Drobe :: The archives
About Drobe | Contact | RSS | Twitter | Tech docs | Downloads | BBC Micro

RISCOS Ltd. reveal development database

By Chris Williams. Published: 5th Jun 2004, 06:38:45 | Permalink | Printable

All your CVS commit are belong to us

Select 3 motifThe RISCOS Ltd. development team have this week opened the RISC OS development database to the public, allowing all users to see exactly what changes have been made to RISC OS 4 (from Select onwards) and when. Although RISCOS Ltd. publish feature overviews when new versions of RISC OS are released, the online database allows all users to view the development summaries that, until now, were for Select subscribers and Adjust users only.

Also, this is the first time the development summaries have been presented in HTML form, and made accessible via CGI. The online database organises the distinct components that make up the OS into two main categories, depending on where they traditionally reside: that is, either in ROM or on disc. From each category, users can select an individual component's CVS development summary, which is colour coded by milestone, and for the non-programmers that have just joined us, CVS is the popular version control software that RISCOS Ltd. use to manage the OS source code. So, although the Select documentation for third party developers remains reserved for paying customers, the summaries do give an insight into the amount of work involved in each RISC OS 4 release cycle, and specifically, where development time is spent.

Components such as Paint, the Filer, the Kernel and the WindowManager all boast fairly extensive development summaries, but unlike real life, size isn't everything: for example, the summary for MessageTrans seems quite small, but the fixes listed have resulted in a marked increase in system stability. Also listed in the milestones chart is one as yet unreleased version of RISC OS 4, namely Select 3i4.

"All the versions of the components that make up the OS - some 500-odd of them - have had their changes logged within CVS; those changes have a 'summary' that covers the change was that was made plus a lot more detailed internal development information," a RISCOS Ltd. software engineer explained yesterday, who also added that the new online database doesn't intend to step on the toes of Peter Howkins' module database. Peter's database covers module version numbers for RISC OS in its various forms, from Arthur to RISC OS 5, whereas RISCOS Ltd's database covers just RISC OS Select and Adjust, but obviously in much more detail.

The developer continued: "Since the internal info is confidential, only the summary details are released in the database.

"Because this is done for every component, it's possible to build up these change lists as necessary. Select users have seen them in the past in the form of change files that can be accessed through the Softload tool. The database makes this more accessible to people. If anyone wants to get at the raw data, could they please contact us though, rather than hammering the server to extract it from the formatted data."

Update at 15:09 5/6/2004
The article originally said Adjust1i2 was unreleased, but we checked again, and it has been released. Adjust1i2 fixes a few bugs found in Adjust1i1.

Links


Database of RISC OS 4 changes - spot your favourite entry RISCOS Ltd. website

Previous: GCCSDK Website Moved
Next: 'My other computer is an Iyonix'

Discussion

Viewing threaded comments | View comments unthreaded, listed by date | Skip to the end

"as yet unreleased versions of RISCOS 4, namely Adjust 1i2" i beg to differ, im sat here typing aw.ay on adjust 1i2

 is a RISC OS UserLee on 5/6/04 2:47PM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

ignoring the . in away of course

 is a RISC OS UserLee on 5/6/04 2:49PM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

Oops, ok, see the update.

Chris.

 is a RISC OS Userdiomus on 5/6/04 3:15PM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

Hum. I wonder how many of these bug-fixes have been done separately in RO5 too.

Aside from the fixes, which are always nice, there's not that much here is there? I hope that Select comes to RO5... I hope that when it does, someone does a good sales job on why everyone (or, at least, a good majority) should buy it.

So who's going to paste this lot into the Merlin wishlist then ;-(

 is a RISC OS UserTonyStill on 5/6/04 4:23PM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

"there's not that much here, is there?"

Oh my good God. You're a programmer Tony, you know the deal about bugs: they're a pain to find, but it's essential you find them. This is on top of 3 years of features:

[link] [link] [link]

Ok, so the development summaries are no sales brochure, due to the fact that they're more technical than anything else.

Chris. Just me, and my personal opinion

 is a RISC OS Userdiomus on 5/6/04 4:56PM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

TonyStill: "there's not that much here is there"

Just the rounded buttons, really ... I don't believe ROL added any other features to Select.

