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/
Stuart Bell
> 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.
I'm sorry, but the usenet newsgroups _cannot_, IMHO, be blamed for the
Pheobe debacle.
Let's remember how hopes of a high-spec machine were raised, with talk
of multiple processors and triple VIDC output. And not from optimistic
users, but people who should have known what was likely and what was
not. It would have been an amazing machine.
No wonder that when the actual machine was announced people were not
impressed. It wasn't their fault. . . . .
--
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!
pstewart
sab...@argonet.co.uk (Stuart Bell) wrote:
> I'm sorry, but the usenet newsgroups _cannot_, IMHO, be blamed for the
> Pheobe debacle.
>
> Let's remember how hopes of a high-spec machine were raised, with talk
> of multiple processors and triple VIDC output. And not from optimistic
> users, but people who should have known what was likely and what was
> not. It would have been an amazing machine.
>
> No wonder that when the actual machine was announced people were not
> impressed. It wasn't their fault. . . . .
Whilst the newsgroups cannot be completely blamed for the demise of
Pheobe, I think it's fair to say they didn't exactly inspire the Acorn
manangement to release her. I mean in the run up the announcement in
Septmeber anyone reading the newsgroups could have mistaken them for the
Anti-Acorn, Ant-Pheobe, Ant-Risc OS newsgroups - I mean, they were so
damn negative. Let's postive for a change.
Think positive. Risc OS 4 is about to be release. Okay, it may be
lacking many thinks, but it's a step forward, a step in the right
direction. The more people who relise this the better.
I like everyone else, would have liked Acorn World 98 to have gone ahead
as planned, with the release of the new computer. It didn't and the
only way this platform is going to survive and not end of like the Atari
and the Amiga, is if we all start backing attempts to bring out the new
operating system and not being so negative.
If you can't do anything apart from critisize the platform, then maybe,
just maybe this platform and all of it's benefits isn't for you.
Paul
--
------With suppliers like Acorn, who needs competitors-----
------48MB SA RISC PC------
------ http://www.pstewart.freeserve.co.uk ------
Tim Nicholson
> > http://www.acorn.com/acorn/news/press/riscos4.html
>
> [Middle-click] ;-)
Will this make it to the peanut?
--
Tim
mailto:t...@agape.prestel.co.uk
Andy McMullon
<URL:mailto:sab...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> Gareth J Dykes <dy...@seesig.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > 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.
>
> Pheobe debacle.
>
> Let's remember how hopes of a high-spec machine were raised, with talk
> of multiple processors and triple VIDC output. And not from optimistic
> users, but people who should have known what was likely and what was
> not. It would have been an amazing machine.
>
> No wonder that when the actual machine was announced people were not
> impressed. It wasn't their fault. . . . .
I would have been very happy with Phoebe - just as I was very happy with
my BBC Master
However, what is most needed now is for RISC OS to be set free by Acorn
so that it can become what they should have made it two or three years
ago. That means RISC OS 4 being released by a new company with a belief
in the future of RISC OS and a committment to making it happen. This
means having some idea how it is going to become fully 32 bit (perhaps
even 64 bit) with no reliance on proprietry VIDC or MEMC so that it can
run on new generation machines with multi-processors.
Old Acorn just don't have it. If they are selling RISC OS 4 without the
road map for the future then I'll still buy it - but it will be the end
of the line..............................!
:-(
--
Andy: skyp...@bigfoot.com / http://www.mcfamily.demon.co.uk
Andy McMullon
<URL:mailto:pa...@pstewart.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> If you can't do anything apart from critisize the platform, then maybe,
> just maybe this platform and all of it's benefits isn't for you.
Well Stuart already realized that!
Howver, I won't be shut up quite so easily. This is my platform and I
want to continue to use it.
I did want Phoebe - with all her undoubted disappointments!
I do want RISC OS 4 - though it is not perfect!
But it is time to leave Acorn (the company) behind - they are headed
elsewhere (and good luck to them!) and no longer have any committment to
our kind of computers (other than taking more of our money - and I'm not
even sure they want that!).
It is time for RISC OS to become open source, freely licenseable,
developed and cloned everywhere that you find ARM chips!
Acorn have lost the plot and I'll criticise them coz they are worth it!
Joseph Heenan
Matthew Bullock <matthew...@dial.pipex.com> wrote:
>
> > > 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. :-)
Considering they're a fairly key component of Java, and Java is still
being developed, it seems /slightly/ unlikely that the toolbox
modules are totally frozen. Yet.
bfn,
Joseph
--
Joseph Heenan, Coventry, UK http://www.ping.demon.co.uk/
"Spare no expense to save money on this one." -- Samuel Goldwyn
Frank Lester
<URL:mailto:skyp...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
> However, what is most needed now is for RISC OS to be set free by Acorn
> so that it can become what they should have made it two or three years
> ago. That means RISC OS 4 being released by a new company with a belief
> in the future of RISC OS and a committment to making it happen. This
> means having some idea how it is going to become fully 32 bit (perhaps
> even 64 bit) with no reliance on proprietry VIDC or MEMC so that it can
> run on new generation machines with multi-processors.
>
> Old Acorn just don't have it. If they are selling RISC OS 4 without the
> road map for the future then I'll still buy it - but it will be the end
> of the line..............................!
>
> :-(
>
>
Just a thought, if Acorn received a petition or similar from ALL
enthusiasts, User Groups etc stating that they would NOT purchase RISCOS 4
except via the Steering Group (or whatever it's latest incarnation). Then:
(1) the Steering Group would be able to negotiate with Acorn from a position
of strength.
(2) OUR monies spent purchasing RISCOS 4 would have a greater chance of going
into development of our favourite platform into the future, rather than just
being used as a "cash cow" to offset previous costs of Acorn's.
Much as I would like to see and obtain RISCOS 4, I would prefer to see
development. In the mean time RISCOS 3.7 will have to suffice :-)
--
Frank Lester
"Omahanui"
Waitangi Falls Road
RD1 Waiuku,New Zealand
Gareth J Dykes
Frank Lester <au...@ihug.co.nz> shared with us:
> >
> Just a thought, if Acorn received a petition or similar from ALL
> enthusiasts, User Groups etc stating that they would NOT purchase RISCOS
> 4 except via the Steering Group (or whatever it's latest incarnation).
.. then RO4 would, IMHO, never see the light of day.
None of us know what exactly is happening in Acorn so we can only surmise
from the little that is leaking out. After taking a tough decision (we may
not like it, but writing off 2 million ukp development costs and sacking a
load of people is never easy) two employees persuade you that some money
could be made by releasing RO4. I can imagine that it was a close decision
(it is not all profit - releasing RO4 would consume at least some
management time). Then they get a petition saying no-one is going to buy
it except via another third party (thus further increasing costs and
reducing profit) coupled, perhaps, with a whole series of negative views
on Usenet and elsewhere - it would not be surprising if they didn't decide
that it just wasn't worth the hassle.
Duncan MacCallum
<URL:mailto:t...@agape.prestel.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <3681858B...@sysmag.com>, Paul Clark
> <URL:mailto:p...@sysmag.com> wrote:
> > [Select]
> > > http://www.acorn.com/acorn/news/press/riscos4.html
> >
> > [Middle-click] ;-)
> Will this make it to the peanut?
>
they were aware of RiscOS 4 and Peanut would come with flash
roms making any upgrades painless.
Duncan
---
Howard Cutler
pstewart <pa...@pstewart.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <1dko0if.fy...@usero516.uk.uudial.com>
> sab...@argonet.co.uk (Stuart Bell) wrote:
>
> > I'm sorry, but the usenet newsgroups _cannot_, IMHO, be blamed for the
> > Pheobe debacle.
