. I presume they mean a new disc
image in the sense that a new image was supplied with ROS 3.7, Browse/Java
and so on. Disc image + ROMs.
Given that I intend to continue with my RPC for as long as it's viable for
me and that I would be interested in upgrading, have authors had an
opportunity to test their software on RO4? I, and I'm sure others, would be
interested to know what breaks if anything. Anyone from Acorn know/allowed
to say?
--
Fred
PGP key available
Matthias Seifert
[...]
> as well as a new filecore which supports up to 80,000 files per
> directory,
Strange - I had to change recently from the new filecore (of ROS 3.80)
back to raFS because the new filecore couldn't handle enough files per
directory (about 550 at the moment). How do they define 'up to'? What does
this figure relate to?
--
_ _ | Acorn Risc PC, StrongARM @ 287 MHz
| | | _, _|__|_ |) ' _, , | 130 Mbyte RAM, ~30 Gbyte HD
| | | / | | | |/\ | / | / \ | ------------------------------------
| | |_/\/|_/|_/|_/| |/|/\/|_/ \/ | http://www.deutschlandwetter.de
Lenny
David Marston <david....@physics.org> wrote:
> In message <3681858B...@sysmag.com>
> Paul Clark <p...@sysmag.com> wrote:
>
> One of the other interesting lines in this is :
> > these will all be supplied as part of a new disc image.
> So is this implying the whole thing will be disc based, or just that
> there will be a new disc image to go with it? Am I just being paranoid
> and reading too much into it?
Maybe it'll be on a yellow disc :-)
Lenny.
Walter Lo Nigro
<URL:mailto:sab...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> James Sargent <jsar...@uksn24.uk.oracle.com> wrote:
>
> > As a person who is just a *user* of these machines, I find myself
> > thinking that if the software I use is no longer supported I will *have*
> > to change to a PC.
> [snip]
> > So a PC is the only way
> > out. And that is not a nice thought.
>
> It is _not_ the only way out. There are other alternatives besides PCs,
> and I'm pretty sure that Sibelius is/will be available for Macs.
Apologies for the blatancy (?) and/or off-topics, but things aren't that
bad for Sibelius users, as long as there is some development around it
(like my new !SibToDraw program ;) for instance) ...
Cheers,
WLN
*** Walter Lo Nigro, Trieste, Italy - member, IFCM, ACDA, and NATS ***
E-mail: walt...@tin.it - fax +39 40 3725133
Sendu Bala
<URL:mailto:M.Se...@t-online.de> wrote:
> Paul Clark <p...@sysmag.com> wrote:
>
> [...]
> > as well as a new filecore which supports up to 80,000 files per
> > directory,
>
> Strange - I had to change recently from the new filecore (of ROS 3.80)
> back to raFS because the new filecore couldn't handle enough files per
> directory (about 550 at the moment). How do they define 'up to'? What does
> this figure relate to?
I remember reading somewhere that they had tested as many files as
possible in a directory and found that the computer started to slow
down by an unacceptable amount once they tried much more than 80000.
Hence the 'up to'. I don't think there's an actual limit though,
unless they artificially put one in because of this problem.
--
Sendu Bala (se...@sbs-net.demon.co.uk | http://www..co.uk/)
Tori Amos, Babylon5, DNA and my SA RPC
"If life gets any better than this, I'll be genuinly surprised"
Jim Lesurf
Dave Clare - Home <da...@cowlane.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <na.c6876f48b9.a70...@argonet.co.uk>
> Richard. Watson <series3...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> > Being a completely cinical I go for one of two theories:
> >
[snip cynical bit]
> This is rather cynical yes.
> Having visited Acorn in the immediate aftermath of the last shakeup I can
> tell you that Ray Pinchard and Peter Henry were even then looking at the
> possibilities for RO4 and from what I hear they have been fighting our
> corner ever since.
> Ray and Peter both go back a long way (Peter wrote our Replica series on
> the BBC) and are dedicated Acorn enthusiasts.
I'd agree with this. Ray's name being linked to this does give it some
real credibility so far as I am concerned.
