AMS> I'd also point out that compared to several other OSes the GUI appearance of *both* versions of RISC OS look very dated. So given that both look stone age the decider should be technical advanages - particularly the ability to run on new more capabile hardware while at the same as offering users of legacy platforms an option to use code on a *single* OS rather than the forked set up we have at the moment. RO5 offers this RO6 does (IMHO) not.
IMHO RISC OS has always had the dated look, the granite desktop has been around for years!
I couldn't agree more with your thoughts - technical advantages, esp. those ones which have allowed at lest 12 videos to run simultaneously on the desktop and one of those lip sync'd - aka !Replay
Two forked versions of the same OS - I just wish one would feed the other - fedora / red hat?
However, sadly we'll always have people bleating on about the lack of this and that, rather than its abilities and historically RISC OS has been ahead in some areas for years.
The concept of new hardware is a good one and
in times where the polar ice cap IS melting - new low power / high performance systems to play music and watch videos, etc. can't be bad thing!
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
Star Fighter 3000: The Next Generation review Star Fighter 3000: The Next Generation was born from the 3D0 version of the original SF3K that was ported back to RISC OS and this year freed from programmers' hard discs for the platform to enjoy, writes Andrew Weston. In this review Andrew weighs up much-improved graphics and sound against playability and stability. 19 comments, latest by AW on 9/12/08 8:45PM. Published: 17 Nov 2008