> >
> > Let's remember how hopes of a high-spec machine were raised, with talk
> > of multiple processors and triple VIDC output. And not from optimistic
> > users, but people who should have known what was likely and what was
> > not. It would have been an amazing machine.
> >
> > No wonder that when the actual machine was announced people were not
> > impressed. It wasn't their fault. . . . .
>
> Whilst the newsgroups cannot be completely blamed for the demise of
> Pheobe, I think it's fair to say they didn't exactly inspire the Acorn
> manangement to release her. I mean in the run up the announcement in
> Septmeber anyone reading the newsgroups could have mistaken them for the
> Anti-Acorn, Ant-Pheobe, Ant-Risc OS newsgroups - I mean, they were so
> damn negative. Let's postive for a change.
>
> Think positive. Risc OS 4 is about to be release. Okay, it may be
> lacking many thinks, but it's a step forward, a step in the right
> direction. The more people who relise this the better.
>
> I like everyone else, would have liked Acorn World 98 to have gone ahead
> as planned, with the release of the new computer. It didn't and the
> only way this platform is going to survive and not end of like the Atari
> and the Amiga, is if we all start backing attempts to bring out the new
> operating system and not being so negative.
>
> If you can't do anything apart from critisize the platform, then maybe,
> just maybe this platform and all of it's benefits isn't for you.
>
> Paul
Well said. I could'nt agree more. You can please people some of
the time, but you can't please everyone!!
Regards,
Adge
=============================================================================
** J233MHz Acorn RiscPC **
P133 Co-Processor running Win98Plus!
Howard Cutler adg...@adgecut.demon.co.uk
WWW: http://www.adgecut.demon.co.uk
If you live near 'Stonehenge' - Contact me
=============================================================================
Matthias Seifert
> Before being shot for writing message <48ba65746...@t-online.de>
> 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!
No - I do not (even) look at Win98! ;-)
> > > 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?
Only while loading modules. ;-)
> > > 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!
Then you surely don't need the new filecore at all. 77 files in a
directory should be enough for everyone...
[...]
> > > 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!
You see? ;-)
Matthias Seifert
> In article <48ba65746...@t-online.de>, Matthias Seifert
[...]
> > > 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.
I don't think that it is a bug.
[...]
> > > 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.
Erm, how could it as it has a completely different SWI interface?
[...]
> > > 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. :-)
And what do they use for their 'digital TV' or 'network computer'? Windows?
> > > 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...
:-D
Matthias Seifert
[...]
> If you can't do anything apart from critisize the platform, then maybe,
> just maybe this platform and all of it's benefits isn't for you.
If we aren't allowed to discuss, why should we post in a newsgroup at all?
Matthias Seifert
> In message <48ba65746...@t-online.de>
> 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.
> 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.
Considering to this Win98 is a real enhacement over Win95 in your eyes?
Well... ;-)
> > > 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 ;-)
It will - at least sometimes... ;-)
> > > 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?
No. The problem is:
'The maximum size of a directory will be 4,096K bytes. The formula below
applies: For names of upto 19 characters, we can have upto 87380 directory
entries.'
This means that you can put less entries in a directory if the names a
longer than 19 chars (as was the case in my example).
At the moment I don't know if the maximum size of a direcotry is related
to the disc size. But on the other hand it has to because otherwise the
~500 files of my example should have fit in a new format directory...
> > 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.
Well, I got the following answers from _one_ company (in fact from the
same person):
On 18 Sep, [...] wrote:
Well, in light of what's happen all I can say is that the tests that
have been carried out with RiscOS 4 the [...] card seemed to work fairly
well. We have written a driver for long filenames but to be honest is
there any point in actually saying/marketing this as RiscOS 4 is a no
go.
On Wed 11 Nov, [...] wrote:
We have not introduced a driver for RiscOS 3.8 to get over longfile
names. When and if RiscOS 4 comes out then this will be considered.
> > > 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?
It does not work with any program that tries to access a CD-ROM directly
by using CD and CDFS SWIs. And be asured that this doesn't only mean CD
players... :-(
> The most important thing is that it works. In this respect it is
> probably also incompatible...
Are you _sure_ that it works... :-}
> > > 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...).
And why shouldn't there be any further fixes - at least until all bugs are
removed?
[...]
> > (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...
Well, how do you define 'official claims' then...?
pstewart
M.Se...@t-online.de (Matthias Seifert) wrote:
> pstewart <pa...@pstewart.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>
> [...]
> > If you can't do anything apart from critisize the platform, then maybe,
> > just maybe this platform and all of it's benefits isn't for you.
>
> If we aren't allowed to discuss, why should we post in a newsgroup at all?
>
Isn't there a difference between discussing and simply critisizing every
potential release from Acorn, to the extent that they don't release it.
Matthias Seifert
> In message <48bb7a2bb...@t-online.de>
> M.Se...@t-online.de (Matthias Seifert) wrote:
> > pstewart <pa...@pstewart.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> > > If you can't do anything apart from critisize the platform, then
> > > maybe, just maybe this platform and all of it's benefits isn't for
> > > you.
> >
> > If we aren't allowed to discuss, why should we post in a newsgroup at
> > all?
> >
> Isn't there a difference between discussing and simply critisizing every
> potential release from Acorn, to the extent that they don't release it.
Well, if they decide it isn't good enough to release it, it's their
decission. As long as noone is telling lies, it is a good thing to tell
others about shortcommings of hardware or software. Because people can
decide then if they want it in spite of the shortcommings - or not.
This was the case with Phoebe (and is with ROS4): Some people said that
they will go for it, even if there are some points they are not happy
with, others decided that they rather save their money as they found out
that the hardware (or software) isn't what they expected it to be.
And as long as there are people like you (who only see the bright things
as long as something comes from Acorn) I will show the dark side (and the
other way round). Thus in summary people probably will see what they realy
can expect... :-)
It would be much worse if people would buy something and then find out
that it completely isn't what they expected it to be (as lots of people
did when they bought a PC with Windows 98)...
Henry Helliwell
In message <ant27225...@mcfamily.demon.co.uk>
Andy McMullon <skyp...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
[snip]
> Howver, I won't be shut up quite so easily. This is my platform and I
> want to continue to use it.
Hear, hear!
> I did want Phoebe - with all her undoubted disappointments!
I did too, even if I couldn't afford it... )-:
> I do want RISC OS 4 - though it is not perfect!
It looks nice, the are long filenames, more things in a directory,
and so on; I'll have it too.
> But it is time to leave Acorn (the company) behind - they are headed
> elsewhere (and good luck to them!) and no longer have any committment to
> our kind of computers (other than taking more of our money - and I'm not
> even sure they want that!).
Perhaps there are several people inside Acorn who order people about in
completely different directions.. it seems like it after the past few
months.
> It is time for RISC OS to become open source, freely licenseable,
> developed and cloned everywhere that you find ARM chips!
Woohoo! (How sick owuld the Peanut-people be if it was? (-:)
Mmm, a 32-bit version of RISCOS running on a box with several ARM10s and
loadsa other hardware inside... (I wish)
--
Henry Helliwell he...@stohelit.demon.co.uk
PGP Key http://www.stohelit.demon.co.uk/key.asc
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3ia
Charset: noconv
iQCVAwUBNodXqV/SdVEljhtBAQG3WAP+IjYM4BnVM+xHcF5UheoVxvTHG2LJS/SD
LL77WFoEKLOvfodWJRTq9lefbNZlJ8BDdKzjZwFObfl+qHHkFGLf/Zgkzs+orFML
9234RfWMDBO2n5ZTV+DrYvlqfgAjwuR5HadAlkB8+Bv4HXB3tf5zBnwH8j6aV8WL
EDUE0YKJhto=
=4Usb
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Dickon Hood
M.Se...@t-online.de (Matthias Seifert) wrote:
: 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).