As some people would have you believe.

 is a RISC OS Userjms on 5/6/04 7:07PM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

There is only one feature I'm waiting for, well not really an OS feature but all the same something I'd sure pay for - Latest version of Java.

 is a RISC OS Usersa110 on 5/6/04 7:25PM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

Tony:

"Aside from the fixes, which are always nice, there's not that much here is there? I hope that Select comes to RO5..."

Perhaps I'm stupid - run this by me again. There's not much there, so therefore why would you want it on RO5 anyway??

 is a RISC OS Usermd0u80c9 on 5/6/04 7:26PM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

md0u80c9: "There's not much there, so therefore why would you want it on RO5 anyway??"

One assumes Tony was referring to Adjust compared with Select, not the entire Select scheme plus Adjust enhancements.

dgs

 is a RISC OS Userdgs on 5/6/04 7:49PM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

Positively thinking, there appears to be a lot more happening lately. :-o I think more in the last 12 months than the last 5 years, maybe since the excitement of RISC OS 4 release? :cog: The development for the next 12 months will be interesting for RISC OS Users. ;-) I mean interesting to see how/if/when/will/can... RISC OS offer a computer to really please their users not to bother with Windows? :devil: With all these Select and Adjust enhancements and the blossoming reality of some basic Windows standards (Media Player, DVD, USB, etc, etc,) which we lacked for far too long now, and hopefully before too long now it really looks like we're in for some darn good computer systems? :grin: The long frustration rage of what RISC OS previously has been lacking over the years reflects in *Tony's* Select comments, but I think Select features and Adjust's small enhancements are much more than they appear. In my mind, I think Tony's comments more or less refer to the Window's standards comments I made, (until recently) in RISC OS... <there's not that much here is there?>. Are these 'small in appearance features' in Windows? Or are are we really on a winner....? P.S. How do I get internet news videos to play, my recent Oregano2 can't play them? Cheers, Steve.

 is a RISC OS UserSawadee on 6/6/04 6:13AM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

Sawadee> Possibly you wait for Cineorama to be completed. Whether that will help will depend what formats it supports and what formats the internet news videos are in.

 is a RISC OS Useraardvark on 6/6/04 12:42PM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

In reply to aardvark: You're not seriously expecting Cineroma to ever be released, are you? It's sad that such a lot of work on it has gone to waste, but it's obviously a 'dead duck' now. We won't see a 'real player' for RISC OS either - many have suggested ways of doing it, but no-one seems to have the time. I can understand that as it takes sooooo long to write/convert such things, and with little or no financial reward, why should they? RISCOS Ltd, on the other hand, have a commercial interest in seeing their OS flourish, but seem to ignore the features and software that's fundamental to modern computer systems. Maybe they don't see that as their role, but without such software, they won't sell many copies of the OS, so perhaps they should review their strategies?

 is a RISC OS UserJeremy on 6/6/04 4:53PM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

ROL do what's possible with the money they have.

And of course Cineroma will be released. The author should just release whatever version he has now if he's not got much time to work on it ATM though.

 is a RISC OS Usermavhc on 6/6/04 6:29PM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

Jeremy: "You're not seriously expecting Cineroma to ever be released, are you? It's sad that such a lot of work on it has gone to waste, but it's obviously a 'dead duck' now." What on earth makes you assume that? Have you spoken to the author, David McEwen? If you are interested in seeing it released, why not express your interest to him personally and ask about the current state of its development?

 is a RISC OS Usertlsa on 6/6/04 6:35PM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

tlsa:

I understand Jeremy's cynicism; nothing's been heard from the developer for months and I got no response from the two emails I sent.

Of course this doesn't mean than nothing's happening, but I'm not going to get my hopes up.

 is a RISC OS Userfylfot on 6/6/04 6:49PM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

mavhc:

ROL have done one major and useful thing and that is release the original RISC OS 4. Since then, all they have done is prat around with ludicrous subscription schemes and ugly rounded buttons.

Jeremy is spot on. ROL have consistently refused to work on anything remotely useful to the long-term future and immediate useability of RISC OS, such as a good media player, Web browser, printer drivers. Oh yeah, and 32bit. Why did MW Software have to port GIMPrint? ROL should have done that in order to make RISC OS compatible with more modern printers. Why is Mr McEwan working on a media player? One should be supplied with the OS. The list goes on.

