f



new to acorn

Dear all,

I just got to know that there's this risc 32 bits processor! I was a 
Commodore user and seems like the two have a little in common. Well, how do 
I get one, where, how much...

Can you guys give me some info?

Thanks,
R. 


0
5/29/2006 6:59:54 AM
comp.sys.acorn.misc 5707 articles. 0 followers. michael104 (366) is leader. Post Follow

38 Replies
680 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 58

In article <447a9bfd_2@news.tm.net.my>, ri <riccardo.balistreri@poste.it>
wrote:
> Dear all,

> I just got to know that there's this risc 32 bits processor! I was a
> Commodore user and seems like the two have a little in common. Well, how
> do I get one, where, how much...

> Can you guys give me some info?

Most recent machines, or an older one that comes cheaper?

For the former www.iyonix.co.uk 

or another manufacturer

http://www.advantagesix.co.uk/products.html
for something with a minuscule footprint.

Of course there is one place that has both "in stock" (we think he'd die
rather than be out of stock) http://www.cjemicros.co.uk/

CJE also has the bonus of being able to offer refurbished old units at
affordable levels.
http://www.cjemicros.co.uk/micros/prices/categories/computers.html

Of course when you have one you need to revisit these groups to learn
more...

0
5/29/2006 8:23:37 AM
ri wrote:
> I just got to know that there's this risc 32 bits processor! I was a
> Commodore user and seems like the two have a little in common. Well, how =
do
> I get one, where, how much...

What's your budget like? The most affordable option is to buy a
secondhand computer from eBay. The cheapest models go for a few pounds,
but I would recommend that you shouldn't get anything older than a
"RiscPC" (preferably with 2MB of VRAM). That might set you back more
like =A350.

The next option up is to buy an emulator (if you've already got a
powerful Windows PC). That costs around =A3100. (Search for "virtual
acorn".)

Finally you've got the best/most expensive options of new hardware, as
Steven has already noted.


> Can you guys give me some info?

For a bit of general-interest RISC OS news, you can look at
www.drobe.co.uk

Adam

0
news4275 (1182)
5/29/2006 9:27:44 AM
"ri" <riccardo.balistreri@poste.it> wrote in message 
news:447a9bfd_2@news.tm.net.my...
> Dear all,
>
> I just got to know that there's this risc 32 bits processor! I was a 
> Commodore user and seems like the two have a little in common. Well, how 
> do I get one, where, how much...
>
> Can you guys give me some info?

I think you'll find that Commodores had more in common with Apple Macs than 
RiscPCs.

If you want something that sprung out of the old Amiga community, check out:

http://www.pegasosppc.com/ and
http://www.morphosppc.com/

Paul B. 


0
5/29/2006 9:42:52 AM
On 29 May 2006  "Adam" <news@snowstone.org.uk> wrote:

> 
> ri wrote:
>> I just got to know that there's this risc 32 bits processor! I was a
>> Commodore user and seems like the two have a little in common. Well, how do
>> I get one, where, how much...
> 
> What's your budget like? The most affordable option is to buy a
> secondhand computer from eBay. The cheapest models go for a few pounds,
> but I would recommend that you shouldn't get anything older than a
> "RiscPC" (preferably with 2MB of VRAM). That might set you back more
> like �50.

But the OP was wanting something 32-bit, which maybe counts this 
option out, depending on what interpretation you put on 32-bit.

With best wishes,

Peter.

-- 
Peter   \   /                 \     Prestbury, Cheltenham,  Glos. GL52
Anne     \ / __            __  \                              England.
and       / /  \ | | |\ | /  _  \     http://pnyoung.orpheusweb.co.uk
family   /  \__/ \_/ | \| \__/   \______________ pnyoung@ormail.co.uk.
0
pnyoung1 (1656)
5/29/2006 10:11:02 AM
"Paul Bunyan" <paul.bunyan@ntlPISSworld.com> wrote in message 
news:wmzeg.525$s4.279@newsfe3-win.ntli.net...
> "ri" <riccardo.balistreri@poste.it> wrote in message 
> news:447a9bfd_2@news.tm.net.my...
>> Dear all,
>>
>> I just got to know that there's this risc 32 bits processor! I was a 
>> Commodore user and seems like the two have a little in common. Well, how 
>> do I get one, where, how much...
>>
>> Can you guys give me some info?
>
> I think you'll find that Commodores had more in common with Apple Macs 
> than RiscPCs.
>
> If you want something that sprung out of the old Amiga community, check 
> out:
>
> http://www.pegasosppc.com/ and
> http://www.morphosppc.com/
>
> Paul B.
>
Interesting, but I've never had an amiga, I had a C64 and I never understood 
a thing about amiga, I only remember it used to do great things for that 
time. 


0
5/29/2006 10:39:29 AM
"Dr Peter Young" <pnyoung@ormail.co.uk> wrote in message 
news:76d18f2e4e.pnyoung@pnyoung.ormail.co.uk...
> On 29 May 2006  "Adam" <news@snowstone.org.uk> wrote:
>
>>
>> ri wrote:
>>> I just got to know that there's this risc 32 bits processor! I was a
>>> Commodore user and seems like the two have a little in common. Well, how 
>>> do
>>> I get one, where, how much...
>>
>> What's your budget like? The most affordable option is to buy a
>> secondhand computer from eBay. The cheapest models go for a few pounds,
>> but I would recommend that you shouldn't get anything older than a
>> "RiscPC" (preferably with 2MB of VRAM). That might set you back more
>> like �50.
>
> But the OP was wanting something 32-bit, which maybe counts this
> option out, depending on what interpretation you put on 32-bit.
>
> With best wishes,
>
> Peter.
>
> -- 
> Peter   \   /                 \     Prestbury, Cheltenham,  Glos. GL52
> Anne     \ / __            __  \                              England.
> and       / /  \ | | |\ | /  _  \     http://pnyoung.orpheusweb.co.uk
> family   /  \__/ \_/ | \| \__/   \______________ pnyoung@ormail.co.uk.

