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

Confirm comment report request

Spriteman: A very interesting question and a very valid historical comparison. But we shouldn't look at history with rose-tinted glasses.

You compare the Iyonix launch (as compared with the previous top end system) with the A5000 launch (as compared with the previous - effective - top end system).

Remember that when the Risc PC was launched it had a 30MHz ARM610 CPU, with no FPA. In the previous generation of hardware you could have a 33MHz ARM3 or a 25MHz ARM3 with FPA. That's not to say the Risc PC was a bad move (in fact it was a great move), it's just that in one respect it hadn't really moved on.

In addition, you also ignore the fact that the original Risc PC did *not* have 16-bit sound.

I've rambled extensively elsewhere about how wonderful the Risc PC is, so let's avoid that here. Suffice to say that it was a major step forward in some areas, but less so in others. I've put up with people at user groups lecturing me for 20 minutes at a time about how stupid Acorn were not to separate video and other functions onto separate, cheap, cards.

Looking at the other side of the comparison, the Iyonix compared to the Risc PC hasn't even kept the "maximum" CPU speed the same. And it adds USB and, in particular, PCI. In some areas it could have done more - but changing *everything* at once is dangerous and foolish.

Everyone needs their own definition of what "can't sensibly" be done.

Maybe Castle have foolishly left out opportunities to tick boxes for things that are just impossible on the Risc PC; preferring to move forwards on some of the most important things like the ability to use newer processors and hardware independence (graphics in particular).

If so, it's less exciting, but we should thank them for it anyway.


 is a RISC OS Userdgs on 22/7/04 9:27PM
[ Reply | Permalink | Report ]

Click on the button below to confirm you wish to flag up this comment to the website's administrators. Abuse of this service will be frowned upon and it should only be used to notify us of comments that are extremely distasteful, indecent or otherwise unlawful. If you disagree with an opinion expressed or fact stated in a comment, please take part in the debate rather than expect it to be removed.

Return to the drobe.co.uk front page


Reporting user / IP: /
Comment GID: 11766
Timestamp: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 13:59:37 +0000

Search the archives

Today's featured article

  • Should the TCO of RISC OS be higher?
    Show us the money
     61 comments, latest by datawave on 16/06/05 5:07PM. Published: 17 Feb 2005

  • Random article

  • Education to obscurity: How Mac users view RISC OS
    Strong start to vanishing finish
     Discuss this. Published: 1 Mar 2007

  • Useful links

    News and media:

    Top developers:
    RISCOS LtdRISC OS OpenMW SoftwareR-CompAdvantage SixVirtualAcorn

    CJE MicrosAPDLCastlea4X-AmpleLiquid SiliconWebmonster


    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
    "Drobe often has glaring factual errors that could simply be avoided with the bare minimum of research"
    Page generated in 0.0762 seconds.