With ROL now sidelined as irrelevant, it's more a question of whether Castle Technology decides to look at Windows and MacOS and see what gaps in RISC OS need plugging and then go forth and plug. For while such things as media players aren't strictly part of the OS, if all other OSes come with them bundled for free, then RISC OS needs to do so, too.

 is a RISC OS Userarenaman on 6/6/04 8:26PM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

fylfot: "nothing's been heard from the developer for months"

This isn't true. I've exchanged emails with David M a few times (including within the last few months), and basically he is snowed under with paid work. Paid work means RISC OS stuff takes a back seat for the time being. But from what I've been told, he's still hopeful of finding the time to finish things off.

That would be months away, or even longer, but it's still planned. Negative comments that some other people have made, are unlikely to help.

dgs

 is a RISC OS Userdgs on 6/6/04 9:17PM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

I based my assumption about Cineroma on the fact that his web site hasn't been updated for seven months, and the three emails I've sent him over the past couple of months haven't been acknowledged. I think we have to accept the probability that some things just won't happen, no matter how much we want them. I have the greatest respect for David for even trying to produce such software. Yes, 'negative comments' are unlikely to help, but so are positive ones, or any other form of comment. If the guy can't find time to finish it, it's not a criticism, it's a fact. Sometimes we have to acknowledge and accept such things.

 is a RISC OS UserJeremy on 6/6/04 9:37PM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

Web sites I think that sometimes, for a solo developer, just getting the software sorted is quite enough without the drain on time and resources that running a website entails. That's why we have drobe and its monthly roundup of software developments.

Alas, it is also true that in a small market such as ours we are reliant on the often herculian labours of individuals to pull off miracles. The main thing is not to take things when they do happen (like the Iyonix, and Adjust) for granted. Support and encourage, lads - or we'll go nowhere.

(End of Sunday sermon)

 is a RISC OS Usermartin on 6/6/04 10:04PM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

Jeremy: "... his web site hasn't been updated for seven months"

Take a look at [link]

In particular, the "What's New" section lists the latest news as of more than two years ago.

If you have an alternative, tell us about it. If not, someone saying they *do* plan to finish it is what you need to accept. *NOT* telling everyone (and them) that they won't finish it, just because you ran out of patience.

I'm sorry to be rude, but when David does have a bit more time, I think updating his website should be bottom of his priorities (get someone else to do it). After working on the code, top of the priority list should be demonstrating what's working thus far, at a RISC OS user group.

dgs

 is a RISC OS Userdgs on 6/6/04 10:57PM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

My original question was to see if there was any other way than Cino or a PC 'Real Player'. I do have a laptop PC, though I seldom use it, just found it sad to be on the net with RISC OS and no Media Player functions (I'm obviously not alone - that's what I wanted to confirm). Anyway, hats off to any and all RISC OS [charitable] developers. Maybe a each donation to help and keep your fingers crossed (and your toes) for the *Cino and Castle hype new ADFS* in Drobes article 14th May....

 is a RISC OS UserSawadee on 7/6/04 12:37AM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

Just to put the record straight, and apologise to David about Cineroma - I was wrong. Cineroma is being worked on (see David's current update on his web site). So, apologies to all for stating the project was dead - it isn't, and I thank David for his continued commitment to the project. I still firmly maintain that ROL have their priorities completely wrong - and don't agree that 'they're doing their best with the money available'. They're just not working on the right things, in my opinion.

 is a RISC OS UserJeremy on 7/6/04 7:28AM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

> ROL have consistently refused to work on anything remotely useful to the long-term future and immediate useability of RISC OS > Oh yeah, and 32bit Because they don't have enough money.