Slainte, and Happy Hogmanay to everyone! :-)
Jim
--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
MMWaves http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/MMWave/Index.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html
TechWriter http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/TechWrite/Tips1.html
Dutton CDs http://www.duttonlabs.demon.co.uk/index.html
Jim Lesurf
Walter Lo Nigro <walt...@tin.it> wrote:
> In article <1dkjqfl.1rc...@userb999.uk.uudial.com>, Stuart Bell
> >
> > It is _not_ the only way out. There are other alternatives besides PCs,
> > and I'm pretty sure that Sibelius is/will be available for Macs.
> Apologies for the blatancy (?) and/or off-topics, but things aren't that
> bad for Sibelius users, as long as there is some development around it
> (like my new !SibToDraw program ;) for instance) ...
How about some 'guerilla warfare'?... i.e. someone write a RiscOS only
add-on or extra for Sib that is a 'must have' for Sib users?... ;->>
Sort of "Son of Killer App" scenario?
Slainte, and Happy Hogmanay. :-)
Andrew Berry
>
> Acorn will be making this latest version of RISC OS available to
> existing StrongARM RiscPC owners through the normal dealer channels.
Does this mean that a StrongARM is required, or will the upgrade be
available for non-SA RPCs?
Cheers,
--
Andrew Berry
(and...@aberry.demon.co.uk)
A black heart will only find beauty in darkness
Steffen Huber
Richard Adkins <Ac...@adkins.demon.co.uk> wrote:
[snip]
> Also there is the issue of the cost of this upgrade. Looking at Acorn's
> track record, it will be over priced,
I don't remember any OS upgrade being overpriced by Acorn. In fact, I
remember the RO3 upgrade to be quite cheap.
> and not justified because really RO 4 is not that radical and does not
> deliver a major advance.
I think RISC OS 4 delivers the biggest advance since the RO2->RO3
transition. The kernel seems to be much faster (task swapping), and
two "weak points" in previous RISC OS versions have gone: filecore
and CDFS. Together with having all the latest Toolbox modules in ROM,
I think RO4 is the OS that RO3.7 should have been.
Well, the new filer is also quite nice.
> This move could be viewed in a light that, Acorn is trying to realise some
> return from the investment in RO 4, even although they are not seriously
> commited desktop computers.
I guess that we all know that RISC OS 4 is very probably the last OS that
will be available from Acorn for their desktop machines. However, I
will buy it anyway, because it gives me some real advantages - it is
just another piece of software I buy, and I am fully aware that further
development will probably only happen if Acorn gives me the sources ;-)
I for one am happy with the decision I now have - buy it or not. Without
Acorns latest announcement, it would have been a very easy "decision"...
So long, Steffen
--
Steffen Huber LambdaComm System - Welcome to Trollinger Country
hub...@lcs.wn.bawue.de aco...@ftp.uni-stuttgart.de
... Mal verliert man, mal gewinnen die anderen.
Stephen Crocker
Andrew Berry <and...@aberry.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <3681858B...@sysmag.com>, Paul Clark
> <URL:mailto:p...@sysmag.com> wrote:
> >
> > Acorn will be making this latest version of RISC OS available to
> > existing StrongARM RiscPC owners through the normal dealer channels.
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Does this mean that a StrongARM is required, or will the upgrade be
> available for non-SA RPCs?
I think they are assuming that everyone has had the common sense to
upgrade. I see no reason for it not to work with ARM6 or 7. However,
SA RPC owner probably _will_ have to upgrade to a rev. T SA for lazy
task swapping to work!
--
x^ ( ) _________ // Email: mailto:cr...@crok.demon.co.uk
< U O |_|_|_|_|_| O || WWW: http://www.crok.demon.co.uk
\, |/|\ _________ [ ]
. |/^\ . 2 . /__\
... Law of Insurance and Taxes - Whatever goes up, stays up.
Simon John
Andrew Berry <and...@aberry.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <3681858B...@sysmag.com>, Paul Clark
> <URL:mailto:p...@sysmag.com> wrote:
> >
> > Acorn will be making this latest version of RISC OS available to
> > existing StrongARM RiscPC owners through the normal dealer channels.
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Does this mean that a StrongARM is required, or will the upgrade be
> available for non-SA RPCs?
I thought the original thing was for A7000[+]s and [SA-]RiscPCs, now will we
need Rev-T upgrades?!
