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

Reply to thread

There seems to be a lot of opposition to getting RISC OS onto other architectures. I was having a discussion with a non-RO using friend of mine about the issue and he made a very good point. "Wouldn't you like to see RISC OS being able to be run on any desktop computer?" Now might not be the best time to be concentrating on a serious x86 port or whatever but I can't understand why you wouldn't want this flexibility. To me, the 'holy grail' would be RO getting to a point where it had the features/software to draw large amounts of users from other OSs, who could simply buy some off-the-shelf hardware and run it. And if things ever came to that stage, what is there to stop Castle developing x86 or PPC machines?

"The only thing I like about RISC OS is the UI and (some) of the applications. If these can be ported to another system, with more stability; better hardware compatibility and greater room for growth, why should I care?"

Perhaps because in such a case, Castle, current owners of the OS, would lose all their income from selling desktop ARM hardware, and desktop RISC OS itself would disappear.

"RISC OS is an OS. It's a tool. It's not some idol to be placed on a pedestal and worshipped. Other systems can do almost everything RISC OS can do, but better and faster."

If RISC OS hadn't been treated as an idol I wouldn't be using it now! My first experience with RO was using Acorns daily for DTP at my work. I came to love the intuitiveness and simplicity of the GUI, and it certainly looked better than anything else at the time (early 2000). Had there not been a fanatical userbase which put RO on a pedestal and actively promoted its benefits, companies which continued to develop and support the users, then I would've said "Oh, nice OS, but Acorn is gone. What a shame," assumed that nobody would bother developing things anymore and went off and bought a Power Mac.

"The radical thing that needs to happen is that RISC OS users should get behind their platform, support its hardware manufacturers and stick with it. In our small little pond we have some influence - the same can't be said in the much larger Linux (or Windows) pool."

This is crucial. RISC OS is lucky to still have a small but fiercely loyal userbase which is enough to keep desktop development ticking along. This needs to continue if the OS is to survive in a dignified form (i.e. a complete OS, not just UI functionality bodged onto KDE in Linux). In an open source situation, we need a community who actually give a toss about RO, so meaningful development gets done, rather than people who would rather take bits away and use them in other OSes.

 is a RISC OS Usertimephoenix on 27/08/06 07:57AM
[ 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

  • Brush up your ARM coding skills with Matthew Bloch's assembler guide

     Discuss this. Published: 27 Feb 2001

  • Random article

  • 100MBit cards part two
    Finally shipping
     2 comments, latest by diomus on 30/4/02 2:34PM. Published: 29 Apr 2002

  • 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
    "The Drobe 'Best of 2005 awards' seems to have been infiltrated by a form of favouritism or censorship"
    Page generated in 0.063 seconds.