> such as a good media player, Web browser, printer drivers. Why did MW Software have to port GIMPrint? ROL should have done that in order to make RISC OS compatible with more modern printers. Why is Mr McEwan working on a media player? One should be supplied with the OS. The list goes on. So you'd rather ROL spent their money doing things other people can do and tend to release for free(ish)? What would be the advantage?

 is a RISC OS Usermavhc on 7/6/04 9:47AM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

Why should things like a web browser or media player be RISC OS's responsibility? They are nice things to have, but aren't part of an OS (neither are things like Draw, to be honest).

 is a RISC OS UserSimonC on 7/6/04 11:59AM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

There's a balance. What use is an OS with no meaningful applications? How can an application run well without a useful OS?

 is a RISC OS Userjonix on 7/6/04 1:45PM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

In my experience Select 4.37 and RO5.06 seem equally stable, and work fine. I don't really see the point in fiddling with either of them anymore.

There are many other things such as video viewing and editing software, Real Audio/streaming audio, JVM that we are still no nearer to having under RISC OS that other OS users take for granted and expect to find bundled with their new computer.

So what is the point of trying to 'improve' the OS when IMHO the effort should be going into 'improving' the range of things we can do with a RISC OS machine?

At least new hardware such as the Iyonix offers the opportunity to do more things under RISC OS (such as PCITV and Cino).

 is a RISC OS Userblahsnr on 7/6/04 3:43PM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

SimonC:

I suggest you take a look at MacOS X and WindowsXP and that will answer your question. Both come with a top-notch Web browser, email client, media player, text editor, image viewer, basic movie editor and Apple also provide an organiser and jukebox (iTunes).

RISC OS is supplied with none of these things.

I agree a media player is not actually part of the OS, but it is now commonly expected to be supplied *with* it. As Apple and Microsoft, both OS developers, supply such applications free with their OSes, then so logic suggests that that is what ROL (and now Castle) should be doing. Nothing to do with the principles of what constitutes part of an OS, but what the simple commercial reality is in the rest of the consumer computing industry.

 is a RISC OS Userarenaman on 7/6/04 3:57PM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

Ignore the text editor bit!! I meant to delete that.

 is a RISC OS Userarenaman on 7/6/04 3:58PM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

arenaman: "I agree a media player is not actually part of the OS, but it is now commonly expected to be supplied with it"

Perhaps ROL and Castle should come to an arrangement to ship !DigitalCD with their OSes. And Cineroma when released.

I'd hate to think of both companies independently trying to spend time to reproduce work already completed by somebody else.

 is a RISC OS Userjms on 7/6/04 4:07PM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

mavhc:

How do you know how much money ROL have? Are you privy to their accounts? As far as I can see, they employ at least one engineer and have found the time for said engineering staff to mess around with rounded buttons, graduated backdrops and the structure of !Boot (which I found required manual intervention to get some apps running again after upgrading, hardly a great thing for less experienced or new users). Surely porting Java or improving Replay (ie. adding modern codecs to it) and the like would have been a better use of time. Rounded buttons and graduated backdrops are simply an insult to subscribers who are paying for useful improvements.

Yes, I would rather have seen ROL spend their time on useful things that others can do for nearly free. What guarantee was there that MW would port GIMPrint or David McEwan would write a media player? Why should a RISC OS user pay for Oregano or use less-capable browsers? It is the responsibility of the OS developer to develop and bundle such utilities. That's the way it works nowadays. It's hardly radical or The Only Way To Save RISC OS - it's copying the market leaders in order to survive as a viable platform.

 is a RISC OS Userarenaman on 7/6/04 4:12PM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

With regard to the comparison with RISC OS and MAC OS X :-

Software development costs of Panther year ending 2003 - $14.7 million Costs involved in development of Jaguar year ending 2002 - $13.3 million

Somehow I doubt RISC OS Ltd's budget for OS development comes anywhere near that enjoyed by Apple's OS developers. I'm quite sure they'd love to be able to add further value to their product by providing everything that the big OS's are able to - but unless they win the lottery or find more custom that is not likely to happen for the forseeable future.

