VirtualAcorn boasts 3000 users - RISC OS News, Software and Information

VirtualAcorn boasts 3000 users

Published: 19th Aug 2005, 17:13:27GMT Source: drobe.co.uk
By Chris Williams

Page 1 of 1

You win a gold star

Emulation software developer VirtualAcorn revealed today that it has bagged its 3000th registered user. The maker of VirtualRiscPC and the discontinued VirtualA5000 is also celebrating its 4th birthday, according to an announcement this afternoon.

The size of VA's customer base is usually a closely guarded secret, fuelling the debate on whether or not sales of emulated hardware eclipse the number of native hardware products shifted. Although, it's known that, at least according to VirtualAcorn, VA5000 was retired after selling "thousands of copies" and it's likely that these sales contributed to today's figure of 3000.

To put this number into context, as far as we're aware, around 4000 copies of RISC OS 4 on ROM, over 2000 PS2MouseMinis and over 1000 NET100 ethernet cards have been shifted over the course of the past 5 years. These sales figures, whilst often seen as gossip or confidential secrets, are useful in gauging the size of the RISC OS market.

To celebrate their birthday, VirtualAcorn are running a special offer on VirtualRiscPC-SE from August 22nd to 26th.

Update at 19:27 19/8/2005
VirtualAcorn has added that the 3000 number is not the total number of products that they have sold - it's the number of registered users in their database.

"The figure includes all VirtualRPC-SE and VirtualRPC-Adjust's sold by us directly, but it doesn't include MicroDigital Alpha's," said VA's Aaron Timbrell.

"The figure also includes some VirtualA5000 sales, although in many cases the same user also has a VirtualRPC, and would only appear once in the database. Also dealer sales of VirtualA5000 aren't included and neither are show sales, unless the customer sent us their details and asked to be out on the database."

Links
VirtualAcorn website

This article has been linked to, or is available in the following formats:

[Printable] [Digg this] [Blog search]