The information you have given me is very helpful, sure, I would like to 
check out the 32bits, but the prices I saw are not affordable to me... I 
live in Malaysia and I think isn't going to be that easy 1 pound st. is 
almost 7 local currency,
thus for me is a big capital. I could try it out with an emulator as a 
beginning, but the same unless freeware.

I saw Ionyx, is it a brand name for the acorn?

E-bay, mmh, I have never used it, I guess I should start ...

Thanks,
R. 


0
5/29/2006 10:49:33 AM
On 29 May, ri wrote in message
  <447ad1c8$2_1@news.tm.net.my>:

> 
> "Dr Peter Young" <pnyoung@ormail.co.uk> wrote in message 
> news:76d18f2e4e.pnyoung@pnyoung.ormail.co.uk...
> > On 29 May 2006  "Adam" <news@snowstone.org.uk> wrote:
> >
> > > ri wrote:
> > > > I just got to know that there's this risc 32 bits processor! I was
> > > > a Commodore user and seems like the two have a little in common.
> > > > Well, how  do I get one, where, how much...
> > > 
> > > What's your budget like? The most affordable option is to buy a
> > > secondhand computer from eBay. The cheapest models go for a few
> > > pounds, but I would recommend that you shouldn't get anything older
> > > than a "RiscPC" (preferably with 2MB of VRAM). That might set you
> > > back more like �50.
> > 
> > But the OP was wanting something 32-bit, which maybe counts this
> > option out, depending on what interpretation you put on 32-bit.

I don't see why: the Archimedes was always referred to as "32-bit", and
the current confusion between "26-bit" and "32-bit" is a largely internal
thing to the RISC OS market.

As far as the OP is concerned, all machines from the Archimedes in 1987
are 32-bit.

> The information you have given me is very helpful, sure, I would like to 
> check out the 32bits, but the prices I saw are not affordable to me... I 
> live in Malaysia and I think isn't going to be that easy 1 pound st. is 
> almost 7 local currency, thus for me is a big capital. I could try it
> out with an emulator as a  beginning, but the same unless freeware.

 
> I saw Ionyx, is it a brand name for the acorn?

The Iyonix (correctly, the "IyonixPC") is one brand (or model) of RISC OS
machine which is currently in production from Castle Technology; the other
is the A9home from Advantage6.  Both are still being developed.

You may also see references to the Omega (a limited production run and now
unavailable, from Microdigital), the Mico (in production for longer, also
from Microdigital) and RiscStation (in production for a good while, from
RiscStation).  These were the three non-Acorn machines that were built
after the company dissolved and are no longer available new.

Before that, the most useful machine to look at is the RiscPC (Acorn's
last machine).  This comes in a number of configurations from the original
ones running on an ARM6 processor to the most recent running on a
StrongARM or a "Kinetic StrongARM" (the fastest model, basically).  All
fully upgradable, you could turn an ARM6 version into a Kinetic for the
price of a new processor card and an OS upgrade.

If you want to use the machine for 'real' tasks, and not just nostalgia,
the only other model worth looking at is the A7000 or A7000+.  Anything
prior to that (A300s, A400s, A500s, A3000s, A4000s, A5000s) is of
historical interest only.

As for RISC OS, there are two current versions: RISC OS 5 runs on the
Iyonix, while RISC OS 4 runs on the other current hardware (and on the
emulators).  Both are being developed, and both have similar features. 
You can upgrade a RiscPC to the latest version of RISC OS 4, by talking to
RISCOS Ltd who manage the OS development.
 
> E-bay, mmh, I have never used it, I guess I should start ...

Look for RiscPCs.  Depending on your budget, you probably want to look in
preference at Kinetic, StrongARM, ARM7 and finally ARM6.  The higher the
version of RISC OS it runs, the better: RISC OS 4 is best, then RISC OS
3.7.  RO 3.6 and 3.5 probably aren't worthwhile, though RO3.7 ROMs are
fairly cheap nowadays...  If you can get a machine with CD ROM fitted,
that would be better than trying to do it yourself.

-- 
Steve Fryatt - Leeds, England

http://www.stevefryatt.org.uk/

0
news1571 (3486)
5/29/2006 11:09:28 AM
In message <447ad1c8$2_1@news.tm.net.my>
          "ri" <riccardo.balistreri@poste.it> wrote:

> The information you have given me is very helpful, sure, I would like to
> check out the 32bits, but the prices I saw are not affordable to me... I
> live in Malaysia and I think isn't going to be that easy 1 pound st. is
> almost 7 local currency,

There are often machines that would be suitable offered free to a good 
home, I don't know whether transport costs and local electricity 
voltage make this viable though. (Of course if you know anyone 
visiting the UK, that might make the transport easier.)

> thus for me is a big capital. I could try it out with an emulator as a
> beginning, but the same unless freeware.

There are freeware emulators, but the OS is of course not free and 
therefore a problem (though it was reported that the previous owners 
of RO were happy for version 3.1 to be freely available, however this 
was never official as far as I know and the OS is no longer owned by 
them) They are also very slow.

The commercial emulator works well though - but we are then in the 
silly money (for your exchange rate) region again.

A second hand copy of virtual acorn 5000 would give you a taster 
though, if you can find one.

> I saw Ionyx, is it a brand name for the acorn?

Acorn itself is no more (although the name is now being used again) 
they were effectively asset stripped for arm holdings. The system is 
still being developed and is owned by Castle Technology, the Iyonix is 
their ATX based machine (using an XScale processor)

> E-bay, mmh, I have never used it, I guess I should start ...

Post the url for anything you find locally and we'll be able to advise 
on whether it is a good deal.

-- 
Jess                   Iyonix
contact http://jess.itworkshop-nexus.net
Hotmail is my spam trap - don't email
valid - mailto:nospam@jess.itworkshop-nexus.net
0
phantasm_39 (2515)
5/29/2006 11:45:22 AM
ri <riccardo.balistreri@poste.it> wrote:
> The information you have given me is very helpful, sure, I would like to
> check out the 32bits, but the prices I saw are not affordable to me... I
> live in Malaysia and I think isn't going to be that easy 1 pound st. is
> almost 7 local currency, thus for me is a big capital. I could try it out
> with an emulator as a beginning, but the same unless freeware.