--
Simon E. John
Email: sim...@argonet.co.uk
WWW: http://surf.to/simonsite
ICQ: 15267939
Every message from now on shall be in Morse Code.
al...@see.the.sig.localhost
<URL:mailto:fr...@ypical.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <48B9A0395D%david....@physics.org>
> David Marston <david....@physics.org> wrote:
>
> > In message <3681858B...@sysmag.com>
> > Paul Clark <p...@sysmag.com> wrote:
>
> > One of the other interesting lines in this is :
>
> > > these will all be supplied as part of a new disc image.
>
> > So is this implying the whole thing will be disc based, or just that there
> > will be a new disc image to go with it? Am I just being paranoid and reading
> > too much into it?
>
> image in the sense that a new image was supplied with ROS 3.7, Browse/Java
> and so on. Disc image + ROMs.
>
> Given that I intend to continue with my RPC for as long as it's viable for
> me and that I would be interested in upgrading, have authors had an
> opportunity to test their software on RO4? I, and I'm sure others, would be
> interested to know what breaks if anything. Anyone from Acorn know/allowed
> to say?
>
That raises another more important point - what about developer products and
support?
Are Acorn just going to release Risc OS 4 and let us all spend 6 months
struggling to get things working ourselves, while they get on with other
business? We are going to need the Risc OS 4 PRMs and new toolbox libraries
etc.
What level of developer support are they likely to give? It'll have to be
more than just a token effort if they want Risc OS to have any medium/long
term future - we still need a proper C++ compiler and class libraries if we
are to attract new software developers. (This is what drove CC/Xara away).
I'm going to need a lot of convincing that it'll happen - I fear that Acorn
are still in the 'sell what we've got before it's too late' mode. As soon
as Risc OS 4 sales start to drop they'll perform another 'reorganisation'
and Risc OS (and 'Acorn') will be buried for good.
Ho hum. Cheer up - it's Christmas!
Alex
--
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>
Rey Cobham
Stephen Crocker <cr...@crok.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> Before being shot for writing message <ant25125...@aberry.demon.co.uk>
> > In article <3681858B...@sysmag.com>, Paul Clark
> > <URL:mailto:p...@sysmag.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Acorn will be making this latest version of RISC OS available to
> > > existing StrongARM RiscPC owners through the normal dealer channels.
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > Does this mean that a StrongARM is required, or will the upgrade be
> > available for non-SA RPCs?
> I think they are assuming that everyone has had the common sense to
> upgrade. I see no reason for it not to work with ARM6 or 7. However,
> SA RPC owner probably _will_ have to upgrade to a rev. T SA for lazy
> task swapping to work!
And yet no-one will tell all of those who've recently(?) ordered SA's for
their Risc PCs whether what they'll be recieving will be a rev S or a rev
T! I for one may well cancel mine till I can find out. Someone (can't
for the life of me remember who) said that the softloadable versions of
RO4 (was it 3.8?) had been SA disabled due to that task swapping problem.
Assuming the RO4 price previously touted (150 ukp) was correct, and the SA
upgrade by Simtec was to be around 100 ukp, the price of my SA was 260
quid which totals up to way too much for my liking. $o0
Since Black Thursday I've already spent around 550 ukp (excluding the SA)
and I only work part-time, as well as being an OU student. (the miracles
of your flexible friend... ;o)
I doubt too many people mind paying a little extra for their favourite
platform, but this rocks drying up a little now and I suspect I might not
be alone... (saying that I'll probably still upgrade to RO4 at some point)
Does anyone yet know who the funds generated by sales of RO4 will be going
to? Is it a 'new' company or will we simply be paying for Acorn to delve
deeper into the depths of DiTV?
TTFN
Rey
--
The Dark Lord Of All is awaiting his sig. file
Web-Site: TBA Real Soon
E-Mail: fo...@argonet.co.uk
Vincent Lefevre
> I think they are assuming that everyone has had the common sense to
> upgrade. I see no reason for it not to work with ARM6 or 7. However,
> SA RPC owner probably _will_ have to upgrade to a rev. T SA for lazy
> task swapping to work!
Why? Why not have a patched RISC OS so that the bug condition never
happens? (e.g., when a LDM is at the end of a page, always map the
next page, or use two-level page tables as Thomas Boroske said a few
weeks ago.)