AMS (+0.9) 19/8/05 6:59PM	Given the current Worm problem striking Windows - the operating system Virtual Acorn/VARPC uses- the timing of this announcement probably could have been better - IMHO. But be that as it may, yes VA/VARPC is an impressive piece of software. I'll hold up my hands and say I (did) buy a copy of VA5000 (but not until after an RO4 purchase), and both done at a time when Imago vs Omega was going on and it was not clear how the hardware front would resolve itself. I also had to use a PC to work on files from work - so I felt if I was being railroaded into buying a Windows license I might as well have some RISC OS stuff run on it too). Now that RISC OS has viable alternatives available in the form of a mature platform in the form of Iyonix which is now my preferred platform (or the soon to arrive A9) I would find it more difficult to make the same justification - especially considering that the 98SE that is on that old PC would need to be upgraded to Windows XP just in order to run VARPC - and let's face it I don't want to pay Bill Gates any more money to run RISC OS - thank you very much The real question is the VARPC success at the expense of killing the RISC OS hardware platform and tying our future use to that of Windows - and that only time will tell
ninja 19/8/05 7:22PM	VRPC does not tie the future use of RISC OS to Windows, since there's nothing to stop VRPC being ported to an alternate host OS, provided there is a commercial justification for such a port.
demondb (+4.8) 19/8/05 7:22PM	VARPC certainly has a home, and I cannot understand people who say it is robbing RISC OS hardware manufacturers of sales. I for one would definitely NOT have bought new RISC OS hardware, as I need a PC, so it makes sense to use VARPC. And anyway, the PC I have can run VARPC as fast as an IYONIX (yes, I have tested both), with much faster disk access, and it is portable. VARPC is, if anything, widening RISC OS use in the world. I can see a day when RISC OS hardware ceases, and we all go the way of the PC, it's just a question of which OS you run on it.
ninja 19/8/05 7:30PM	Given that VRPC on a modern PC at least has one concrete advantage over new native hardware (speed), I'd say it will potentially have had to have led to lost sales for native hardware manufacturers. Although I'd concede that probably the vast majority of sales come from users who'd either stick with their RPC until future hardware became cheaper, or who would have entirely abandoned the platform. Also, the existence of a faster way to run RISC OS will also be a driver to the native hardware manufacturers to provide faster hardware. Until VRPC came out, many were happy to stick with their trusty old RPCs, so there was no market for faster, newer ways to run the OS. That said, to deny that VRPC could compete with native hardware in any circumstance is shortsighted.
freder (+1.0) 19/8/05 7:59PM	What are the limitations? I'm very tempted to buy when the Mac version's available.
AMS (+1.0) 19/8/05 8:04PM	demondb said >"VARPC certainly has a home, and I cannot understand people who say it is robbing RISC OS hardware manufacturers of sales. " You can't extrapolate from your case and suggest that VARPC has had no effect on native hardware sales. If (as the numbers suggest) more copies of VARPC/VA have sold than actual hardware there must have been some people who would have opted for VARPC over actual RISC OS hardware - particularly given the "spin" put on by some (I stress not* by Virtual Acorn themselves) such as describing machines running VARPC as being "hybrid computers"* - when in actual fact what was being discussed was a plain ordinary PC running VARPC on top of Windows. *In reply to ninja:* Yes if VARPC is ported to another operating system then yes RISC OS won't be dependant alone on Windows. I would suspect though that while money can be made hawking VARPC on Windows then that's where it's going to stay. Do bear in mind no matter what OS VARPC moves to it makes RISC OS dependant on THAT OS and VARPC - RISC OS becomes dependant and therefore I would argue vulnerable. demondb said >"VARPC is, if anything, widening RISC OS use in the world. I can see a day when RISC OS hardware ceases, and we all go the way of the PC, it's just a question of which OS you run on it." So how many people use VARPC who never used RISC OS on actual RISC OS hardware then ? I'd suggest very few in short it's shuffling the deckchairs on the Titanic time.... I would agree that I can see a day too when RISC OS hardware ceases, and VARPC may well have helped in its own way to acchieve that, thing is what makes you think once we get to that point that you'll have a choice over which OS you use ? Currently Intel/Microsoft/Phoenix (of the BIOS fame) are drawing up a next generation BIOS - given the credentials of the first two organisations there I'd be unwilling to wager that they'd be too keen on allowing people free choice over what OS they use.... and if you think Apple are any better what's this about Digital Rights Management (DRM) being built into the x86 version ????? Nah, our best hope is to keep improving the ARM hardware and keeping RISC OS running "for real" rather than pushing it into a space where ultimately it will not survive.....
ninja (+1.0) 19/8/05 8:31PM	*In reply to AMS:* If by 'vulnerable' you mean vulnerable to worms, viruses and the likes, then I agree. But that's just something you have to put into the comparison of speed and price versus efficient CPUs and not being vulnerable to nasties. If you mean vulnerable to an attack by DRM and not being allowed to install VRPC on the host OS without paying for some additional license check, thereby killing the use of RISC OS on that host OS, and, just assuming we'd stopped using native hardware by then, stopping all of us using RISC OS, then I'd disagree. The existence of VRPC makes it much easier to port RISC OS over to other hardware and OSes. And if all host OSes were to become so offensive to creators of small software then I'm pretty sure hardware and a host OS to run on it would magically become a lot more popular all of a sudden. VRPC has made the use of RISC OS less vulnerable to the whims of a few select companies, while making it more vulnerable to worms and viruses.