In which case you might want to start with:
http://b-em.bbcmicro.com/arculator/
(free, for various platforms, I suggest using RPCEmu)

You'd also need some ROM images of RISC OS 3.5 or later.  The legality of
these is difficult to call, but at the very least I'd suggest buying some
physical ROM chips, even if you just use the image from disc.

RPCEmu is quite slow so doesn't really give you a good feel for what a
modern machine is like, but you should get the speed of about a 12 year old
machine.

RISC OS machines have always been '32 bit' in the conventional sense, but
early hardware only had a 26 bit program counter.  Sometimes we talk about
'26 bit software' as that compiled for a 26 bit program counter and '32 bit
software' for a 32 bit program counter, but apart from this very limited set
of operations all the hardware supports 32 bit operations.
[ http://www.riscos.info/index.php/32bit has the gory details if you really
want to know ]

Theo
0
news539 (2440)
5/29/2006 12:14:51 PM
"ri" <riccardo.balistreri@poste.it> wrote in message 
news:447ad1c8_1@news.tm.net.my...
> Interesting, but I've never had an amiga, I had a C64 and I never 
> understood a thing about amiga, I only remember it used to do great things 
> for that time.

yep great machines of their time - but things move on...

Don't waste your time on dead systems - get a new Mac....


0
jsmith1456 (18)
5/29/2006 4:02:09 PM
In article <5WEeg.2024$xH1.913@newsfe3-gui.ntli.net>, john
<jsmith1456@yahoo.com> wrote:

> "ri" <riccardo.balistreri@poste.it> wrote in message
> news:447ad1c8_1@news.tm.net.my...
> > Interesting, but I've never had an amiga, I had a C64 and I never
> > understood a thing about amiga, I only remember it used to do great
> > things for that time.

> yep great machines of their time - but things move on...

> Don't waste your time on dead systems - get a new Mac....

x86 based and then you can be seduced to the dark side by Mr Gates.

0
5/29/2006 4:46:58 PM
In article <5WEeg.2024$xH1.913@newsfe3-gui.ntli.net>,
   john <jsmith1456@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Don't waste your time on dead systems - get a new Mac....

I wouldn't waste your time on a Mac. Get a new Iyonix....

-- 
                           __\\|//__            Life,
                           (` o-o ')        the Universe
http://www.vigay.com -----ooO-(_)-Ooo------ & Everything ------
(email address is genuine, to fool junkmailers)
0
5/29/2006 4:49:25 PM
In article <5WEeg.2024$xH1.913@newsfe3-gui.ntli.net>, john
<jsmith1456@yahoo.com> wrote:

> "ri" <riccardo.balistreri@poste.it> wrote in message
> news:447ad1c8_1@news.tm.net.my...
> > Interesting, but I've never had an amiga, I had a C64 and I never
> > understood a thing about amiga, I only remember it used to do great
> > things for that time.

> yep great machines of their time - but things move on...

> Don't waste your time on dead systems - get a new Mac....

That'll be the new intel-based macs as opposed to the dead ppc ones,
innit?

If you are interested in RISC computing, as the OP intimated, RISC OS 5
is certainly not 'dead'.

-- 
* Cheap phone bills? Gift shopping? www.timil.com/usenet.php
* Spam-proof Usenet address? Visit www.invalid.org.uk 
  or email me:  postmaster at invalid dot org dot uk
* (tim@invalid.org.uk is deleted unread - please use my valid address above)

.... "Good night, sweet friend: thy love ne'er alter, till thy sweet life end" Mid N Dr, Act ii, Sc.3
0
tim155 (1564)
5/29/2006 5:13:07 PM
Tim Hill wrote:
> If you are interested in RISC computing, as the OP intimated, RISC OS 5
> is certainly not 'dead'.

Indeed, it's resting. ;-)

John.
0
this (338)
5/29/2006 5:57:44 PM
john wrote:
> "ri" <riccardo.balistreri@poste.it> wrote in message 
> news:447ad1c8_1@news.tm.net.my...
>> Interesting, but I've never had an amiga, I had a C64 and I never 
>> understood a thing about amiga, I only remember it used to do great things 
>> for that time.
> 
> yep great machines of their time - but things move on...
> 
> Don't waste your time on dead systems - get a new Mac....
> 
> 
And you subscribe to csa.* because...?

Best wishes,

Drew
0
user7 (4036)
5/29/2006 6:15:42 PM
In article <4e2eb410dfsteve.pampling@dsl.pipex.com>
          Steven Pampling <steve.pampling@dsl.pipex.com> wrote:

> In article <5WEeg.2024$xH1.913@newsfe3-gui.ntli.net>, john
> <jsmith1456@yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
>> "ri" <riccardo.balistreri@poste.it> wrote in message
>> news:447ad1c8_1@news.tm.net.my...
>> > Interesting, but I've never had an amiga, I had a C64 and I never
>> > understood a thing about amiga, I only remember it used to do great
>> > things for that time.
> 
>> yep great machines of their time - but things move on...
> 
>> Don't waste your time on dead systems - get a new Mac....
> 
> x86 based and then you can be seduced to the dark side by Mr Gates.

I think Apple hope the Trojan principle will work the other way round 
once Mac OS can run on any Intel.


-- 
andrew@mcmullon.plus.com
0
andrew4885 (87)
5/29/2006 6:58:44 PM
In message <4e2eb44a3eusenet-nospam@vigay.com>
          Paul Vigay <usenet-nospam@vigay.com> wrote:

> In article <5WEeg.2024$xH1.913@newsfe3-gui.ntli.net>,
>    john <jsmith1456@yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
>> Don't waste your time on dead systems - get a new Mac....
> 
> I wouldn't waste your time on a Mac. Get a new Iyonix....
> 

The new MAC is definitely a hot machine. If you need to heat the room 
then there is no substitute......

If its too hot to put on your lap can it technically be a laptop?