I forget the details (there was a release note with the 3.8 kernels but I
don't have it here and can't look it up right now - modems, hateful things,
too slow, expensive and IP not available all the time - yes, I'm on holiday),
but ISTR reading something somewhere about a limit on the length of strings
for the catalgue entries. I can't remember how big it was, 4K seems too
small, and I'm not sure 16K is much bigger.
--
Dickon Hood
Due to binaries posted to non-binary newsgroups, my .sig is
temporarily unavailable. Normal service will be resumed as soon as
possible. We apologise for the inconvenience in the mean time.
Dickon Hood
Andy McMullon <skyp...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
: That means RISC OS 4 being released by a new company with a belief in the
: future of RISC OS and a committment to making it happen. This means having
: some idea how it is going to become fully 32 bit (perhaps even 64 bit) with
: no reliance on proprietry VIDC or MEMC so that it can run on new generation
: machines with multi-processors.
I've seen a rather distressing number of posts along these lines (port ROS to
new hardware / make it fully 32-bit / etc.). Have you *any* idea just *how*
hard that would be? In particular, you can kiss goodbye to almost all
applications, and almost certainly anything involving modules.
: Old Acorn just don't have it. If they are selling RISC OS 4 without the
: road map for the future then I'll still buy it - but it will be the end
: of the line..............................!
Acorn's roadmap for the future of the OS is almost certainly quite well laid
out. The problem is it isn't going to be aimed at the likes of you or me,
but fairly and squarely at the problems facing the OS which limit its
usefulness in the DiTV market it is now being aimed at (*don't* ask me to
list them, I don't have the discspace for the resultant rant, and I'm
discovering new limitations every day :-().
Dickon Hood
M.Se...@t-online.de (Matthias Seifert) wrote:
: Steffen Huber <hub...@lcs.wn.bawue.de> wrote:
: > In message <48ba65746...@t-online.de>
: > M.Se...@t-online.de (Matthias Seifert) wrote:
: > > > 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 ;-)
: It will - at least sometimes... ;-)
As I think Justin's already pointed out, this is untrue. Old modules are
perfectly compatible. If a module has an old-style service call handler (the
only bit which changed), it will receive all service calls as it used to. If
it has a new-style handler, it'll only receive the ones it's interested in.
The patcher patches CMHG veneers and modules written using it by analying the
generated code for the service call handlers to see which calls they were
interested in.
: > > > 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?
: No. The problem is:
: 'The maximum size of a directory will be 4,096K bytes. The formula below
: applies: For names of upto 19 characters, we can have upto 87380 directory
: entries.'
Damn, it *was* 4K...
: > > 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.
: Well, I got the following answers from _one_ company (in fact from the
: same person):
: On 18 Sep, [...] wrote:
: Well, in light of what's happen all I can say is that the tests that
: have been carried out with RiscOS 4 the [...] card seemed to work fairly
: well. We have written a driver for long filenames but to be honest is
: there any point in actually saying/marketing this as RiscOS 4 is a no
: go.
: On Wed 11 Nov, [...] wrote:
: We have not introduced a driver for RiscOS 3.8 to get over longfile
: names. When and if RiscOS 4 comes out then this will be considered.
Should make no difference; TTBOMK the Filecore / filingsystem API didn't
change, so new FC should make all discs (when formatted) work with long FNs.
I suspect it's just the formatters they're interested in. Anyone marginally
technically competant *should* be able to do that for themselves using Zap
and a copy of HForm...
Note: I've not tried this, obviously. The FC in the RO 3.8 softload is
broken in a number of ways.
[...] CDFS:
: > The most important thing is that it works. In this respect it is probably
: > also incompatible...
: Are you _sure_ that it works... :-}
Breaking it further than 3.xs versions would require some skill, lets face
it...
Matthew Bullock
<URL:mailto:M.Se...@t-online.de> wrote:
> Matthew Bullock <matthew...@dial.pipex.com> wrote:
> > In article <48ba65746...@t-online.de>, Matthias Seifert
> > > > 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.
>
> > 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.
>
> I don't think that it is a bug.
In the developer release of RiscOS 3.8 there are several situations
where filecore fails tod o what it is supposed to do. In some cases it
will crash, in some cases it will return an unexpected error. That is
called a bug.
> [...]
> > > > 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.
>
> Erm, how could it as it has a completely different SWI interface?
There is a new SWI interface, CDManager. In addition all the old swis
are provided by another module. All that module does is call the
relevant SWI from the new interface.
> [...]
> > > > 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. :-)
>
> And what do they use for their 'digital TV' or 'network computer'? Windows?
I wish I could answer that, but you may be very disapointed if I did.
Paddy Spencer
pstewart <pa...@pstewart.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> Whilst the newsgroups cannot be completely blamed for the demise of
> Pheobe, I think it's fair to say they didn't exactly inspire the
> Acorn manangement to release her.
No management@acorn read the newsgroups.
--
Work: pad...@parallax.co.uk http://www.parallax.co.uk/~paddys
Home: pad...@argonet.co.uk http://www.argonet.co.uk/users/paddys
The Whispered Rule: People will believe anything if you whisper it.
Tarcus
M.Se...@t-online.de (Matthias Seifert) writes:
> And as long as there are people like you (who only see the bright
> things as long as something comes from Acorn) I will show the dark
> side (and the other way round). Thus in summary people probably will
> see what they realy can expect... :-)
This is pretty much the reason I still hang around here, some people
in this group (and lots of other groups) live in a fantasy world
ignoring the outside world, stuck in the view that the outside world
is still trying to catch them up. When their world bursts and they
see that the rest of the world has moved on, they get a bit upset at
small doses of realism!
I'm trapped in this group. I only dropped by a month or so before
Acorn's announcement because I thought that something nasty was
happening, I've been stuck here ever since on account of the FUD I see
scattered around about the real world.
--
From the keyboard of Tarcus himself, running Linux in the UK.
-- There are no facts, only opinions --
Stuart Bell
> > If you can't do anything apart from critisize the platform, then maybe,
> > just maybe this platform and all of it's benefits isn't for you.
>
> Well Stuart already realized that!
Indeed, but it wasn't the platform's deficiencies which led to my
migration; it was far more to do with market share, consequences for new
s/w development, new internet 'technologies', doubts about what Acorn
were doing with the platform, projected Phoebe pricing, and Acorn's
constant policy changes. And that was _before_ black Thursday and
subsequent announcements. . . . .
I still miss Risc OS 3.7.
Michael Barnes
Steffen Huber <hub...@lcs.wn.bawue.de> wrote:
> In message <48ba65746...@t-online.de>
> 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.
>
> 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.
I have four words to say:
ResourceFS
Filecore In Use.
--
22 years old and online since before Microsoft.
Michael Barnes
Frank Lester <au...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
> In article <ant27224...@mcfamily.demon.co.uk>, Andy McMullon
> <URL:mailto:skyp...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
[Snikd]
> Just a thought, if Acorn received a petition or similar from ALL
> enthusiasts, User Groups etc stating that they would NOT purchase RISCOS 4
> except via the Steering Group (or whatever it's latest incarnation). Then:
>
> (1) the Steering Group would be able to negotiate with Acorn from a position
> of strength.
>
> (2) OUR monies spent purchasing RISCOS 4 would have a greater chance of going
> into development of our favourite platform into the future, rather than just
> being used as a "cash cow" to offset previous costs of Acorn's.
>
> Much as I would like to see and obtain RISCOS 4, I would prefer to see
> development. In the mean time RISCOS 3.7 will have to suffice :-)
>
If this were to be done, we would have to organize something quickly and
sensibly. Any volunteers to go talk to the steering group for starters?