AMS 19/8/05 8:52PM	*In reply to ninja:* "If by 'vulnerable' you mean vulnerable to worms, viruses and the likes.." Yes, there is that. It then boils down to if the risk is worth the benefits percieved by the user. As I am a naturally cautious sort I prefer not to take the risk - naturally though not all people take that view. If people wish to use VARPC then I suggest that they must take it upon themselves to ensure that their machines have their PC Antivirus updated regularly - and Windows updates done as well - so that the risks are as low as can be acchieved. *In reply to ninja:* "VRPC has made the use of RISC OS less vulnerable to the whims of a few select companies, while making it more vulnerable to worms and viruses." So it then boils down to which does the greater damage ? I'd also point out that Virtual Acorn are (like ROL, Castle, Ad6 et al) just another company and will no doubt be looking out for their interests while these coincide with that of the RISC OS using public grand if they should ever differ then potentially we're all stuffed. I fear the natural outcome (suggested by demondb) that eventually RISC OS hardware would cease and then rather than having our eggs in two baskets (that of ROL/Ad6 and Castle) it would be in one basket (VA/Microsoft). VRPC for all it's potentially for having RISC OS running on disparate platforms has failed to cause this meaningfully to materialise - and even if it did now with the Mac going to go x86 one can only wonder what effect that would have on VARPC trying to run on a hardware platform that effectively ceased to exist - unless of course emulating ARM on an emulated PowerPC running on an x86 sounds like a sensible proposal to you
VirtualAcorn (+2.5) 19/8/05 8:54PM	With regard to the size of our customer base being a closely guarded secret. Every single product we supply mail order to end users has a customer number on the address label. These numbers start at 2 (1 is reserved for us) and carry on from there. So anyone who has ever purchased directly from us by mail order could easily tell how many registered customers we had at the time their order was processed just by looking at their customer number on the label.
demondb (+0.2) 19/8/05 9:09PM	*In reply to AMS:* "So how many people use VARPC who never used RISC OS on actual RISC OS hardware then ? I'd suggest very few in short it's shuffling the deckchairs on the Titanic time.... " I could word this another way. How many are using VARPC would have left the RISC OS platform instead of buying new hardware. I admit that I am one of them. It seems short sighted to insist the everyone should buy native hardware. What I meant earlier when I said it was a matter of which OS it runs on, should have read which computer it runs on, because as we all know, Windows runs on a multitude of different PC's. And you said it, however you shuffle the deckchairs, you're still on the Titanic.
adamr 19/8/05 9:29PM	*In reply to freder:* "What are the limitations?" None, as far as I can tell *In reply to ams:* "You can't extrapolate from your case and suggest that VARPC has had no effect on native hardware sales." You're right - it could have increased hardware sales by tempting ex-users back into the market. "So how many people use VARPC who never used RISC OS on actual RISC OS hardware then ? I'd suggest very few in short it's shuffling the deckchairs on the Titanic time...." In my opinion, RISC OS is not in a state where we can really have the luxury of attracting brand new users. However, there are a /vast/ number of ex-users out there and if VA temps some back then that's great Adam
AMS (+1.0) 19/8/05 9:32PM	*In reply to demondb:* "It seems short sighted to insist the everyone should buy native hardware." In fact I am insisting on nothing. I am simply stating the obvious - IMHO VARPC damages the sale of REAL RISC OS hardware. It's then down to people to decide if putting Microsoft in charge of RISC OS's future is a good idea. At least with actual RISC OS hardware about that risk is limited - if RISC OS hardware dissapears then you are dependant fully on Virtual Acorn and Microsoft for RISC OS's future. *In reply to demondb:* "What I meant earlier when I said it was a matter of which OS it runs on, should have read which computer it runs on, because as we all know, Windows runs on a multitude of different PC's. " And that matters because ? If at the end of the day Windows (on all those different PC's) can't run VARPC you're stuffed - be it a Dell, an Acer, a Siemens-Nixdorf, be it based on a P-IV/AMD64/Semperon etc., makes no difference if Windows just won't run VARPC. Or if Windows changes in such a way that it is uneconomic for Virtual Acorn to update VARPC to keep it running on newer PC hardware. Yes I know that is conjecture and may not necessarily happen - but a multitude of PC hardware running ONE OS (Windows) is still just running ONE OS (Windows) and leaves you dependant on Microsoft and having different badges on the PC Box or a different brand of PC processor does not get around that. Ask the former users of DR-DOS they know all about this sort of thing
AMS 19/8/05 9:54PM	*In reply to adamr:* "it [VARPC] could have increased hardware sales by tempting ex-users back into the market. " A singularly inefficient way of doing it. Yep, you buy a PC with Windows XP to buy a further piece of software (VARPC) to run RISC OS for you and then you're so overcome with joy you buy an Iyonix ? Is this really likely ? Really ? I would suspect a person with an old chugging RPC sees VARPC running on a cheap PC - it's faster than their old box - the package costs less than an Iyonix - YIPPEE they buy the PC. Technically I suppose they're still using RISC OS - but the only new hardware bought was a PC. Then at some point they say - nah, why boot VARPC at all - save the time - just run Word/Excel/Powerpoint - game set and match Microsoft.
