VisitorQ (+0.8)
10/5/06 7:32PM |
I would like to buy a copy of VirtualRPC-AdjustSA but I won't until the copy protection is removed or changed to a more acceptable method. |
nico (+0.6)
10/5/06 9:53PM |
in reply to VisitorQ;
Well that's very easy then, don't buy.
General notes;
I'm getting a bit fed up with all people moaning about this copy protection while running VRPC on an OS with the same type of protection. Maybe because the all run hacked versions anyway ( but hey it's Bill so it's ok).
I'm used to copy protection whatever form it may be, most protections I've seen sofar can be broken and normally have been broken. But stop this moaning if you don't like it don't buy.
VRPC notes;
Looking forward to this, hopefully we can now have a Select version which leaves the high res screen intact.
|
VisitorQ (+1.0)
10/5/06 10:11PM |
In reply to nico:
The point is if it becomes apparent to VirtualAcorn that enough people won't buy the product due to the copy protection maybe they will tone it down a bit.
When activating my legal copy of Windows XP I've never had to phone Microsoft even when I've changed hardware around a lot. Also it is unlikely that
Microsoft will disappear overnight leaving me with no way to activate the software. There is also the point I can defer activation to a time that suits me.
I don't think the same can be said of VirtualAcorn's products. |
Stewy 
10/5/06 11:02PM |
This is SUCH good news. Faster and nice new features is excellent. A very reasonable upgrade cost too (I'm going from VRPC-Adjust to the new StrongARM version).
In reply to VisitorQ:
I wouldn't want to be without RISC OS on a laptop. Aaron's support has been exemplary and this new release is evidence of VirtualAcorn's commitment to their products. Ultimately, though I sort of understand your reluctance, there's no doubt in my mind that you are missing out.
In reply to NB:
In a recent thread on Drobe, David Holden noted "Arrangements have already been made to ensure that there would be no problems if VA ceased trading." |
hzn (+1.1)
11/5/06 6:45AM |
To VirtualAcorn:
Hey, good news indeed!
In reply to VisitorQ:
I agree - same here, that is I don't mind the copy protection but I do mind the way registration is done.
In reply to nico:
You write "I'm getting a bit fed up with all people moaning about this copy protection while running VRPC on an OS with the same type of protection." First of all the moaning was not mainly about the copy protection but the registration procedure which I don't put up with either (thus following your suggestion to not buy it). And there is a very major difference as for registering! For Windows XP the registration can be postponed for some time, can be done at any time of the day via Internet, can be done during office hours by phone. With VirtualRPC I start the setup, see the key, then have to interrupt to get the key before I can continue. And in case of upgrade/refresh/crash I have to wait for UK office hours to be able to reinstall it - you got to be kidding. Since I use RISC OS for day-by-day things like email etc. I am not into running it in a way that to be able to then read my email so that I use native hardware. |
hubersn (+1.0)
11/5/06 8:41AM |
I really hope that those "arrangements" are not the same than the ones Cerilica made for Vantage.
Apart from the usage protection employed by VRPC, I am very happy with the product, and it is certainly nice to see it progressing. |
krisa (+0.3)
11/5/06 8:41AM |
Could someone clarify something for me: what is the great advantage to emulating a StrongARM processor over emulating a 700 (which is what I believe VRPC has emulated up until now)? After all, the major advantage when I upgraded my 'proper' RiscPC from a 600 to a StrongARM was the speed increase - and obviously, a modern PC running VRPC is rather nippy anyway! So what does emulating a StrongARM get for me?
(This isn't intended as a fight-picking question - I honestly want to know!) |
druck (+0.2)
11/5/06 9:11AM |
Still no Linux or Mac versions  |
arawnsley (+2.7)
11/5/06 9:34AM |
Advantage of SA core is that certain additional instructions become available, benefiting optimised code. For example, several of our games, and also AMplayer and the like, have SA optimisations. They work on 710 systems of course, but operations that could be done in one instruction, then take many times more, reducing performance. There are also programs that only work on StrongARM (eg. a few of our RO4/SA updates for the old Krisalis titles). I should stress I haven't checked the above, but these are the benefits I would expect to see.
Also, if you have software optimised for hardware FP, the 7500FE core will probably help, as I'd imagine it offers a near-enough 1:1 mapping of FP operations to x86FP. |
JGZimmerle (+1.1)
11/5/06 9:35AM |
@krisa: There is some software, that checks if a StrongARM CPU is present and will refuse to run if this is not the case. |
flibble
11/5/06 10:50AM |
Of course, I suspect there's more software that doesn't work on the SA due to the split data and instructon caches than software that was written for SA only. Though I doubt they're emulating the split cache (or any cache at all), so this is probably the best of both worlds. |
SimonC (+0.2)
11/5/06 10:54AM |
Hoorah for StrongARM emulation! Now I don't have any need to be reminded that there's Windows sitting there when I want to listen to an Ogg file, or an MP3 stream (due to DigitalCD's discsample using StrongARM instructions, which wasn't an unreasonable thing to do when nothing slower in terms of the real hardware was fast enough to do the job anyway). |
simo (+1.0)
11/5/06 11:08AM |
redsquirrel has had SA support for years, the arm7500 emulation always used to run faster and supported the fpa2 module (and allow you to use 4mb vram) of course if you need sa instructions....
i remember there was some reason vrpc-se used arm700 emulation instead, just can't think what it was, something to do with the mouse I think.
shame there's no linux version and we still have the copy-protection! how long for the torrent I wonder....
hehe, I wonder if vrpc-sa will have select4 support before the iyonix  |
hEgelia (+2.6)
11/5/06 12:28PM |
In reply to simo:
I expect Select 4 will initially run on everything except the Iyonix when it finally comes out.
To VirtualAcorn:
Very nice progress, also better integration with Windows it seems. Still, could you elaborate on the Linux / Mac OS X situation, please? In the past you've shown us both a Linux and Mac OS X version of VRPC, so it really tickles me; when can we hope to see these (or one out of two) released? |
JohnB (+1.0)
11/5/06 1:26PM |
The large disparity between the amount of work needed to run Select 4 on VRPC vs the Iyonix means it's clear the emulator will have this latest version running first.
Hopefully there will be some indication from RISCOS Ltd this saturday as to how they are progressing with their plans for some kind of Select release on the Iyonix.
|
Stewy
11/5/06 8:29PM |
In reply to JohnB:
Paul Middleton is also going to be at ROUGOL on Monday 15th May 2006, talking about "significant new developments for RISCOS Ltd, including RISC OS Select 4. Paul will be demonstrating RISC OS on an A9home computer, and on a demo
version of Virtual RiscPC for Apple Mac OS X."
Sounds excellent, and the fresh-from-Wakefield timing is perfect:
http://rougol.jellybaby.net/
Presumably, given the large number of Iyonix owners at ROUGOL, someone will raise the issue of Select for Iyonix |
jc
12/5/06 12:03AM |
In reply to Stewy:
And at RONWUG on Wednesday 17th May.
Paul shouldn't be misled by the number of A9s that are visible at every meeting - we too have a good number of Iyonix owners, and more than one or two likely to ask about Select 4 on RiscPCs. |
| |