David Courtney
ia...@pobox.DUMPTHISBIT.quza.com (Tarcus) wrote:
> This is pretty much the reason I still hang around here, some people
> in this group (and lots of other groups) live in a fantasy world
> ignoring the outside world, stuck in the view that the outside world
> is still trying to catch them up. When their world bursts and they
> see that the rest of the world has moved on, they get a bit upset at
> small doses of realism!
Where as other speaking against RiscOS4 base there comments on 3.8
and they all get lumped together. It's tricky enough to see what
RiscOS4 is going to be like and if it's worth it without a new MOBO.
Without these gits telling me Linux is great, it's like you've
sat next to the Bus Nutter who want's to tell you Bee's are such hard
working creatures. And follow you when you try to change seat.
Realism is what you have bought and what cash you have to do with it.
Realism is describing computers by what you can do with them, given
your budget and abilities.
Realism is waiting until you are a paid public relations firm with an
account to a non-acorn company. Before living your life[1] 'informing'
people that whatever they are doing with the acorn. Is shite compared
to anything they might do with the most popular brand.
What upsets people is that they probably all ready have a PCeee. It's
like the bloody double-glazing sellers phoning 3 times a day. I have
double-glazing s*d-off.
[1] going on generation of articles.
--
_______________________
http://www.jinksies.com I demand the right to know what is on my web site
Kira L. Brown
Paddy Spencer <pad...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> No management@acorn read the newsgroups.
That is simply not true.
kira.
--
This is a tagline.
Stuart Bell
> Isn't there a difference between discussing and simply critisizing every
> potential release from Acorn, to the extent that they don't release it.
'Intrigued' rather than 'criticising' would best describe most peoples'
reaction to the RO4 announcement,
Paul Vigay
pstewart <pa...@pstewart.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> Whilst the newsgroups cannot be completely blamed for the demise of
> Pheobe, I think it's fair to say they didn't exactly inspire the Acorn
> Septmeber anyone reading the newsgroups could have mistaken them for the
> Anti-Acorn, Ant-Pheobe, Ant-Risc OS newsgroups - I mean, they were so
> damn negative. Let's postive for a change.
Acorn would have been totally stupid (no comments please...) to take notice
of the newsgroups. They hardly offer an accurate portrayal of Acorn Users. I
would say that probably only around 20-25% of Acorn users have Internet
access and that applies to the more 'power' or enthusiast users. There was
not a lot of mention (positive or negative) in the Acorn newsagent magazines.
I know several people who don't have internet access who were waiting for
Phoebe to come out so that they could buy one. They didn't even know about
all the arguments about spec/colour that were going on.
> Think positive. Risc OS 4 is about to be release. Okay, it may be
> lacking many thinks, but it's a step forward, a step in the right
> direction. The more people who relise this the better.
True.
> I like everyone else, would have liked Acorn World 98 to have gone ahead
> as planned, with the release of the new computer. It didn't and the
> only way this platform is going to survive and not end of like the Atari
> and the Amiga, is if we all start backing attempts to bring out the new
> operating system and not being so negative.
True. I agree!
> If you can't do anything apart from critisize the platform, then maybe,
> just maybe this platform and all of it's benefits isn't for you.
Go over to the PC if you must complain - and then see what you have to
*really* complain about! :-)
--
Paul Vigay
Acorn Programming,
ICQ: 15533406 __\\|//__ Internet Consultancy
Web: http://www.matrix.clara.net (` o-o ') & Web Design
BBS: +44 (0)1705 871531 (ansi,8n1) -----ooO-(_)-Ooo--------------------------
You did WHAT?
Remove ".vogonpoetry" to reply by email.
Steffen Huber
M.Se...@t-online.de (Matthias Seifert) wrote:
> Steffen Huber <hub...@lcs.wn.bawue.de> wrote:
> > In message <48ba65746...@t-online.de>
> > 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.
>
> > 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.
>
> Considering to this Win98 is a real enhacement over Win95 in your eyes?
No. What (other than your sarcasm) has led you to believe this? What
improvement I mentioned above is so "small" to be compared with
the step from Win95 to Win98?
> > > > 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?
>
> No. The problem is:
>
> 'The maximum size of a directory will be 4,096K bytes. The formula below
> applies: For names of upto 19 characters, we can have upto 87380 directory
> entries.'
If this is really the case, I will think again about my own filing system
:-(((
> This means that you can put less entries in a directory if the names a
> longer than 19 chars (as was the case in my example).
This *IS* braindead.
> At the moment I don't know if the maximum size of a direcotry is related
> to the disc size. But on the other hand it has to because otherwise the
> ~500 files of my example should have fit in a new format directory...
Yes, agreed. Perhaps if you use a smaller LFAU it reserves less
space for a directory?
> > > 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.
>
> Well, I got the following answers from _one_ company (in fact from the
> same person):
>
> On 18 Sep, [...] wrote:
> Well, in light of what's happen all I can say is that the tests that
> have been carried out with RiscOS 4 the [...] card seemed to work fairly
> well. We have written a driver for long filenames but to be honest is
> there any point in actually saying/marketing this as RiscOS 4 is a no
> go.
>
> On Wed 11 Nov, [...] wrote:
> We have not introduced a driver for RiscOS 3.8 to get over longfile
> names. When and if RiscOS 4 comes out then this will be considered.
Hmmm, I always wondered why we need a new driver at all. Surely something
that formats the disc accordingly should suffice? Which of the
filecore entries actually depends on the allowed number of files in
a directory, or the length of a filename?
> > > > 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?
>
> It does not work with any program that tries to access a CD-ROM directly
> by using CD and CDFS SWIs. And be asured that this doesn't only mean CD
> players... :-(
I thought about which programs actually need to use those CD and CDFS
SWIs, and the only ones I came up with were "audio CD players". At
the moment, I am not sure if there are any applications that are both
important and not easy to fix.
> > The most important thing is that it works. In this respect it is
> > probably also incompatible...
>
> Are you _sure_ that it works... :-}
Well, I guessed that part, but it can't be worse than the old CDFS...
> > > > 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...).
>
> And why shouldn't there be any further fixes - at least until all bugs are
> removed?
This entirely depends on further development inside Acorn. And I am not
so optimistic about that.
> [...]
> > > (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...
>
> Well, how do you define 'official claims' then...?
A press release would be fine.
So long, Steffen
--
Steffen Huber LambdaComm System - Welcome to Trollinger Country
hub...@lcs.wn.bawue.de aco...@ftp.uni-stuttgart.de
... Rettet den Wald - esst mehr Biber.
Andy McMullon
<URL:mailto:ia...@pobox.DUMPTHISBIT.quza.com> wrote:
> In article <48bb99ec5...@t-online.de>,
> M.Se...@t-online.de (Matthias Seifert) writes:
>
> > And as long as there are people like you (who only see the bright
> > things as long as something comes from Acorn) I will show the dark
> > side (and the other way round). Thus in summary people probably will
> > see what they realy can expect... :-)
>
> in this group (and lots of other groups) live in a fantasy world
> ignoring the outside world, stuck in the view that the outside world
> is still trying to catch them up. When their world bursts and they
> see that the rest of the world has moved on, they get a bit upset at
> small doses of realism!
>
> Acorn's announcement because I thought that something nasty was
> happening, I've been stuck here ever since on account of the FUD I see
> scattered around about the real world.
You forget that most of the people who inhabit this ghetto also work in
the big city of the so called 'real-world' and have experience of the
way in which it has allegedly moved on!
Most of us reckon that they haven't made progress in the things that
matter and that life here is ever so much more pleasant!