adamr 19/8/05 10:47PM	*In reply to AMS:* "Is this really likely ? Really ?" I don't see why not - ever heard of "try before you buy"? In any case, my comment was rhetorical - the point I was trying to get across is that it is far from clear exactly what impact VA has had on native hardware sales. "Then at some point they say - nah, why boot VARPC at all - save the time - just run Word/Excel/Powerpoint - game set and match Microsoft." I don't understand your point. Surely if using MSOffice is best for some individual user then that's what they should do, by definition? In any case, all this talk of hardware leaves me cold. The software is what interests me - and it seems likely, to me, that VA has benefited the RISC OS software scene. Adam
Revin Kevin 20/8/05 2:33AM	Happy Birthday to Virtual Acorn.
SkyPilot (+1.0) 20/8/05 8:54AM	I don't think the effect of VA on sales of realAcorn hardware is as simple as some people make out. Sure there will be some people who bought VA and chose not to buy new the realAcorn hardware that they could have bought. Mainly these will be people who might have bought an Iyonix. However, I guess for many of them buying realAcorn wasn't a proposition because they needed a portable machne (which remains non-existent) or because they also needed a realWindows machine because of the limitations of RISC OS. What strikes me now is that the people who bought VA because realAcorn wasn't a proposition may now be changing their minds with the advent of a cheaper realAcorn machine. So in these cases VA has kept them using RISC OS when they could easily have gone over completely to another OS - and now they might well be buying new real Acorn hardware. If this is the case, and I suspect there is something in it, then VA will have helped sales of realAcorn by keeping them in the game. Of course, no-one really knows for certain!
charles 20/8/05 9:08AM	as a VA user (MD Alpha, actually), I bought it to get a laptop - there being no native RISC OS alternative [despite at least two attempts by firms to make one]. VA suffers from having an underlying Windows OS. Virus checking with McAfee makes VA almost unuseable because of speed, and was probably responsible for a complete crash resulting in the need to reinstall. I'm now using AVG Free, as suggested by VA, but it needs to go through a checking routine when turning the machine on. It takes 3 or 4 minutes after turning on before I can use RISC OS. There is no alternative, but I wish there was.
Hertzsprung 20/8/05 12:55PM	They should've given a copy of Star Fighter to their most recent customer
SimonC 20/8/05 1:42PM	The split between VRPC users using laptops and those using it on desktop machines would be very interesting to know, but I doubt there's any reliable way of finding out. If the emulator can do everything the native hardware can, and faster, and cheaper, then even if there are some other issues going that way then frankly the native hardware side is in a bad state anyway - without VRPC to highlight that would just be burying heads in the sand.
simo 20/8/05 2:36PM	Damned impressive sales figures I'd say. I expect the majority of that lot is schools who have been forced to switch to PC's, or people who want a RO laptop. I would definitely pay 70ukp for a Linux version, although that's not done yet - I heard a Mac version will be done first? I don't use Windows enough these days to justify buying the Windows version, I guess I could run it under VMWare. Come to think of it I sold my RiscPC's with all my RISC OS software anyway, might still have my RedSquirrel images somewhere.... I'd love a VirtualAcorn that allowed you to use any OS like the RedSquirrel Dev version
hEgelia (+0.9) 20/8/05 4:19PM	*In reply to simo:* A Linux port has been shown working, but support for it was too demanding... Too bad, eh Perhaps you can try the vanilla version out under Wine. What if AMS will be right? What if VA users will prefer Windows / Mac OS X software above RO software, if it will outperform native machines in all respects? What if dealers rather sell a jolly VA bundle, than supporting native machines and find out their customers gradually stop using RO software? Thankfully Castle would never let that happen! They would rather stop the license, than see their beloved platform become cyborged, won't they? Sure, they need us, remember?
Trapper 20/8/05 8:32PM	The emulated operating system is only "vulnerable" in the hands of foolish Windows users. I have had spyware problems, but no viruses, trojans et al on any of my Windows systems in a great number of years. Frankly native RISC OS hardware is still very expensive given the relatively small market and limited sales. I could pay £1000 for an Iyonix or I could spend that and build up two extremely decent PCs and have money spare for a couple of VRPC licenses.
simo 20/8/05 8:36PM	I've always believed in just using the best tool for the job. I use RISC OS, Windows and Linux, well don't use RISC OS anymore, but that's besides the point. I use Windows for DVD creation, and Linux for pretty much anything else. I had to make some letterhead, a logo and some compliment slips the other day and started on OpenOffice.org, then got annoyed as there are no decent vector graphics programs for Linux really, so thought OK, I'll switch to Windows and use Office2003 and Illustrator, then got fed up of the crappy export options (needed decent PDF and Word97 really). If I'd used Artworks and Publisher+ (maybe even Techwriter Pro+) I could have done it in about an hour instead of the day or so it took (eventually in a mixture of OO.org Draw exporting as WMF into Word and printing to Acrobat). So for me, in that instance, RISC OS would have been the best tool, but then for internet and programming Linux kills RISC OS/Windows, and for DVD creation and video editting Windows kills the others. Glad I don't have a Mac to confuse the issue even more So what I'm trying to say is that I'd be very surprised if many people would just switch to using Windows after using VirtualAcorn. Oh and hEglelia, RedSquirrel doesn't work nicely under WINE (mouse issues at least) but works fine under VMWare, as you're basically running a complete Windows install. Some interesting screenshots for ya though: http://gallery.the-jedi.co.uk/emulators