I like the suggestion of meeting some of these needs by bundling 3rd party applications to meet this shortfall (!DigitalCD is a great program :)) - that is definitely something that could be looked into if it hasn't already.

 is a RISC OS UserJohnB on 07/06/04 6:15PM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

In reply to mavhc:

You are correct in stating that RISC OS Ltd has insufficient money to develop the OS in the way we might wish. This is why I have a problem with their behaviour - I see them hindering Castle, the only company with the wherewithall to move RISC OS forward. ROL should align with Castle's vision and strategy, focussing their efforts on bringing enhancements to ALL desktop users whilst leaving the pursuit of new markets to CTL. I don't object to competition, but it seems to me that ROL's vision is to continue producing minor enhancements (our OS has fallen behind rather badly) of RISC OS until such time as the OS is completely irrelevant and / or existing users die of old age.

 is a RISC OS UserNeilWB on 07/06/04 9:03PM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

NWB: Well, yes. Except I could swap over "ROL" and "Castle" in your statement, and it would pretty much still remain a valid argument, depending on your point of view.

 is a RISC OS Usermrchocky on 07/06/04 10:17PM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

In order to get things like video editing software to work at reasonable speeds, we need massive improvements in the OS. For this to happen, the OS' components have to have a clear structure and as little dependancies as possible. IIRC this is exactly what ROL are working on. Once we have filesystems that can handle more than 30MB/s easily, it starts to make sense to bundle applications like CineWorks (after it has had a few updates).

 is a RISC OS UserJGZimmerle on 07/06/04 10:25PM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

mrchocky: How can it be the case that RISCOS Ltd have sufficient money to develop the OS "in the way we might wish", but Castle do not?

OK, so someone could believe that "depending on their point of view", but they'd have to have some serious suspension of disbelief...

dgs

 is a RISC OS Userdgs on 07/06/04 10:56PM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

Julian: what's the point of doing that now? It seems to me the IyonixPC would make a far better multimedia machine than a 10 year-old RiscPC or half-finished Ohmygod. Take into account 32bit hardware and OS, faster CPU, faster bandwidth etc etc.

I have to agree with NeilWB. ROL are now simply wasting time and money on an OS that is superceded. It's a poor show that they won't accept that the IyonixPC is the way forward and do something to help move the market forward. Admittedly, though, I can't think of what use they are now or how they can help. Castle own RISC OS, Castle have RISC OS engineers, Castle are the only company building 32bit hardware. ROL are just sort-of there, releasing rounded-buttons for people who wish to stay with RiscPCs. Money spent with ROL is not helping the market at all, it's just keeping one useless company going for a bit longer. Since the new 32bit machine is built by the people who *own* RISC OS and doesn't use ROL RISC OS, then ROL disappearing would not affect the market in any significant way - especially not the *future* of the market.

ROL messed up, Castle made the moves to secure their own and the market's future.

Sure RISC OS Select has bells and whistles (to an extent) but what use is a fancy OS on ancient 26bit, rather slow hardware? It's hardly going to win anyone over...

 is a RISC OS Userarenaman on 08/06/04 00:33AM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

Would it cost as much as what other platforms experienced to develop? Could the cost of development be included in the price of purchase? How did other platform computers achieve developing their software? Who ever can take responsibility and how ever it can be achieved must be overcome somehow, surely or we will never have the "Basics" other platform users take for granted. Our platform computer IS moving forward on a shoestring budget, more than any of the past 6 years that I can see. Cheers, Steve.

 is a RISC OS UserSawadee on 08/06/04 03:20AM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

dgs: The salient point was "pretty much". Whether you agree with specific points is neither here nor there - what's relevant is that NWB's argument was mostly based upon who you care to "side with".

 is a RISC OS Usermrchocky on 08/06/04 08:39AM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

@arenaman: I suggest you look at the facts before pondering on old prejudices.

 is a RISC OS Useranon/195.227.111.2 on 08/06/04 09:31AM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

> Both come with a top-notch Web browser Well, there's IE, source of 50% of security holes for the past 5 years, and Safari, based on an open source browser. ROS has no free one yet, but people are working on various options.

> email client OE? Funny. Messenger is free and better.

> media player Codecs and an video player API. The player part is easy.

> text editor Edit is better than Notepad by about 1AU, StrongEd, Zap, triv.

> image viewer Although the XP picture viewer isn't great, the printing stuff is good. Thump is better.

> basic movie editor Cineworks?

> Apple also provide an organiser !Organizer, very cheap anyway.

> jukebox (iTunes). There are 101 audio players for ROS, although I don't think any have library functions.

So apart from the browser, the only problem is bundling all this free stuff with the OS? Half of it is anyway, Castle and ROL both have free software with their systems. Maybe you want some kind of system like debian and linux....