--
Andy: skyp...@bigfoot.com / http://www.mcfamily.demon.co.uk
Andy McMullon
What we are lacking at the moment is *any* infornmed comment from the
Steering Group about the planned RISC OS 4 release.
Are they involved? Is this Acorn's last fling? What about the
Steering Group's plans for development?
Are they all on Christmas break with no access to the newsgroup?
Ernst Dinkla
<URL:mailto:lite...@litening.dircon.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <ant28120...@auric.ihug.co.nz>
> Frank Lester <au...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
>
> > <URL:mailto:skyp...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
> [Snikd]
> > Just a thought, if Acorn received a petition or similar from ALL
> > enthusiasts, User Groups etc stating that they would NOT purchase RISCOS 4
> > except via the Steering Group (or whatever it's latest incarnation). Then:
> >
> > (1) the Steering Group would be able to negotiate with Acorn from a position
> > of strength.
> >
> > (2) OUR monies spent purchasing RISCOS 4 would have a greater chance of going
> > into development of our favourite platform into the future, rather than just
> > being used as a "cash cow" to offset previous costs of Acorn's.
> >
> > development. In the mean time RISCOS 3.7 will have to suffice :-)
> >
>
> If this were to be done, we would have to organize something quickly and
> sensibly. Any volunteers to go talk to the steering group for starters?
A nice plan to get everyone confused.
Just wait for the other announcements. As yet we don't know who is
involved, what the name of the non-workstation part will be, what the
plans for the future are, where they will be located, whether the two
companies are still related to another etc etc.
You can't vote for one party or another when you don't have the
basic information.
If they are changing the signs on Acorn House they will announce
something soon. Wouldn't amaze me when that part of the company will
get the 'Applied Risc Technologies' name. Must be the cheapest solution.
Would that be the end of their notation on the LSE as well? Some of
you are informed, spill the beans boys.
Ernst
--
Ernst Dinkla Serigrafie,Zeefdruk edi...@inter.nl.net
Sig couldn't keep up with the events.
James Sargent
: 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.
I know this may sound a bit like an advocacy comment - but I used a Mac
once and that was quite enough for me ...
--
James Sargent (jsar...@uk.oracle.com)
Not the opinions of my employer, except by coincidence.
Tarcus
Paul Vigay <pvi...@interalpha.vogonpoetry.co.uk> writes:
> In article <a06d34bb48%pa...@pstewart.freeserve.co.uk>,
> pstewart <pa...@pstewart.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> If you can't do anything apart from critisize the platform, then
>> maybe, just maybe this platform and all of it's benefits isn't for
>> you.
So you want a complete, non-disagreement, on-message group do you? No
dissent, no discussion, just praise all the time?
> Go over to the PC if you must complain - and then see what you have
> to *really* complain about! :-)
This is like an 8-track tape (acorn) vs. minidisc religious war!
BTW I did go over to the PC, and all the things I had to complain
about went waway, but I think I was a unix man really, the Acorn
hardware and the Acorn OS were both too basic, expensive, inflexible
and lacking in power. Plus of course you have to do everything by
hand, I can and do automate most tasks on my machine.
Tarcus
Andy McMullon <skyp...@bigfoot.com> writes:
> You forget that most of the people who inhabit this ghetto also work
> in the big city of the so called 'real-world' and have experience of
> the way in which it has allegedly moved on!
No I haven't forgotten that, it's just that I see so many statements
about other platforms that are just straight lies that have never been
true, or were true a long time ago. I did after all say "some people"
and not all.
David H Wild
David Courtney <da...@jinksies.com> wrote:
> What upsets people is that they probably all ready have a PCeee. It's
> like the bloody double-glazing sellers phoning 3 times a day. I have
> double-glazing s*d-off.
We had a double-glazing firm ring us a week after *they* had installed our
double-glazing.
--
__ __ __ __ __ ___ _____________________________________________
|__||__)/ __/ \|\ ||_ | / Acorn Risc_PC
| || \\__/\__/| \||__ | /...Internet access for all Acorn RISC machines
___________________________/ dhw...@argonet.co.uk
Richard. Watson
being re-written before my very eyes. Mr. Orwell was indeed an accurate
foreseer of future news reporting - there's no mention of dropping the Acorn
name, and I must have got very confused about the Workstations division
being canned, and I really did not realise just how dedicated to Risc-OS the
Acorn Workstations division is, even though it didn't have any staff a few
weeks ago. I can't help thinking something has slipped away though, the name
Pheobe keeps recurring, but then I might be thinking of "Good Night
Sweetheart". Still, never mind, all those customers slipping away due to
terminal confusion must be a Double Plus Good Thing - everyone keeps telling
me so.
Regards
Richard (now getting very peed off with all this faffing about)
--
__ __ __ __ __ ___ _____________________________________________
|__||__)/ __/ \|\ ||_ | /
| || \\__/\__/| \||__ | /...Internet access for all Acorn RISC machines
___________________________/ series3...@argonet.co.uk
Stephen Parkin
<URL:mailto:dhw...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <na.36c03748bb.a7...@argonet.co.uk>,
> David Courtney <da...@jinksies.com> wrote:
> > What upsets people is that they probably all ready have a PCeee. It's
> > like the bloody double-glazing sellers phoning 3 times a day. I have
> > double-glazing s*d-off.
>
> We had a double-glazing firm ring us a week after *they* had installed our
> double-glazing.
>
--
Stephen Parkin <mailto:ste...@spcap.demon.co.uk>
Tarcus
Kira L. Brown <kbr...@neutralino.demon.com.uk> writes:
> In message <48bba9ac...@argonet.co.uk>
> Paddy Spencer <pad...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> No management@acorn read the newsgroups.
>
> That is simply not true.
No upper-tier management then?
Tarcus
David Courtney <da...@jinksies.com> writes:
> Sorry had to add this, the above seems to say I'm only here to TROLL.
If I were here to troll, it would be easy. I'm not here to troll, I'm
usually here because I'm interested in what happens to acorn as an
ex-acorn user (7 years of acorn machines bought using money I earned
working during college breaks --- I worked hard to buy the machines, I
didn't take them lightly, a lot of work went into them). What I see
here is not very positive, but I also see mindless optimism and a
total lack of realism in some posts, and of course the downright lies.
When I see such things and can be bothered, I respond.
> Where as other speaking against RiscOS4 base there comments on 3.8
I don't criticise any particular RiscOS, as there's been no
*significant* changes between any of the versions since 3. What you
regard as significant and what I regard as significant are a level
apart. To me, proper memory management, task protection,
multitasking, filesystem performance, task control, range of hardware,
OS reliability, scripting and automation, multi-CPU support and a
whole host of other things are important, but to acorn they're not.
For crying out loud, the changes to RiscOS 4 don't even bring it into
line with the technical merits of shitty old Windows 95, let alone NT
or unix!
> and they all get lumped together. It's tricky enough to see what
> RiscOS4 is going to be like and if it's worth it without a new MOBO.
It's going to be like RiscOS3, there's no great shakes at all, just
small incremental updates. From what I've read, the changes are going
to be *less* than the changes from 2 to 3.
> Without these gits telling me Linux is great,
Well, it is great if you like unix, if you don't it's crap. I don't
think I've been banging on about using linux as a replacement for
RiscOS, it's most definately not in the same market. Just because I
mention linux in my .sig, don't go thinking that I worship it and
think that it can replace and satisfy all.
> it's like you've sat next to the Bus Nutter who want's to tell you
> Bee's are such hard working creatures. And follow you when you try
> to change seat.
There's a few acorn users like this, I can tell you... People who
*still* try to convince you that the machine is a viable machine to
run a business with when there's little software and little hope of
what there is being updated. Buying a system that's going to be out
of date in a few years (I mean that software isn't available to do new
tasks --- what's Euro support like BTW, I don't know) is a bad move as
staff will need to be retrained when the inevitable shift to
whatever looks promising arrives.