ROHC (-0.5) 21/8/05 11:57AM	*In reply to simo:* so why the hell didn't you use a RISC OS computer for your task? & isn't VMWare still very expensive these days?
AMS (+2.4) 21/8/05 12:05PM	Skypilot said >"So in these cases VA has kept them using RISC OS when they could easily have gone over completely to another OS - and now they might well be buying new real Acorn hardware. If this is the case, and I suspect there is something in it, then VA will have helped sales of realAcorn by keeping them in the game. " That's a bit like saying all the people waiting for the Omega to appear kept people running RISC OS - so therefore Omega was a good thing. While (perhaps) in a few instances that was the case in the long run damage occurred (the long overdue Omega, loss of confidence and eventually MD enticing ROL to have a release for VARPC on the MD Alpha - which I would argue further damaged "real"* RISC OS hardware sales). I've had a good long think about all of this and perhaps* things are not as bad as I thought. Perhaps the "lower" VARPC-SE price is down to the fact that with the lower priced Iyonix (and soon to follow the A9Home retail version) available people were doing the maths and saying - "the PC/VARPC option is not* the cheaper option anymore"* and that there are in fact "real" ARM hardware alternatives - in short VA is having to lower their price to compete against a resurgent ARM hardware platform. If that were the motivation I'd be somewhat less worried. Trapper said > "The emulated operating system is only "vulnerable" in the hands of foolish Windows users. " Yes quite, but remember many people who buy VARPC may not have used windows before (they are RISC OS users in the main). They may not know that the average time for an unprotected Windows PC to become infected on the internet is 20 minutes, they may not realise you need broadband to ensure that you can download Windows and/or AV patches quickly enough to ensure your machine is protected before the viruses strike. Simply using VARPC on Windows does not somehow render them immune to viruses or the need to maintain the Windows patch level currency or AV updates. People using VARPC ARE windows users and must forget the RISC OS world - if you want to run RISC OS under Windows you have to do so under WINDOWS rules. adamr said > "I don't understand your point. Surely if using MSOffice is best for some individual user then that's what they should do, by definition?" I did not say they couldn't nor did I indicate that Word was preferable for anything. What I meant was that people would in time get used to Windows and through sheer convenience just load and run the available Windows apps rather than loading VARPC (delay) loading techwriter (or whatever further delay), access file from HostPC etc.,. Windows takes long enough to boot without adding the VARPC delay. Over time RISC OS usage would drop - if you like VARPC is a means to allow RISC OS users to get used to windows - a sort of stepping stone to become a Windows user. Microsoft did such a thing for WordPerfect users - they provided key stroke compatibility in Word so that WP users could get used to and finally switch to Word - which is of course what they did. This infers nothing about the appropriateness or otherwise of Windows Software over RISC OS software - all it says is that people like convenience - if you can do something with one or two fewer mouse clicks and fewer delays people will generally opt for the more convenient. I am not blaming them for that either - its just a natural consequence of trying to graft one OS on top of another - generally the base OS (Windows in this case) is the one that will be used and whatever apps are associated with that.
adamr 21/8/05 4:02PM	*In reply to AMS:* "generally the base OS (Windows in this case) is the one that will be used and whatever apps are associated with that" Only if the two are equally good at every job. The whole point of using VRPC is that people want to do certain things in RISC OS rather than Windows. You are suggesting that the benefits of using RISC OS are so tiny that they are outweighed by the 20 second delay, once or twice a day, as VRPC loads up. If that's the case then, frankly, no amount of cheap dedicated hardware (or whatever you are proposing) is going to keep people with RISC OS! Adam
steelpillow (+1.6) 21/8/05 7:29PM	Re. vulnerability, I would suggest that the Wintel platform is less likely to die than the real ARM hardware. On that basis, ARM hardware draws RISC OS users away from the "safe" option. Wintel/DRM licensing will always be cheaper than ARM motherboard development. So ARM hardware also draws users away from the lower-cost, higher-performance option. Now I am not saying that is all a good thing, but it does seem to be an valid angle to consider. What users want is to be able to choose the best hardware, then choose the best desktop OS regardless of the hardware, then choose the best apps regardless of either. RISC OS should aim to be the OS of choice on as many platforms as possible: roll on VA Mac and Linux. And it should make migrating apps across as easy as possible - roll on the Unix Porting Project too!
Gulli 21/8/05 7:54PM	Maybe migrating RISC OS to the x86 platform would be the best possible solution in the long run. Not the cheapest though I'd guess.
adamr 21/8/05 10:09PM	*In reply to gulli:* That would be great, I think. However, it's been pointed out before that it simply is not viable.
Gulli 21/8/05 11:01PM	*In reply to adamr:* No, probably not viable but perhaps a move to an existing kernel like BSD could be a way. Not that it would be much more viable
Use the forum for more comments on this article