You'll freeze to death with an Iyonix ;-)

MArkee
0
5/29/2006 8:11:57 PM
On 29-May-2006, Andrew Hill <user@example.net> wrote:

> john wrote:
> > "ri" <riccardo.balistreri@poste.it> wrote in message
> > news:447ad1c8_1@news.tm.net.my...
> >> Interesting, but I've never had an amiga, I had a C64 and I never
> >> understood a thing about amiga, I only remember it used to do great
> >> things
> >> for that time.
> >
> > yep great machines of their time - but things move on...
> >
> > Don't waste your time on dead systems - get a new Mac....
> >
> >
> And you subscribe to csa.* because...?

He's a necrophiliac ?  ;-)

-- 
David Holden - APDL - <http://www.apdl.co.uk>
0
black_hole (774)
5/30/2006 5:37:08 AM
"Jess" <phantasm_39@hotmail.com> wrote in message 
news:6774982e4e.jess@itworkshop.invalid...
> In message <447ad1c8$2_1@news.tm.net.my>
>          "ri" <riccardo.balistreri@poste.it> wrote:
>
>> The information you have given me is very helpful, sure, I would like to
>> check out the 32bits, but the prices I saw are not affordable to me... I
>> live in Malaysia and I think isn't going to be that easy 1 pound st. is
>> almost 7 local currency,
>
> There are often machines that would be suitable offered free to a good
> home, I don't know whether transport costs and local electricity
> voltage make this viable though. (Of course if you know anyone
> visiting the UK, that might make the transport easier.)
>
>> thus for me is a big capital. I could try it out with an emulator as a
>> beginning, but the same unless freeware.
>
> There are freeware emulators, but the OS is of course not free and
> therefore a problem (though it was reported that the previous owners
> of RO were happy for version 3.1 to be freely available, however this
> was never official as far as I know and the OS is no longer owned by
> them) They are also very slow.
>
> The commercial emulator works well though - but we are then in the
> silly money (for your exchange rate) region again.
>
> A second hand copy of virtual acorn 5000 would give you a taster
> though, if you can find one.
>
>> I saw Ionyx, is it a brand name for the acorn?
>
> Acorn itself is no more (although the name is now being used again)
> they were effectively asset stripped for arm holdings. The system is
> still being developed and is owned by Castle Technology, the Iyonix is
> their ATX based machine (using an XScale processor)
>
>> E-bay, mmh, I have never used it, I guess I should start ...
>
> Post the url for anything you find locally and we'll be able to advise
> on whether it is a good deal.
>
> -- 
> Jess                   Iyonix
> contact http://jess.itworkshop-nexus.net
> Hotmail is my spam trap - don't email
> valid - mailto:nospam@jess.itworkshop-nexus.net


wow, the information you guys have given me is incredibly good... I think 
I'll check around locally if anything is available in Malaysia and then post 
if it's something worth buying.

I've found so much of software for the electron emulator, I had no idea of 
this acorn phenomena in the UK (I'm Italian)

I got a bit nostalgic of my Commodore64 times. The fact that the Acorn was 
upgradeable has made it survive much longer than the Commodore I guess.

I'm getting more and more intrigued by this :)

Thank you very much to all the people that answered my post.
R. 


0
5/30/2006 5:50:23 AM
)In message <447bdd62$1_1@news.tm.net.my>
          "ri" <riccardo.balistreri@poste.it> wrote:

> wow, the information you guys have given me is incredibly good... I think
> I'll check around locally if anything is available in Malaysia and then post
> if it's something worth buying.

Excellent, of course whether it is worth buying is very dependant on 
whether you are looking at retro computing or want to be able to use 
it as a main IT system (or somewhere in between). My RISC OS system is 
my main computer, used for email, MP3 playing, web design, word 
processing, etc. Supplimented by A blue G3 mac to fill in the gaps 
where software isn't available. (No windows PC in use here)

> I've found so much of software for the electron emulator, I had no idea of

The acorn arm machines are related to the electron and BBC micro in a 
similar way to Windows machines being related to CP/M machines.

> this acorn phenomena in the UK (I'm Italian)

Olivetti owned (part of??) Acorn for a while, so there's a connection 
for you. (I notice that the styling of the A4000 and A5000 is similar 
to Olivettis of the same age.)

> I got a bit nostalgic of my Commodore64 times. The fact that the Acorn was
> upgradeable has made it survive much longer than the Commodore I guess.

Yes very much upgradeable, (some have said to much for their own good 
- you don't sell a second one for ten years because the first gets 
upgraded, whereas a PC would have been replaced 3 or 4 times)

The RISC PC (1994 design) has (or had) usb, an AGP graphics card, 
100Mb networking available, it can probably support over 1/2 GB RAM 
(with the right upgrades), the latest operating system supports things 
like DHCP. DVDROM burning is a possibility.

The GUI from the machines from the very early 90s is still far more 
advanced in most ways than either MacOS X or windows. (For example we 
don't get that thing where you are typing away and something hapeens 
and it all goes in the wrong box, or when a progam opens a (non error) 
dialogue box and all the other windows lock)

> I'm getting more and more intrigued by this :)

> Thank you very much to all the people that answered my post.

Good luck in finding something(s).

-- 
Jess                   Iyonix
contact http://jess.itworkshop-nexus.net
Hotmail is my spam trap - don't email
valid - mailto:nospam@jess.itworkshop-nexus.net
0
phantasm_39 (2515)
5/30/2006 10:19:18 AM
Jess <phantasm_39@hotmail.com> wrote:
> The RISC PC (1994 design) has (or had)
[snip]
> the latest operating system supports things like DHCP.

Moving rapidly off-topic into .advocacy territory it occasionally amuses me
that RISC OS people cite DHCP as a noteworthy feature.  Most other platforms
take it for granted - I think Windows has had it since Windows 95.  It's not
really a major marketing point for other platforms, and is only so on RISC
OS because it too so long to come out that many people who had a need for it
were stuck waiting for it and made a fuss.

Lots of other platforms support ZeroConf (as included in Select), but I've
not seen any fuss made of it either on this or other platforms.  Which is
probably as it should be, since it's not exactly awe-inspiring.  I think I'd
say the same about DHCP.