There are people who try to convince you that the market is going to
pick up again. You're down to a few dealers and software houses,
Acorn are selling RiscOS 4 possibly *instead* of passing it over to
another company, there's no new hardware coming unless a number of
back-of-the-envelope companies actually come up with something (the
business plans aren't likely to appeal to banks) and so on.
> Realism is what you have bought and what cash you have to do with it.
Absolutely not!
> Realism is describing computers by what you can do with them, given
> your budget and abilities.
That's more like it, more of it would be nice.
> Realism is waiting until you are a paid public relations firm with
> an account to a non-acorn company.
Eh?
> Before living your life[1] 'informing' people that whatever they are
> doing with the acorn. Is shite compared to anything they might do
> with the most popular brand.
Believe me, this place is the only place I ever hear of Acorns these
days, I no longer know anyone who still uses them. Secondly, you
don't appear to be taking account of the opposite view, i.e. that
people are saying that whatever they are doing with the acorn is
glorious and amazing compared to anything they might do with the most
popular brand. This is the most prevalent view around here, but you
don't bitch about that!
> What upsets people is that they probably all ready have a PCeee. It's
> like the bloody double-glazing sellers phoning 3 times a day. I have
> double-glazing s*d-off.
I'm not particularly a PC fan, I'd prefer to have a DEC Alpha box but
Quake II won't run on it :-( Secondly just because someone *has* a PC
doesn't mean they're not talking shite about it. I've seen posts in
the past from people who claim to be experienced PC users that are
still coming out with outrageous crap. Admittedly I've never
installed a Microsoft OS on my home machines and my work NT box is
pretty much just an Xterm, but I'm surrounded with PCs at work all day
and I don't see them crashing every hour like you'd think they do from
posts around here. Using them is like learning to drive, not
particularly natural movemements (neither is RiscOS) but once you've
learnt it you cease to notice the user interface and get on with your
work.
Unless you're a zealot of course...
David Courtney
ia...@pobox.DUMPTHISBIT.quza.com (Tarcus) wrote:
> Believe me, this place is the only place I ever hear of Acorns these
> days, I no longer know anyone who still uses them. Secondly, you
> don't appear to be taking account of the opposite view, i.e. that
> people are saying that whatever they are doing with the acorn is
> glorious and amazing compared to anything they might do with the most
> popular brand. This is the most prevalent view around here, but you
> don't bitch about that!
Thanks for correctly identifying a bitch and not a flame. :-)
Yes I do give no weight at all to Acorn users, behaving as football
supporters "with irrational support". It comes down to the old
concept of cheer as much as you like but don't boo.
Acorns have thier limitations which is why you need the c.s.a.
hierarchy to enable Acorn users to make the most of what they
have. It's not for them to justify thier purchasing descisions
to you. Maybe they should justify thier jokes but in that thread
not five months later.
I think we all have to be wary of "my computers better than yours".
It's too well documented that major purchase decisions create
alot of stress. And the body reacts to this, after a descisons
by becoming incredibly certain that it's made the correct
choice. So really you should disagree with incorrect statements
in their threads and not generalise 'c.s.a.*' to be a platform.
People can't help "getting on with life" and enjoying doing so.
Your only bitter cos you can't play Super Foul Egg. ;-)
Stuart Bell
> sab...@argonet.co.uk (Stuart Bell) writes:
> : 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.
>
> I know this may sound a bit like an advocacy comment - but I used a Mac
> once and that was quite enough for me ...
There's a learning curve for any GUI. MacOS grows on you within a month,
unlike Windross which crashes on you within a month.
Kira L. Brown
ia...@pobox.DUMPTHISBIT.quza.com (Tarcus) wrote:
> In article <48BBB4B076%kbr...@neutralino.demon.com.uk>,
> Kira L. Brown <kbr...@neutralino.demon.com.uk> writes:
> > In message <48bba9ac...@argonet.co.uk>
> > Paddy Spencer <pad...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> >> No management@acorn read the newsgroups.
> >
> > That is simply not true.
>
> No upper-tier management then?
Depends how you define 'upper tier'...
(don't think this thread can go much further without me
getting into trouble) kira.
Dave Santorum
<URL:mailto:ia...@pobox.DUMPTHISBIT.quza.com> wrote:
> In article <na.36c03748bb.a7...@argonet.co.uk>,
> David Courtney <da...@jinksies.com> writes:
>
> > Sorry had to add this, the above seems to say I'm only here to TROLL.
>
> If I were here to troll, it would be easy. I'm not here to troll,
> > Where as other speaking against RiscOS4 base there comments on 3.8
>
> I don't criticise any particular RiscOS, as there's been no
> *significant* changes between any of the versions since 3.
...
> For crying out loud, the changes to RiscOS 4 don't even bring it into
> line with the technical merits of shitty old Windows 95, let alone NT
> or unix!
Wha!! Technical merits?! Windows 95!! It would be nice if RO4 addressed
the areas that people have been crying for. It would be nice if RO4
were the Galileo project by another name. RO4 is going to be a _new_
OS though if you have to ditch the old one to use it. No?
>
> > it's like you've sat next to the Bus Nutter who want's to tell you
> > Bee's are such hard working creatures. And follow you when you try
> > to change seat.
>
> There's a few acorn users like this, I can tell you... People who
> *still* try to convince you that the machine is a viable machine to
> run a business with when there's little software and little hope of
> what there is being updated.
Yes, me!
For certain tasks, a SA RPC is far more productive than an
equivalent NT PC or MacOS machine. Generating images from
scratch, handling foreign file formats, etc. And then you have
RISC OS to tie up all your applications. Which *does* *not*
crash as often as MacOS or NT (for me anyway).
Unfortunately, Acorn, builders of the first multi-media desktop
computer, never really bothered trying to infiltrate the design
market. I am using a 3 year old operating system on a machine a
few months older than that. It really does throw expletives at
Windows 95, and while I can export TIFF, JPEG and EPS files, I will
still be using it.
<< Euro situation
>>
RISC OS 4
> Believe me, this place is the only place I ever hear of Acorns these
> days, I no longer know anyone who still uses them.
Nobody has used an Acorn for 'serious' tasks for years, surely?
I mean, ARM3! What good's that running Vantage when you could
use a PII to run Illustrator? Oh, sorry. When you *NEED* a PII
to run Illustrator. An' a hell of a lot more RAM.
> Secondly, you
> don't appear to be taking account of the opposite view, i.e. that
> people are saying that whatever they are doing with the acorn is
> glorious and amazing compared to anything they might do with the most
> popular brand. This is the most prevalent view around here, but you
> don't bitch about that!
Hah!
> I'm not particularly a PC fan, I'd prefer to have a DEC Alpha box but
> Quake II won't run on it :-( Secondly just because someone *has* a PC
> doesn't mean they're not talking shite about it.
Games. Yes, that is a point. Thank the lord for SonyNintendoSega.
> Using them is like learning to drive, not
> particularly natural movemements (neither is RiscOS) but once you've
> learnt it you cease to notice the user interface and get on with your
> work.
Err, that's the fing point. Getting on with your work. Rather than
having to call support everytime NT/95 goes doolally or MacOS hangs
on the network.
And IMO a *lot* of time and effort went into the Win95/98 user interfaces.
> Unless you're a zealot of course...
... and it's still crap! I like ROS, BTW, and I can't see your
point.... stop using your RPCs/A5000s/A3010s/A7000s because the
company that made them has stopped production? This is not
very good economic sense man.
I think most Acorn users are aware of the situation regarding the
machines they use.