> How do you know how much money ROL have? Are you privy to their accounts? Their earlier ones, yes, everyone was. If they had enough money from ROS4 they would have started on the 32bit OS, if they had enough money to wait until they'd finished Adjust they wouldn't have raised cash via subscriptions for Select

> As far as I can see, they employ at least one engineer A sign of a company with lots of money?

> and have found the time for said engineering staff to mess around with rounded buttons, graduated backdrops and the structure of !Boot The alternative being to start work on 32bit/java/browser/media player and run out of money before they had anything to sell.

> Yes, I would rather have seen ROL spend their time on useful things that others can do for nearly free. What guarantee was there that MW would port GIMPrint or David McEwan would write a media player? Then they couldn't have improved the OS as well, and MW and DM couldn't have done that work as they didn't work for ROL. None, but they did, as did Photodesk, and the Kino(Amp) people. Also now everyone has the ability to have these features, not just Select owers

> Why should a RISC OS user pay for Oregano or use less-capable browsers? Because they chose to use an OS with a small user base. Same reason they have to pay more for the hardware.

> It is the responsibility of the OS developer to develop and bundle such utilities. That's the way it works nowadays. It's hardly radical or The Only Way To Save RISC OS - it's copying the market leaders in order to survive as a viable platform. Attempting to play catchup with Microsoft isn't a sane plan, you can't win.

It's the responsibility of ROL to keep existing, it seems unlikely that your suggestions would help that cause. Of course if they do that by creating emulators that's also crazy.

 is a RISC OS Usermavhc on 08/06/04 2:31PM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

In reply to Juliam Zimmerle:

What are the facts then? Perhaps you would provide us with the facts relating to the question I have asked you on several occasions, and which you have always dodged.

 is a RISC OS UserNeilWB on 08/06/04 10:20PM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

mrchocky: I didn't disagree on "specific points", I felt that "translating" the argument rather missed the fact that it became ludicrous as soon as applied to Neil WB's very first point, which was also central to the rest of what he said.

In other words, at least one premise of the "reversed" argument was incorrect, hence the so-called "argument" became irrelevant.

YMMV, but if you really want to get into discussion of what is or is not a valid argument, and which parts of Neil's post(s) were premises as opposed to argument, then I think you're mis-allocating your time nearly as much as I am :-)

dgs

 is a RISC OS Userdgs on 08/06/04 10:32PM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

Incidentally, how many of the people posting to the argument about bundled applications, have actually looked at what is bundled with the Iyonix? It seems like very few indeed, from what I've seen!

I imagine Drobe have done an article that explains the Iyonix bundled software, hopefully Chris W or someone else can point me and others to a URL ?

(No comments about the Omega bundled software, please, unless you can confirm that it actually *is* all bundled).

dgs

 is a RISC OS Userdgs on 08/06/04 10:35PM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

dgs:

Yes, Peter covered bundled software in his Iyonix review: [link]

Chris. Just me.

 is a RISC OS Userdiomus on 09/06/04 03:36AM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

dgs: but getting into an argument about what is an isn't valid is precisely what you've done. I'm certain you understood the original point I made, so I'm not sure why you persist with this reply.

 is a RISC OS Usermrchocky on 09/06/04 08:14AM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

"Surely porting Java or improving Replay (ie. adding modern codecs to it) and the like would have been a better use of time." They did do some work on replay in 1999 - tidying up mainly but there was a frontend added to the multitasking playback. I don't know whether this was ever released since I don't have select. Modern codecs tend to require more processing power than riscpc (and probably omega) has. However there were more modern (for 1999) codecs developed for moviefs (a version of which was meant to be part of replay 3) - but they were never released due to licensing cost problems.

 is a RISC OS Userkierongreen on 09/06/04 2:04PM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

mrchocky: "but getting into an argument about what is an isn't valid is precisely what you've done."

No.

I suggested the premise fairly obviously wasn't true, I did *not* question the validity of the argument.