Theo
[crossposted and followups set to comp.sys.acorn.advocacy]
0
news539 (2440)
5/30/2006 12:11:44 PM
In article <KOr*G2Whr@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>, Theo Markettos
<theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
> Jess <phantasm_39@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > The RISC PC (1994 design) has (or had)
> [snip]
> > the latest operating system supports things like DHCP.

> Moving rapidly off-topic into .advocacy territory it occasionally amuses
> me that RISC OS people cite DHCP as a noteworthy feature.  Most other
> platforms take it for granted - I think Windows has had it since Windows
> 95.  It's not really a major marketing point for other platforms, and is
> only so on RISC OS because it too so long to come out that many people
> who had a need for it were stuck waiting for it and made a fuss.

Most OSs have had proper DNS support for years, but Windows only picked up
on that at W2k. Until then the system used every other possible avenue and
only then checked DNS. Even in 2k DNS isn't the default first option.

> Lots of other platforms support ZeroConf (as included in Select), but
> I've not seen any fuss made of it either on this or other platforms. 

MS have been warbling about their version for ages, and it doesn't work
properly.

> Which is probably as it should be, since it's not exactly awe-inspiring.
>  I think I'd say the same about DHCP.

When properly set up it works, on all Windows versions including XP unless
service packed to the latest version it causes problems on the server. (see
the MS knowledge base for details)

-- 

Steve Pampling
0
Steven
5/30/2006 4:34:53 PM
On 30 May 2006, Theo Markettos wrote:
> Jess <phantasm_39@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > The RISC PC (1994 design) has (or had)

> [snip]

> > the latest operating system supports things like DHCP.
> 
> Moving rapidly off-topic into .advocacy territory it
> occasionally amuses me that RISC OS people cite DHCP as a
> noteworthy feature.

It _is_ noteworthy in that it's a distinction from versions of
RISC OS up to 3.7 ( or was 4.0x the last without it?) and those
after that point, for which it is therefore a selling point.

Not a selling point to users of other platforms (unless it's
someone specifically planning switch to, or the addition of, RISC
OS[1]), but a selling point to those people who may be using RISC
OS versions which lack it.

[1] Which seems to be what this thread is all about.

-- 
VinceH - http://www.softrock.co.uk/info/vinceh.html
0
VinceH
5/30/2006 6:29:58 PM
In message <KOr*G2Whr@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>
          Theo Markettos <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:

> Jess <phantasm_39@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> The RISC PC (1994 design) has (or had)
> [snip]
>> the latest operating system supports things like DHCP.
> 
> Moving rapidly off-topic into .advocacy territory it occasionally amuses me
> that RISC OS people cite DHCP as a noteworthy feature.  Most other platforms
> take it for granted - I think Windows has had it since Windows 95.  It's not
> really a major marketing point for other platforms, and is only so on RISC
> OS because it too so long to come out that many people who had a need for it
> were stuck waiting for it and made a fuss.
> 
> Lots of other platforms support ZeroConf (as included in Select), but I've
> not seen any fuss made of it either on this or other platforms.  Which is
> probably as it should be, since it's not exactly awe-inspiring.  I think I'd
> say the same about DHCP.
> 
Quite!

Over the past couple of years it seems to me that a lot of RISC OS 
advocates are stuck in a 1995 timewarp. Back then PC's and Apples were 
most definitely inferior to RiscOS.  However since then various things 
have become standard on those computers which RISC OS struggles to do 
(or worse still not all) :

* DHCP

* DVD Player

* Multimedia emails : (druck is currently spitting nails). It may well 
be that the implementation of this is not correct BUT the concept is 
absolutely correct. IT Museums in 50 years time will be full of people 
giggling at the archaic text based emails.......whilst the 10 RiscOS 
users left in the world swear by them and get very angry when people 
top post.

* Internet browsing : deep sigh here. I think again the RISC OS world 
sits there browsing their own web pages with Netsurf thinking the 
world is nice and rosy. DUH hello wakey wakey!

What has not yet been surpassed on either a PC or an Apple is :

* Fonts : the display of anti aliased fonts is absolutely superb on 
RiscOS

* Responsiveness : Despite the processor speed the OS is so efficient 
that my RiscPC is more responsive than the latest PC's and Apples.

* WYSWYG : Again unsurpassed.

* Application Interaction : Just ahead but those pesky M$ folks are 
learning fast.

My improvement list would be :
1. Single OS.
2. A video sub system.
3. A video toolbox gadget.
4. A properly implemented bitmap translator (Imagefilerender has great 
potential but oh how poorly implemented i.e. use it easily!)
5. A video translator.
6. An internet browser that works.
7. An iconbar and filer icons that can be resized. (note how the 
screen gets bigger but those 34x34 icons get smaller and smaller!)
8. Grapevine utilising improvements 2+3, you know what I mean!
9. Automatic network connection and configuration.
10. A revamped CDBurn that handles DVD's and allows for copying, 
burning etc for the brain dead (like Nero on the PC)
11. A multimedia player (DigitalCD upgraded to handle video and larger 
skins for larger displays(!) and revamped library editor NB not a 
reproduction of the Windows Media Player version which is awful)
12. NO PROMISES! Just finished useable products.

regards,

Malcolm


-- 
Malcolm Ripley uses a RiscOS StrongArm computer.
Current new sender keyword is : terrier (use this word in the
subject line if you are contacting me for the first time)
Email address is : "mripley" not forgetting: "@ukonline.co.uk"

*** Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com ***
0
Malcolm
5/30/2006 6:52:43 PM
In article <slrne7pgri.aj3.this.address.is.fake@realh.co.uk>,
   Tony Houghton <this.address.is.fake@realh.co.uk> wrote:
> In <3e6a432f4e.mripley@mripley.ukonline.co.uk>,
> Malcolm Ripley <mripley@ukonline.co.uk> wrote:

> > * DVD Player

> Is the hardware up to it? IIRC it takes about a 400MHz x86 to decode
> PAL/NTSC MPEG 2 in real time and that's with FP. And then it needs
> scaling; can RISC OS make use of the hardware scaling on any of the PC
> graphics cards it uses these days?