--
d a m a g e p e r s p e c t i v e s
http://www.crespo.demon.co.uk/
Wijnand Thompson
Stuart Bell <sab...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> James Sargent <jsar...@uksn24.uk.oracle.com> wrote:
> > I know this may sound a bit like an advocacy comment - but I used a Mac
> > once and that was quite enough for me ...
> There's a learning curve for any GUI. MacOS grows on you within a month,
> unlike Windross which crashes on you within a month.
Strange; it usually crashes on me within an hour!
--
Wijnand Thompson
Stephen Crocker
ia...@pobox.DUMPTHISBIT.quza.com (Tarcus) wrote:
> In article <na.36c03748bb.a7...@argonet.co.uk>,
> David Courtney <da...@jinksies.com> writes:
>
> > Sorry had to add this, the above seems to say I'm only here to TROLL.
>
> If I were here to troll, it would be easy. I'm not here to troll, I'm
> usually here because I'm interested in what happens to acorn as an
> ex-acorn user (7 years of acorn machines bought using money I earned
> working during college breaks --- I worked hard to buy the machines, I
> didn't take them lightly, a lot of work went into them). What I see
> here is not very positive, but I also see mindless optimism and a
> total lack of realism in some posts, and of course the downright lies.
> When I see such things and can be bothered, I respond.
Unless someone stays optimistic, there is absolutely _NO_ chance of
getting any version of RiscOS beyond 4.0. ATM this seems unlikely, but
then so was putting a man on the moon.
BTW, what lies? I haven't noticed any.
> > Where as other speaking against RiscOS4 base there comments on 3.8
>
> I don't criticise any particular RiscOS, as there's been no
> *significant* changes between any of the versions since 3. What you
> regard as significant and what I regard as significant are a level
> apart.
Everyone's entitled to have an opinion, but since very few people have
seen RiscOS 4, is it possible to judge it?
> To me, proper memory management, task protection, multitasking,
> filesystem performance, task control,
Filesystem performance and multitasking have been improved in RiscOS 4.
Why doesn't RiscOS have task protection? Isn't there something in the
hardware? As for task conrol and memory management, what's wrong with
them ATM?
> range of hardware,
WTF has this got to do with the OS?
> OS reliability,
Which seems fine to me!
> scripting and automation,
Hmmm... That would be handy.
> multi-CPU support
Which was considered, but they decided it would be impossible.
> and a whole host of other things are important, but to acorn they're not.
If I had the option, having a direct network connection to the Internet
in my house would be important, but I can't afford it.
> For crying out loud, the changes to RiscOS 4 don't even bring it into
> line with the technical merits of shitty old Windows 95,
What technical merits? It strikes me as being a pathetically unstable, resource-consuming pile of junk with bells and whistles!
> let alone NT or unix!
NT? Yuck! UNIX, is a powerful OS, but it's only really of any use to
the power user.
> > and they all get lumped together. It's tricky enough to see what
> > RiscOS4 is going to be like and if it's worth it without a new MOBO.
>
> It's going to be like RiscOS3, there's no great shakes at all, just
> small incremental updates. From what I've read, the changes are going
> to be *less* than the changes from 2 to 3.
Well, look at Win98! Is it really any better over 95 than 95 was over
3.x?
> > Without these gits telling me Linux is great,
>
> Well, it is great if you like unix, if you don't it's crap. I don't
> think I've been banging on about using linux as a replacement for
> RiscOS, it's most definately not in the same market. Just because I
> mention linux in my .sig, don't go thinking that I worship it and
> think that it can replace and satisfy all.
I think the only OSes in the same market as RiscOS are MacOS and
Windows.
> > it's like you've sat next to the Bus Nutter who want's to tell you
> > Bee's are such hard working creatures. And follow you when you try
> > to change seat.
>
> There's a few acorn users like this, I can tell you... People who
> *still* try to convince you that the machine is a viable machine to
> run a business with when there's little software and little hope of
> what there is being updated.
But you have to consider the needs of the user. People can still run
their businesses on 486s, 386s or even lower! If it does the job, use
it!
> Buying a system that's going to be out of date in a few years (I mean that
> software isn't available to do new tasks --- what's Euro support like BTW, I
> don't know) is a bad move as staff will need to be retrained when the
> inevitable shift to whatever looks promising arrives.
Apart from the Euro and the Year 2000, what other "new tasks" are likely
to appear?
> There are people who try to convince you that the market is going to
> pick up again.
No-one is trying to _convince_ people, but we do need to try to be
optimistic! The users are what keeps the platform alive, and unless we
put something in, we'll get nothing out!
> You're down to a few dealers and software houses, Acorn are selling
> RiscOS 4 possibly *instead* of passing it over to another company,
> there's no new hardware coming unless a number of back-of-the-envelope
> companies actually come up with something (the business plans aren't
> likely to appeal to banks) and so on.
On the other hand, hasn't the games market picked up since R-Comp
stepped in? If only they'd done this a couple of yearss ago, we might
still have had Phoebe.
> > Realism is what you have bought and what cash you have to do with it.
>
> Absolutely not!
I wish I could understand that so I could comment!
> > Realism is describing computers by what you can do with them, given
> > your budget and abilities.
>
> That's more like it, more of it would be nice.
Well, RiscOS is fine for DTP, spreadsheets an databases. Do companies
really need any more? Apart from all these silly wizards and bells and
whistles, is there anything you cam do in Office that you _can't_ do on
RiscOS?
> > Before living your life[1] 'informing' people that whatever they are
> > doing with the acorn. Is shite compared to anything they might do
> > with the most popular brand.
>
> Believe me, this place is the only place I ever hear of Acorns these
> days, I no longer know anyone who still uses them.
I have met several students at Cambridge who use them, and I don't think
that had anything to do with Acorn's location!
> Secondly, you don't appear to be taking account of the opposite view,
> i.e. that people are saying that whatever they are doing with the acorn is
> glorious and amazing compared to anything they might do with the most
> popular brand. This is the most prevalent view around here,
Is it? I havent noticed.
> but you don't bitch about that!
Who would?
> > What upsets people is that they probably all ready have a PCeee. It's
> > like the bloody double-glazing sellers phoning 3 times a day. I have
> > double-glazing s*d-off.
>
> I'm not particularly a PC fan, I'd prefer to have a DEC Alpha box but
> Quake II won't run on it :-( Secondly just because someone *has* a PC
> doesn't mean they're not talking shite about it.
Well, I have one PC and 2 Acorns, and it's not hard to tell which I
prefer!
> I've seen posts in the past from people who claim to be experienced PC users
> that are still coming out with outrageous crap. Admittedly I've never
> installed a Microsoft OS on my home machines and my work NT box is
> pretty much just an Xterm, but I'm surrounded with PCs at work all day
> and I don't see them crashing every hour like you'd think they do from
> posts around here.
I think a lot of people have only used Win95 on a PC card, and compared
to Win3.x, it's completely unstable. It's usable, but crashes
frequently. On my PC, I often get annoying error messages about
Explorer causing a general protection fault and stuff like that. If I
used it as intensively as my RPC, it just wouldn't cope. I have loads
of servers running, plenty of PD beta software and I'm still not sure
whether my Internet stack is set up ideally! Also, Win98 seems to have
this odd habit of slowing down wen the computer has been left on for any
length of time.
> Using them is like learning to drive, not particularly natural
> movemements (neither is RiscOS) but once you've learnt it you cease to
> notice the user interface and get on with your work.
Agreed, but when you're driving an old wreck of a car with a flat tyre,
you probably get used to it!
--
x^ ( ) _________ // Email: mailto:cr...@crok.demon.co.uk
< U O |_|_|_|_|_| O || WWW: http://www.crok.demon.co.uk
\, |/|\ _________ [ ]
. |/^\ . 2 . /__\
... Click..Click..Click..darn, out of taglines!