--
Vincent Lefevre <Vincent...@ens-lyon.fr> - PhD stud. in Computer Science
Web: http://www.ens-lyon.fr/~vlefevre/ - 100% validated HTML - Acorn Risc PC,
Yellow Pig 17, Championnat International des Jeux Mathematiques et Logiques,
TETRHEX, Faits divers insolites, etc...
Gareth J Dykes
<al...@SEE.THE.SIG.localhost> shared with us:
> What level of developer support are they likely to give? It'll have to
> be more than just a token effort if they want Risc OS to have any
> medium/long term future - we still need a proper C++ compiler and class
> libraries if we are to attract new software developers. (This is what
> drove CC/Xara away).
I think that we have to be realistic, here. My guess is that the best that
we can hope for is a vanilla RISC OS4. Whilst this is not ideal, it is
more than seemed likely not so long ago.
The emerging scenario seems to be that a couple of Acorn enthusiasts
persuaded the Acorn hierarchy that some return could be made from
releasing RO4. I can see no way that this would allow for developer
support. I would counsel against too much criticism on Usenet. Thinking
back to the fate of Phoebe, too many negative waves could result in
another unwelcome change of tack.
Gareth
--
_____)
/ /) Gareth J Dykes
/ ___ _ __ _ _/_(/ dy...@seesig.co.uk
/ / ) (_(_/ (__(/_(__/ )_ http://www.argonet.co.uk/dykes/
(____ / To reply, replace 'seesig' with 'argonet'
Michael M Martin
Gareth J Dykes <dy...@seesig.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <ant26025...@blamey.demon.co.uk>,
> <al...@SEE.THE.SIG.localhost> shared with us:
> > What level of developer support are they likely to give? It'll have to
> > be more than just a token effort if they want Risc OS to have any
> > medium/long term future - we still need a proper C++ compiler and class
> > libraries if we are to attract new software developers. (This is what
> > drove CC/Xara away).
> I think that we have to be realistic, here. My guess is that the best
> that we can hope for is a vanilla RISC OS4. Whilst this is not ideal, it
> is more than seemed likely not so long ago.
> The emerging scenario seems to be that a couple of Acorn enthusiasts
> persuaded the Acorn hierarchy that some return could be made from
> releasing RO4. I can see no way that this would allow for developer
> support. I would counsel against too much criticism on Usenet. Thinking
> back to the fate of Phoebe, too many negative waves could result in
> another unwelcome change of tack.
> Gareth
I couldn't agree more with what you say,I thought that we may have learned
our lesson from the phoebe, just let wait and see.
mick
--
|^^^^^ Michael Martin ^^^^^ mma...@zetnet.co.uk ^^^^^|^^^Acorn Risc PC^^^|
| * * * http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/mmartin/ * * * | Email and News by |
| ^^^ http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/mmartin/sign/ ^^^ | !Pluto |
|======== Member of Clan Acorn ==========|===================|
Matthias Seifert
> In article <48b96572c...@t-online.de>, Matthias Seifert
> <URL:mailto:M.Se...@t-online.de> wrote:
> > Paul Clark <p...@sysmag.com> wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> > > as well as a new filecore which supports up to 80,000 files per
> > > directory,
> >
> > Strange - I had to change recently from the new filecore (of ROS 3.80)
> > back to raFS because the new filecore couldn't handle enough files per
> > directory (about 550 at the moment). How do they define 'up to'? What
> > does this figure relate to?
> I remember reading somewhere that they had tested as many files as
> possible in a directory and found that the computer started to slow
> down by an unacceptable amount once they tried much more than 80000.
> Hence the 'up to'. I don't think there's an actual limit though,
> unless they artificially put one in because of this problem.
There _is_ a limit - and it must be much less than 80000 files. Maybe it's
relating to the total disc space (i.e. the bigger the disc the more files
are allowed per directory).
Matthias Seifert
[...]
> I think RISC OS 4 delivers the biggest advance since the RO2->RO3
> transition.
That's no big problem as RO3 brougt almost no advances compared to RO2.
> The kernel seems to be much faster (task swapping),
That's not only because 'lazy task swapping' but because of some other
enhancements (one of those makes [almost] all modules incompatible - but
there is a patch module included which [hopefully] makes them compatible
again).
> and two "weak points" in previous RISC OS versions have gone: filecore
As I already stated I had to replace the often praised filecore by raFS
again.