I know this is on the "cards", as they say  ;-)

So many hardware accelerations are now available to us (I have several
of them myself) and not just on full-size desktop machines like my
Iyonix.  Even the pocket-sized A9home has working accelerations (and
other enhancements) "head"-ing our way, and already demonstrated at
shows.

> > 7. An iconbar and filer icons that can be resized. (note how the 
> > screen gets bigger but those 34x34 icons get smaller and smaller!)

> It's a bit ironic that RISC OS had Draw etc but now it's been left
> behind with fixed size bitmap icons while other GUIs have got or are
> about to get antialiased vector icons.

As in the next Select, I gather -- or is it already in Select?  I must
look into that, one of these days...

> Even with bitmaps, the others have been able to show them at (more
> than two) different sizes for years.

Ah!  They have finally learned from the example of Sprites22, 23 and 24
options (three sizes!) that we have had for well over a decade.

I just knew they'd get there eventually...

Amazing what our limited resources have continued to achieve, though,
despite the sheer enormity of most other platforms and their vast
resources.  It is very, VERY impressive, and not to be sneered at or
belittled in any way by anyone.  I am proud of it!

-- 
John Ward in Medway, Kent - using RISC OS since 1987
Now using an Iyonix, an A9home, 2 RiscPCs and Virtual-RPC!
Acorn/RISC OS web page: www.john-ward.org.uk/personal/john/computers
Read my "Councilling RISC OS" series in Qercus, from Issue 276 onward
0
John
5/30/2006 11:41:01 PM
In <3e6a432f4e.mripley@mripley.ukonline.co.uk>,
Malcolm Ripley <mripley@ukonline.co.uk> wrote:

> * DVD Player

Is the hardware up to it? IIRC it takes about a 400MHz x86 to decode
PAL/NTSC MPEG 2 in real time and that's with FP. And then it needs
scaling; can RISC OS make use of the hardware scaling on any of the PC
graphics cards it uses these days?

> 7. An iconbar and filer icons that can be resized. (note how the 
> screen gets bigger but those 34x34 icons get smaller and smaller!)

It's a bit ironic that RISC OS had Draw etc but now it's been left
behind with fixed size bitmap icons while other GUIs have got or are
about to get antialiased vector icons. Even with bitmaps, the others
have been able to show them at (more than two) different sizes for
years.

-- 
The address in the Reply-To is genuine and should not be edited.
See <http://www.realh.co.uk/contact.html> for more reliable contact addresses.
0
Tony
5/31/2006 12:21:22 AM
In message <slrne7pre4.dop.this.address.is.fake@realh.co.uk>
          Tony Houghton <this.address.is.fake@realh.co.uk> wrote:

> > I just knew they'd get there eventually...
> 
> No, you're missing the point. Windows' ability to display icons at
> different sizes and offer a resizable task/icon bar has been slightly
> more flexible than RISC OS for years.  MacOS X and common Linux desktops
> are further ahead still to a similar extent that RISC OS' font rendering
> is ahead of DOS. ISTR hearing that Vista will support vector icons too.

Select, (but of course, not RISC OS 5) does indeed have much of this,
with its Image File Renderer, and is supported well by its filer for
thumbnails, etc. Of course, the icon bar is of fixed size, etc, etc.

-- 
Peter Naulls - peter@chocky.org        | http://www.chocky.org/
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
RISC OS Community Wiki - add your own content   | http://www.riscos.info/
0
Peter
5/31/2006 2:31:56 AM
In <4e2f5d8819john@acornusers.org>,
John M Ward <john@acornusers.org> wrote:

> In article <slrne7pgri.aj3.this.address.is.fake@realh.co.uk>,
>    Tony Houghton <this.address.is.fake@realh.co.uk> wrote:
>> In <3e6a432f4e.mripley@mripley.ukonline.co.uk>,
>> Malcolm Ripley <mripley@ukonline.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> > * DVD Player
>
>> Is the hardware up to it? IIRC it takes about a 400MHz x86 to decode
>> PAL/NTSC MPEG 2 in real time and that's with FP. And then it needs
>> scaling; can RISC OS make use of the hardware scaling on any of the PC
>> graphics cards it uses these days?
>
> I know this is on the "cards", as they say  ;-)
>
> So many hardware accelerations are now available to us (I have several
> of them myself) and not just on full-size desktop machines like my
> Iyonix.  Even the pocket-sized A9home has working accelerations (and
> other enhancements) "head"-ing our way, and already demonstrated at
> shows.

That's a huge help, but AFAICS the SM501 only offers acceleration for
things like colourspace conversion and scaling of decoded frames. NVidia
and ATI cards have motion compensation acceleration, but the APIs are
closed and the RO market is maybe too small to get licences. So I think
RISC OS will have to rely solely on software decoding. Even 600MHz VIA
C3 processors struggle and rely on the MPEG decoders on their Unichrome
graphics chips. Those CPUs are renowned for lousy FP, but it's got to be
better than none at all.

>> > 7. An iconbar and filer icons that can be resized. (note how the 
>> > screen gets bigger but those 34x34 icons get smaller and smaller!)
>
>> It's a bit ironic that RISC OS had Draw etc but now it's been left
>> behind with fixed size bitmap icons while other GUIs have got or are
>> about to get antialiased vector icons.
>
> As in the next Select, I gather -- or is it already in Select?  I must
> look into that, one of these days...

Apparently the Filer can display thumbnails and the module it uses to do
it can render Drawfiles. But it doesn't say whether it can antialias
Drawfiles (or render Artworks with antialiasing), and there's definitely
no sign of Drawfiles replacing Iconsprites.

>> Even with bitmaps, the others have been able to show them at (more
>> than two) different sizes for years.
>
> Ah!  They have finally learned from the example of Sprites22, 23 and 24
> options (three sizes!) that we have had for well over a decade.

That's one size for three different pixel formats, not three sizes.

> I just knew they'd get there eventually...

No, you're missing the point. Windows' ability to display icons at
different sizes and offer a resizable task/icon bar has been slightly
more flexible than RISC OS for years.  MacOS X and common Linux desktops
are further ahead still to a similar extent that RISC OS' font rendering
is ahead of DOS. ISTR hearing that Vista will support vector icons too.