Ignoring the difference between the two isn't particularly helpful or useful.

dgs

 is a RISC OS Userdgs on 10/06/04 8:22PM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

I guess explaining the point one more time really is going to be a waste of my time. Please go patronise someone else.

 is a RISC OS Usermrchocky on 11/06/04 07:57AM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

mrchocky: "I guess explaining the point one more time really is going to be a wate of my time"

I'm afraid you didn't have a sensible point to begin with. Sure, people can believe whatever they want, "depending on their point of view", but if what they believe is obviously untrue, they're only fooling themselves.

dgs

 is a RISC OS Userdgs on 11/06/04 08:56AM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

dgs: I guess being insulting is the only way out of this argument for you. As you've continued to miss the point with your unfounded presumptions about what I meant, I guess we should expect no more from you. It's a shame you have to act in such a childish manner.

 is a RISC OS Usermrchocky on 11/06/04 11:21AM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

mrchocky: Do calm down. If you can't defend or explain your point coherently, bluster isn't going to help.

dgs

 is a RISC OS Userdgs on 11/06/04 11:37AM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

Whew!!! :bowdown:

Is the coast all clear for us to come out now? When the fog gets very thick, it's becomes very difficult to see where you're going. (I used to work with a person we all called "The Fog", and some mornings "The Fog" would roll into work quite heavy!) :grin: I would like to make a mere comment, but I'll skip the foggy bit and just move on.

Sometimes I feel that information is either not clear, not up to date on web sites, or certain information won't be released when I'm looking on the web sites of Castle, RISC OS, X Ample, etc., etc. Maybe at times I have a fog related condition on certain days or I just didn't know where to look. I understand that not everything is possible and many people in the RISC OS related business have many things to do to bring us up to date while in the meantime everyone has to find their bread and butter money. We do need to look at ways of retrieving & delivering news to Drobe to keep us more up to date and to the facts of developments and events. Maybe it's just me in my little corner of this world that I miss the boat, but I would love to at times see an update article on various hardware / software. Like the Iyonixs, it's features, bundled software it has, and all that stuff like a new model car release road test. Same with software like Artworks2, showing it's many features, updates, screenshot of effect achieved, etc., etc., again like a car road test report. Yes we do get some articles on these subjects and good technical info at times, but often lacks more info as I was on about before. Why this point is of no greater value to most U.K. or possibly Euro RISC OS user than it appears to me personally, is that I mean in N.Z. we don't have too many users with newer software or hardware like this nor do we have the advantage of dropping in to the RISC OS shop / dealer / distributor to talk and see these things. I would and did drive two or three hours when I lived in Australia, just to look at Acorn / RISC OS stuff, this is not the situation these days as per lack of stock and most product brought here to order only. Anyway, before I get to chapter 12 / Volume 2 of this commentary story, is it possible for more insight and in depth coverage of software and articles, or is this not the pupose of Drobe? Cheers, Steve.

 is a RISC OS Useranon/219.89.80.34 on 13/06/04 03:59AM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

Please login before posting a comment. Use the form on the right to do so or create a free account.

Search the archives

Today's featured article

  • Oregano, Firefox and NetSurf reviewed
    So close yet so far
     27 comments, latest by adrianl on 26/8/05 9:33PM. Published: 25 Aug 2005

  • Random article

  • Game TEK 1608 will be at Wakefield 2001: Artex supply the goods

     Discuss this. Published: 5 May 2001

  • Useful links

    News and media:
    IconbarMyRISCOSArcSiteRISCOScodeANSC.S.A.AnnounceArchiveQercusRiscWorldDrag'n'DropGAG-News

    Top developers:
    RISCOS LtdRISC OS OpenMW SoftwareR-CompAdvantage SixVirtualAcorn

    Dealers:
    CJE MicrosAPDLCastlea4X-AmpleLiquid SiliconWebmonster

    Usergroups:
    WROCCRONENKACCIRUGSASAUGROUGOLRONWUGMUGWAUGGAGRISCOS.be

    Useful:
    RISCOS.org.ukRISCOS.orgRISCOS.infoFilebaseChris Why's Acorn/RISC OS collectionNetSurf

    Non-RISC OS:
    The RegisterThe InquirerApple InsiderBBC NewsSky NewsGoogle Newsxkcddiodesign


    © 1999-2009 The Drobe Team. Some rights reserved, click here for more information
    Powered by MiniDrobeCMS, based on J4U | Statistics
    "I used RISC OS and all I got was this lousy emulator"
    Page generated in 0.4924 seconds.