Keith Wilson
S/A RISCPC is that crashes are very common on the Mac. I can't speak for the
PC as experience on the platform is limited. The Acorn hardly ever crashed
(the machine that is, not the company).
----------
In article <1dktch9.1kz...@userp733.uk.uudial.com>,
sab...@argonet.co.uk (Stuart Bell) wrote:
>James Sargent <jsar...@uksn24.uk.oracle.com> wrote:
>
>> sab...@argonet.co.uk (Stuart Bell) writes:
>> : 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.
>>
>> I know this may sound a bit like an advocacy comment - but I used a Mac
>> once and that was quite enough for me ...
>
>There's a learning curve for any GUI. MacOS grows on you within a month,
>unlike Windross which crashes on you within a month.
>
Keith Wilson
----------
In article <ant30183...@crespo.demon.co.uk>, Dave Santorum
<spam...@crespo.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>In article <76cska$vi$1...@lepto.tarcus.org.uk>, Tarcus
><URL:mailto:ia...@pobox.DUMPTHISBIT.quza.com> wrote:
>> In article <na.36c03748bb.a7...@argonet.co.uk>,
>> David Courtney <da...@jinksies.com> writes:
>>
>> > Sorry had to add this, the above seems to say I'm only here to TROLL.
>>
>> If I were here to troll, it would be easy. I'm not here to troll,
>
>> > Where as other speaking against RiscOS4 base there comments on 3.8
>>
>> I don't criticise any particular RiscOS, as there's been no
>> *significant* changes between any of the versions since 3.
>...
>> For crying out loud, the changes to RiscOS 4 don't even bring it into
>> line with the technical merits of shitty old Windows 95, let alone NT
>> or unix!
>
>Wha!! Technical merits?! Windows 95!! It would be nice if RO4 addressed
>the areas that people have been crying for. It would be nice if RO4
>were the Galileo project by another name. RO4 is going to be a _new_
>OS though if you have to ditch the old one to use it. No?
>>
>> > it's like you've sat next to the Bus Nutter who want's to tell you
>> > Bee's are such hard working creatures. And follow you when you try
>> > to change seat.
>>
>> There's a few acorn users like this, I can tell you... People who
>> *still* try to convince you that the machine is a viable machine to
>> run a business with when there's little software and little hope of
>> what there is being updated.
>
>Yes, me!
>For certain tasks, a SA RPC is far more productive than an
>equivalent NT PC or MacOS machine. Generating images from
>scratch, handling foreign file formats, etc. And then you have
>RISC OS to tie up all your applications. Which *does* *not*
>crash as often as MacOS or NT (for me anyway).
>
>Unfortunately, Acorn, builders of the first multi-media desktop
>computer, never really bothered trying to infiltrate the design
>market. I am using a 3 year old operating system on a machine a
>few months older than that. It really does throw expletives at
>Windows 95, and while I can export TIFF, JPEG and EPS files, I will
>still be using it.
>
I agree! I made a major mistake a few months ago in selling my Risc PC. I've
been using the iMac for some months now and it crashes frequently. I have
reinstalled the system software quite a few times, rebuilt the desktop,
cleared out redundant extensions files etc., etc., to no avail. It's not a
patch on the Acorn. I'm watching carefully to see what transpires with the
Castle Tecnology attempt to give RISC OS some kind of viable future and then
I will consider buying another SA Risc PC. The Mac is unbelievably clumsy
and slow compared to the Risc PC (although I know at least one person who
contributes regularlyto this newsgroup will disagree with that viewpoint).
By the way, I still use my A3010 out of preference for a lot of
wordprocessing (EasiWriter Pro is superb) and minor DTP as it's much more
intuitive. As I know that the iMac is superior in most ways to the PC I can
only feel sorry for those who have never had the RISC OS experience (or for
those who, like me, bailed out too early).
><< Euro situation
> >>
>
>RISC OS 4
>
>> Believe me, this place is the only place I ever hear of Acorns these
>> days, I no longer know anyone who still uses them.
>
>Nobody has used an Acorn for 'serious' tasks for years, surely?
>I mean, ARM3! What good's that running Vantage when you could
>use a PII to run Illustrator? Oh, sorry. When you *NEED* a PII
>to run Illustrator. An' a hell of a lot more RAM.
>
>> Secondly, you
>> don't appear to be taking account of the opposite view, i.e. that
>> people are saying that whatever they are doing with the acorn is
>> glorious and amazing compared to anything they might do with the most
>> popular brand. This is the most prevalent view around here, but you
>> don't bitch about that!
>
>Hah!
>
>> I'm not particularly a PC fan, I'd prefer to have a DEC Alpha box but
>> Quake II won't run on it :-( Secondly just because someone *has* a PC
>> doesn't mean they're not talking shite about it.
>
>Games. Yes, that is a point. Thank the lord for SonyNintendoSega.
>
>> Using them is like learning to drive, not
>> particularly natural movemements (neither is RiscOS) but once you've
>> learnt it you cease to notice the user interface and get on with your
>> work.
>
>Err, that's the fing point. Getting on with your work. Rather than
>having to call support everytime NT/95 goes doolally or MacOS hangs
>on the network.
>
>And IMO a *lot* of time and effort went into the Win95/98 user interfaces.
>
>> Unless you're a zealot of course...
>
Ian Worrall
Stephen Parkin <ste...@spcap.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <48bc3629...@argonet.co.uk>, David H Wild
> > > What upsets people is that they probably all ready have a
> > > PCeee. It's like the bloody double-glazing sellers phoning 3
> > > times a day. I have double-glazing s*d-off.
> >
> > installed our double-glazing.
> >
> I've had them knocking on my door, whilst stood next to the double
> glazing...
I've even had them knocking on my _double_glazed_ DOOR!
--
Ian Worrall mailto: i...@keinyuri.u-net.com
Keith Wilson
Keith Wilson
----------
In article <48bcb189...@walhall.demon.co.uk>, Wijnand Thompson
<dro...@walhall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>In article <1dktch9.1kz...@userp733.uk.uudial.com>,
> Stuart Bell <sab...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
>> James Sargent <jsar...@uksn24.uk.oracle.com> wrote:
>
>> > I know this may sound a bit like an advocacy comment - but I used a Mac
>> > once and that was quite enough for me ...
>
>> There's a learning curve for any GUI. MacOS grows on you within a month,
>> unlike Windross which crashes on you within a month.
>
Paddy Spencer
Kira L. Brown <kbr...@neutralino.demon.com.uk> wrote:
> In message <48bba9ac...@argonet.co.uk>
> Paddy Spencer <pad...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> > No management@acorn read the newsgroups.
> That is simply not true.
OK, I'll rephrase it. No management@workstations I ever spoke to had
read the acorn newsgroups in the past 3 years.
--
Work: pad...@parallax.co.uk http://www.parallax.co.uk/~paddys
Home: pad...@argonet.co.uk http://www.argonet.co.uk/users/paddys
Cole's Law: Thinly sliced cabbage
Stuart Bell
> > There's a learning curve for any GUI. MacOS grows on you within a month,
> > unlike Windross which crashes on you within a month.
>
> Strange; it usually crashes on me within an hour!
I meant 'needs a clean install within a month' ;-)
dgs
Paddy Spencer <pad...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> OK, I'll rephrase it. No management@workstations I ever spoke to had
> read the acorn newsgroups in the past 3 years.
Obviously Chris Cox wasn't management, in your eyes? Or something?
Manchester Acorn User Group - http://www.acorn.manchester.ac.uk/
RPC x86 Card Info Pages - http://acorn.cybervillage.co.uk/pccard/
"Your machine is NOT dead until it stops working" - Ian Gledhill