-- 
The address in the Reply-To is genuine and should not be edited.
See <http://www.realh.co.uk/contact.html> for more reliable contact addresses.
0
Tony
5/31/2006 3:21:56 AM
On 31 May 2006, Peter Naulls wrote:

> Of course, the icon bar is of fixed size, etc, etc.

Although this is a matter of personal opinion, I've always felt
the icon bar was *too big* from the outset, but became more
acceptable when we were able to use higher resolutions - though,
obviously, it's possible to go from one extreme to the other.

Different people will no doubt have different views - and even
those who share mine will have a different view on what screen
res. makes it 'just so'.

-- 
VinceH - http://www.softrock.co.uk/info/vinceh.html
0
VinceH
5/31/2006 8:17:40 AM
In article <gemini.j04f1f001ai8402yk.spam@softrock.co.uk>,
   VinceH <spam@softrock.co.uk> wrote:
> On 31 May 2006, Peter Naulls wrote:

> > Of course, the icon bar is of fixed size, etc, etc.

> Although this is a matter of personal opinion, I've always felt
> the icon bar was *too big* from the outset, but became more
> acceptable when we were able to use higher resolutions - though,
> obviously, it's possible to go from one extreme to the other.

I'd agree with all of that, having come all the way from 640 x 256
resolution up to (nowadays) 1500 x 1200 on one machine, and dual-head
2560 x 1024 (or 2048 x 1280) on another.

Although I don't fancy the idea of a "double decker" icon bar myself,
having a choice would be an enhancement, though -- as ours auto-scrolls
anyway -- not a very important one.  Indeed, I can't recall the topic
ever having arisen before now.

> Different people will no doubt have different views - and even
> those who share mine will have a different view on what screen
> res. makes it 'just so'.

I think we adapt as resolutions change, and most of us have tended to
switch to larger monitors as resolutions have increased, so the
displayed size of the icons (for example) does not change that much in
practice.  Even with my poor eyesight I have no difficulty in dealing
with and identifying the various icons, and there's typically a huge gap
between the two groups on my dual display, so there's no risk of filling
up the icon bar either.

So, these are my findings, and I hope they will be of some use in this
sub-thread about the icon bar.

-- 
John Ward in Medway, Kent - using RISC OS since 1987
Now using an Iyonix, an A9home, 2 RiscPCs and Virtual-RPC!
Acorn/RISC OS web page: www.john-ward.org.uk/personal/john/computers
Read my "Councilling RISC OS" series in Qercus, from Issue 276 onward
0
John
5/31/2006 8:41:01 AM
In message <82c06c2f4e.peter@chocky.org>
          Peter Naulls <peter@chocky.org> wrote:

> Select, (but of course, not RISC OS 5) does indeed have much of this,
> with its Image File Renderer, and is supported well by its filer for
> thumbnails, etc. Of course, the icon bar is of fixed size, etc, etc.

Well, the icon bar may be of fixed height, but certainly not fixed
width.

In any case, the ability of windows to cover the icon bar is a great
advantage over Windoze.  That, plus the ability to get the icon bar
back again just by moving the mouse to the bottom of the screen,
makes the size of the icon bar irrelevant.  IMHO.

The only thing we don't have is an icon on the icon bar for each
open window; occasionally I miss this.  The flip side is that the
Windoze implementation leaves every icon too small to be of any use
when there are lots of windows open - precisely the time you most
need to be able to read it.

Of all the systems I've used, RISC OS has my favourite functionality
in this area.

Dave
0
Dave
5/31/2006 6:57:17 PM
Dave Higton wrote:
> In message <82c06c2f4e.peter@chocky.org>
>           Peter Naulls <peter@chocky.org> wrote:
> 
>> Select, (but of course, not RISC OS 5) does indeed have much of this,
>> with its Image File Renderer, and is supported well by its filer for
>> thumbnails, etc. Of course, the icon bar is of fixed size, etc, etc.
> 
> Well, the icon bar may be of fixed height, but certainly not fixed
> width.
> 
> In any case, the ability of windows to cover the icon bar is a great
> advantage over Windoze.  That, plus the ability to get the icon bar
> back again just by moving the mouse to the bottom of the screen,
> makes the size of the icon bar irrelevant.  IMHO.
> 
> The only thing we don't have is an icon on the icon bar for each
> open window; occasionally I miss this.  The flip side is that the
> Windoze implementation leaves every icon too small to be of any use
> when there are lots of windows open - precisely the time you most
> need to be able to read it.
> 
> Of all the systems I've used, RISC OS has my favourite functionality
> in this area.

Yes, but look at Tony's point.  Windows is far from the last
word in icon or windowing functionality.  Mac OS and the endless Unix
window managers (KDE is of worthy note here), display just
about every behaviour conceivable, and with a wild array
of configurability.  Most of them are noticably slow than
RISC OS, but still - the features are there, and RISC OS lacks
them by and large.  Let's stop apologising for RISC OS and
realise that it has a great deal that needs fixing or
improving.


0
Peter
5/31/2006 7:44:05 PM
In article <27abc72f4e.davehigton@dsl.pipex.com>, Dave Higton
<davehigton@dsl.pipex.com> wrote:
> In message <82c06c2f4e.peter@chocky.org> Peter Naulls
>           <peter@chocky.org> wrote:

> > Select, (but of course, not RISC OS 5) does indeed have much of this,
> > with its Image File Renderer, and is supported well by its filer for
> > thumbnails, etc. Of course, the icon bar is of fixed size, etc, etc.

> Well, the icon bar may be of fixed height, but certainly not fixed
> width.

Huh? How may I configure it across only half the screen? :-/

> In any case, the ability of windows to cover the icon bar is a great
> advantage over Windoze.  That, plus the ability to get the icon bar
> back again just by moving the mouse to the bottom of the screen, makes
> the size of the icon bar irrelevant.  IMHO.