Furthermore I wasn't able to get supporting drivers for the new filecore
from Cumana and Yellowstone (both told me that they don't have drivers
that support the new filecore).
> and CDFS.
Which is completely incompatible to the existing CDFS and thus isn't
supported by any program at the moment.
> Together with having all the latest Toolbox modules in ROM,
Didn't we already have the 'latest toolbox modules' in ROM with RISC OS
3...? ;-)
> I think RO4 is the OS that RO3.7 should have been.
And by this it is several years late...
(Does anyone still remeber what Acorn claimed some years ago ROS4 will
have? Compared to this the actual ROS4 is much more a ROS3.80 - well,
that's how they called it at Acorn...)
Stephen Crocker
M.Se...@t-online.de (Matthias Seifert) wrote:
> Steffen Huber <hub...@lcs.wn.bawue.de> wrote:
>
> [...]
> > I think RISC OS 4 delivers the biggest advance since the RO2->RO3
> > transition.
>
> That's no big problem as RO3 brougt almost no advances compared to RO2.
Well, look at Win98! Some upgrade!
> > The kernel seems to be much faster (task swapping),
>
> That's not only because 'lazy task swapping' but because of some other
> enhancements (one of those makes [almost] all modules incompatible - but
> there is a patch module included which [hopefully] makes them compatible
> again).
Hmmm... And does this slow it down again?
> > and two "weak points" in previous RISC OS versions have gone: filecore
>
> As I already stated I had to replace the often praised filecore by raFS
> again.
Yes, but I can't imagine many people wanting >500 files in a directory!
What a mess!
> Furthermore I wasn't able to get supporting drivers for the new filecore
> from Cumana and Yellowstone (both told me that they don't have drivers
> that support the new filecore).
Ah...
> > and CDFS.
>
> Which is completely incompatible to the existing CDFS and thus isn't
> supported by any program at the moment.
Sounds fun!
> > Together with having all the latest Toolbox modules in ROM,
>
> Didn't we already have the 'latest toolbox modules' in ROM with RISC OS
> 3...? ;-)
Yes, but they're old vesions, now!
> > I think RO4 is the OS that RO3.7 should have been.
>
> And by this it is several years late...
Well, let's hope it isn't any later!
> (Does anyone still remeber what Acorn claimed some years ago ROS4 will
> have? Compared to this the actual ROS4 is much more a ROS3.80 - well,
> that's how they called it at Acorn...)
Sounds a bit like RPC2, really. Maybe that's what killed her...
--
x^ ( ) _________ // Email: mailto:cr...@crok.demon.co.uk
< U O |_|_|_|_|_| O || WWW: http://www.crok.demon.co.uk
\, |/|\ _________ [ ]
. |/^\ . 2 . /__\
... Hardware: The part you kick.
Darren Salt
M.Se...@t-online.de (Matthias Seifert) wrote:
> Steffen Huber <hub...@lcs.wn.bawue.de> wrote:
> [...]
>> I think RISC OS 4 delivers the biggest advance since the RO2->RO3
>> transition.
> That's no big problem as RO3 brougt almost no advances compared to RO2.
Hmm. Not having used RO2 very much at all...
>> The kernel seems to be much faster (task swapping),
> That's not only because 'lazy task swapping' but because of some other
> enhancements (one of those makes [almost] all modules incompatible - but
> there is a patch module included which [hopefully] makes them compatible
> again).
Oh yes, that'll be the service call list. (Zap is known to work OK, and uses
the new method; it's transparent in use with older versions of RISC OS.)
>> and two "weak points" in previous RISC OS versions have gone: filecore
> As I already stated I had to replace the often praised filecore by raFS
> again.
:-\
> Furthermore I wasn't able to get supporting drivers for the new filecore
> from Cumana and Yellowstone (both told me that they don't have drivers that
> support the new filecore).
Hmm. Unless I'm missing something, new *drivers* won't be needed; just new
disk initialisation software, able to create the necessary bits for the new
format. At a push, a generic utility which would just rewrite the necessary
bits of an existing partition (part of the boot block, the map and the root
directory) would probably do...
>> and CDFS.
> Which is completely incompatible to the existing CDFS and thus isn't
> supported by any program at the moment.
That's a big problem. (Hmm, does CDFS 2.28 work with RO4? It would be a
useful workaround until newer drivers are released. Unless, of course,
current drivers work...)
>> Together with having all the latest Toolbox modules in ROM,
> Didn't we already have the 'latest toolbox modules' in ROM with RISC OS
> 3...? ;-)
With RO3.6, yes... ;-)
>> I think RO4 is the OS that RO3.7 should have been.
> And by this it is several years late...
Hmm.
> (Does anyone still remeber what Acorn claimed some years ago ROS4 will
> have? Compared to this the actual ROS4 is much more a ROS3.80 - well,
> that's how they called it at Acorn...)
I remember noticing that at Wakefield ;-)
--
| Darren Salt anti-UCE | ds@youmustbejoking,demon,co,uk | nr. Ashington,
| Risc PC, Spectrum +3, | ds@zap,uk,eu,org | Northumberland
| A3010, BBC Master 128 | arcsalt@spuddy,mew,co,uk | Toon Army
| Let's keep the pound sterling
Is there any recorded case in history where the majority was right?
Steffen Huber
> Steffen Huber <hub...@lcs.wn.bawue.de> wrote:
>
> [...]
> > I think RISC OS 4 delivers the biggest advance since the RO2->RO3
> > transition.
>
> That's no big problem as RO3 brougt almost no advances compared to RO2.
Hmmm - you mean things like image filing systems and territories
along with the more visually-oriented changes (remember the great
window furniture...) and things like new printer system...
Also things like the device claim protocol, which was basically
invented with RO3. Filer Action Windows. Proper system shutdown.
Filter Manager. TaskWindow. Colour calibration in ColourTrans.
DrawFile. FontManager.
It would have been possible to soft-load some of the features on
RO2, but if we start there, we could also argue that the BBC MOS only
needs some changes to evolve into RO3...
I am sure I have forgotten some things, as I got too used to the many
things in RO3.
> > The kernel seems to be much faster (task swapping),
>
> That's not only because 'lazy task swapping' but because of some other
> enhancements (one of those makes [almost] all modules incompatible - but
> there is a patch module included which [hopefully] makes them compatible
> again).
I hope this patch will work ;-)
> > and two "weak points" in previous RISC OS versions have gone: filecore
>
> As I already stated I had to replace the often praised filecore by raFS
> again.
Which raises the question: what went wrong? Is the "plain" filecore module
not enough? Have you done something wrong? Did Acorn lie? Do we need
a completely new Fileswitch-based FS?
> Furthermore I wasn't able to get supporting drivers for the new filecore
> from Cumana and Yellowstone (both told me that they don't have drivers
> that support the new filecore).
Which is a shame. If you asked those companies before the cancellation
of Phoebe, they would have told you that of course everything is ready
and that they only wait for Acorn to release RO4.
> > and CDFS.
>
> Which is completely incompatible to the existing CDFS and thus isn't
> supported by any program at the moment.
What "programs"? The only problems I see is with the various CD players
out there, and this is surely no big problem?
The most important thing is that it works. In this respect it is
probably also incompatible...
> > Together with having all the latest Toolbox modules in ROM,
>
> Didn't we already have the 'latest toolbox modules' in ROM with RISC OS
> 3...? ;-)
Yes, since 3.60 IIRC ;-)
The advantage now is that it is likely that those Toolbox modules are
stable now (not necessarily because there are no bugs, but because there
are no further fixes...).
> > I think RO4 is the OS that RO3.7 should have been.
>
> And by this it is several years late...
Yes, like everything in computer industry.
> (Does anyone still remeber what Acorn claimed some years ago ROS4 will
> have? Compared to this the actual ROS4 is much more a ROS3.80 - well,
> that's how they called it at Acorn...)
I don't remember any official claims, only wishes...
So long, Steffen
--
Steffen Huber LambdaComm System - Welcome to Trollinger Country
hub...@lcs.wn.bawue.de aco...@ftp.uni-stuttgart.de
... "Macht Fernsehen dumm,oder machen Dumme Fernsehen?" (Michael Mittermaier)
James White
> > James Sargent <jsar...@uksn24.uk.oracle.com> wrote:
> >
> > > As a person who is just a *user* of these machines, I find myself
> > > thinking that if the software I use is no longer supported I will *have*
> > > to change to a PC.
> > [snip]
> > > So a PC is the only way
> > > out. And that is not a nice thought.
> >
> > and I'm pretty sure that Sibelius is/will be available for Macs.
>
> Apologies for the blatancy (?) and/or off-topics, but things aren't that
> bad for Sibelius users, as long as there is some development around it
> (like my new !SibToDraw program ;) for instance) ...
>
Looks like a real timesaver compared against !Draw. Just using one
feature, the ability to hide the overhanging slurs automatically, must
save hours.
I was thinking along the lines of a REPLACEMENT for Sibelius 7.
What is needed is a new multi-tasking version which has the same
intuitive characteristic as the original, i.e. it looks like a score, as
opposed to looking like a computer programme.
Assuming continuing hardware developments, is this feasible?
Regards
JW
--
----------------
Acorns in Spain Tel:+34 971 872322 Fax:+34 971 872309
----------------
James Hammerton
Sibelius thought so for SA machines prior to abandoning the new
program on the Acorns. We'd need someone who knows musical notation
and the rules for producing manuscripts as well as the Finn brothers
did however to create a real rival.
James
--
James Hammerton, Research Student, School of Computer Science,
University of Birmingham | Home Page: http://www.cs.bham.ac.uk/~jah/
Connectionist NLP WWW Page: http://www.cs.bham.ac.uk/~jah/CNLP/cnlp.html
Remove "nospam" from my email address
Matthew Bullock
<URL:mailto:M.Se...@t-online.de> wrote:
> Steffen Huber <hub...@lcs.wn.bawue.de> wrote:
>
> [...]
> > I think RISC OS 4 delivers the biggest advance since the RO2->RO3
> > transition.
>
> That's no big problem as RO3 brougt almost no advances compared to RO2.
>
>
> That's not only because 'lazy task swapping' but because of some other
> enhancements (one of those makes [almost] all modules incompatible - but
> there is a patch module included which [hopefully] makes them compatible
> again).
Old format modules are still supported. The only way a module would be
incompatible is if the first instruction in the service call handler is
MOV r0,r0 and the word immediately preceding that is a valid offset into
the module, which is unlikely. It could have been implemented better
though...
> > and two "weak points" in previous RISC OS versions have gone: filecore
>
> As I already stated I had to replace the often praised filecore by raFS
> again.
I think it's pretty clear that the developer release had a version of
filecore that hadn't been fully tested yet. The bugs in it are so
significant that they stop it being used practically. I would expect
them to be fixed by the time it's released.
> Furthermore I wasn't able to get supporting drivers for the new filecore
> from Cumana and Yellowstone (both told me that they don't have drivers
> that support the new filecore).
There is no need for new drivers to support the new filecore, all you
need is the existing drivers that work with the old filecore. What you
can't get ATM is software to format drives on other interfaces to use
the new format. I would expect people producing drive interfaces to get
that sorted out quite soon though. It's not exactly difficult to modify
an existing formatter to handle the new filecore format.
> > and CDFS.
>
> Which is completely incompatible to the existing CDFS and thus isn't
> supported by any program at the moment.
Which is actually totally compatible with all existing software and
works perfectly with everything I've tried. Unfortunately, in the
developer release the ATAPI driver in unfinished so doesn't fully work.
The only things that don't work are CD drivers, as the interface to them
has been totally changed. That means that new drivers will need to be
written for other drive interfaces. The interface is now much simpler
though so writing them shouldn't take very long. Ideally they should be
written before RiscOS 4 is finished and included in the ROM image to
save everyone from having to upgrade their other hardware separately,
but Acorn are unlikely to be that competent/considerate.
> > Together with having all the latest Toolbox modules in ROM,
>
> Didn't we already have the 'latest toolbox modules' in ROM with RISC OS
> 3...? ;-)
Considering Acorn have stopped developing them (along with everything
else) we will actually get the latest versions in ROM. :-)
> > I think RO4 is the OS that RO3.7 should have been.
>
> And by this it is several years late...
>
> (Does anyone still remeber what Acorn claimed some years ago ROS4 will
> have? Compared to this the actual ROS4 is much more a ROS3.80 - well,
> that's how they called it at Acorn...)
I think we all now know how accurate most of Mr Bondar's prophecies
were...
Matthew
--
Matthew Bullock
http://dialspace.dial.pipex.com/matthew.bullock/