Not irrelevant but perhaps unnecessary. I have just this moment chastised
Egg for having too much white space on their web site, forcing me into a
full- and off-screen browsing experience.  :-o

> The only thing we don't have is an icon on the icon bar for each open
> window; occasionally I miss this. 

If there is a utility somewhere which does this at least RISC OS lets you
add it to the iconbar with TinyDirs.

> The flip side is that the Windoze
> implementation leaves every icon too small to be of any use when there
> are lots of windows open - precisely the time you most need to be able
> to read it.

I like the windoze icon bar way of sliding off the screen and being able
to drag it around but hate the useless icons too when the bar is only one
high. As I keep the address bar visible, there is room for only three
icons unless I drag it out across half the screen, which, at least, /can
be done/. 

> Of all the systems I've used, RISC OS has my favourite functionality in
> this area.

Yes, it has readable icons! (On windows, open about twelve web pages with
MIE and then work out which is which from their icons. Do the same with
NetSurf by iconising each window.  :-)

T

-- 
* Cheap phone bills? Gift shopping? www.timil.com/usenet.php
* Spam-proof Usenet address? Visit www.invalid.org.uk 
  or email me:  postmaster at invalid dot org dot uk
* (tim@invalid.org.uk is deleted unread - please use my valid address above)

.... "A friendly eye could never see such faults" Jul Caesar, Act iv, Sc.3
0
Tim
5/31/2006 7:51:37 PM
On 31 May 2006 Dave Higton <davehigton@dsl.pipex.com> wrote:
> The only thing we don't have is an icon on the icon bar for each
> open window; occasionally I miss this.  The flip side is that the
> Windoze implementation leaves every icon too small to be of any use
> when there are lots of windows open - precisely the time you most
> need to be able to read it.

Especially when Microsoft are so vain their name must appear at the beginning
of everything, so you have:-

 Micros... Micros... Micros... Micros... Micros... Micros... Micros... 
 
But then they did introduce the feature to stack multiple windows in to each
icon when you have more than so many windows for each application, to make it
just that little more difficult to use.

---druck

-- 
The ARM Club Free Software - http://www.armclub.org.uk/free/
The 32bit Conversions Page - http://www.quantumsoft.co.uk/druck/
0
druck
5/31/2006 8:05:08 PM
In message <4e2fcca4cbtim@invalid.org.uk>
          Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> wrote:

> In article <27abc72f4e.davehigton@dsl.pipex.com>, Dave Higton
> <davehigton@dsl.pipex.com> wrote:
> > In message <82c06c2f4e.peter@chocky.org> Peter Naulls
> >           <peter@chocky.org> wrote:
> 
> > > Select, (but of course, not RISC OS 5) does indeed have much of this,
> > > with its Image File Renderer, and is supported well by its filer for
> > > thumbnails, etc. Of course, the icon bar is of fixed size, etc, etc.
> 
> > Well, the icon bar may be of fixed height, but certainly not fixed
> > width.
> 
> Huh? How may I configure it across only half the screen? :-/

But why on earth would you want to?  It never gets in the way.

It can never be less than the width of the screen, but it can be as
much wider than the screen as necessary.

Dave
0
Dave
5/31/2006 8:44:47 PM
Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> wrote:
> In article <27abc72f4e.davehigton@dsl.pipex.com>, Dave Higton
> <davehigton@dsl.pipex.com> wrote:
>> The only thing we don't have is an icon on the icon bar for each open
>> window; occasionally I miss this. 
> 
> If there is a utility somewhere which does this at least RISC OS lets you
> add it to the iconbar with TinyDirs.

Director will do almost this: Menu-click on the Back icon of any window and
you get a menu of the currently open windows, which you can then click on to
pull to the front (and a submenu for each window with options like iconise,
maximise and close all from this task).  This helps me because I often have
50-100 windows open at once and finding the one I want often requires a lot
of window shuffling. My most recent patch (in CVS but not released yet)
gives a list of tasks with a submenu of windows for each if there are lots,
because even the menu listing all the windows was getting too high for the
screen!
 
> Yes, it has readable icons! (On windows, open about twelve web pages with
> MIE and then work out which is which from their icons. Do the same with
> NetSurf by iconising each window.  :-)

I wish there was somewhere windows could be iconised that wasn't the
backdrop.  Because the backdrop is usually buried under about 100 windows
and so I'd rather not have to move those 100 windows to find the one I
really wanted.  I could bring the backdrop to the front but I find that's
too disturbing to what I'm working on currently.  And things like Director
don't list iconised windows :( (is there an official way of finding out the
names, sprites, etc of windows that have been iconised?)

Theo
0
Theo
6/1/2006 12:25:58 PM
On 31/05/2006 19:57, Dave Higton wrote:

> In any case, the ability of windows to cover the icon bar is a great 
> advantage over Windoze.  That, plus the ability to get the icon bar 
> back again just by moving the mouse to the bottom of the screen, 
> makes the size of the icon bar irrelevant.  IMHO.

I may be missing the point here completely, but whether the icon bar (or
task bar in windows terminology) is coverable by other windows or not is
optional in both windows and RISC OS. If there is a difference, it is
only in the default setting of that option.

Mike
-- 
Mike Sandells
The University of Liverpool - Computing Services Department
Work: mikejs@liv.ac.uk  http://www.liv.ac.uk/csd
Home: mike@mikejs.com   http://www.mikejs.com
0
Mike
6/1/2006 12:48:03 PM
In article <Ubl*1C7hr@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>,
   Theo Markettos <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
[Snip]
> I wish there was somewhere windows could be iconised that wasn't the
> backdrop.  Because the backdrop is usually buried under about 100 windows
> and so I'd rather not have to move those 100 windows to find the one I
> really wanted.

Erm. you can iconise to the iconbar if you prefer. This is my preferred
action anyway.

Just go into the RISC OS configuration and go into the Pinboard settings.
There should be an option allowing you to choose there to iconise things to.

-- 
                           __\\|//__            Life,
                           (` o-o ')        the Universe
http://www.vigay.com -----ooO-(_)-Ooo------ & Everything ------
(email address is genuine, to fool junkmailers)
0
Paul
6/1/2006 3:08:52 PM
Reply: