24-Apr-2024 13:10 GMT.		 UNDER CONSTRUCTION
Anonymous, there are 22 items in your selection
[Web] RISC OS vs. AmigaOSANN.lu
Posted on 03-May-2004 03:42 GMT by Ronald St-Maurice22 comments
View flat
View list
Are we so dissimilar? If you asked us to list the troubling issues facing the RISC OS platform right now, the lack of more modern hardware support and the OS development split between Castle and RISCOS Ltd. would probably be there, right at the top, beating other problems like the USB split between Castle and Simtec and the gradual slowdown in software development... More...
RISC OS vs. AmigaOS : Comment 1 of 22ANN.lu
Posted by Ole-Egil on 03-May-2004 11:07 GMT
Apparently not, considering people started posting Seehunds petition to it.

Seehund:
Get a life ;-)
RISC OS vs. AmigaOS : Comment 2 of 22ANN.lu
Posted by Sammy Nordström on 03-May-2004 12:25 GMT
In reply to Comment 1 (Ole-Egil):
Sigh...
RISC OS vs. AmigaOS : Comment 3 of 22ANN.lu
Posted by itix on 03-May-2004 13:04 GMT
What the hell is RISCOS anyway? I never saw RISCOS system or software for RISCOS or RISCOS users. As I see it RISCOS is dead.Why should anyone care for RISCOS?
RISC OS vs. AmigaOS : Comment 4 of 22ANN.lu
Posted by pixie on 03-May-2004 13:09 GMT
Seehund strikes again! ;)
RISC OS vs. AmigaOS : Comment 5 of 22ANN.lu
Posted by Amon_Re on 03-May-2004 13:27 GMT
In reply to Comment 3 (itix):
Many people feel the same way about AOS & MOS...
The more alternatives out there the better me thinks

Cheers
RISC OS vs. AmigaOS : Comment 6 of 22ANN.lu
Posted by Kjetil on 03-May-2004 13:35 GMT
Funny reading...
They don't have clue about AmigaOS, and I have no clue about RiscOS.
RISC OS vs. AmigaOS : Comment 7 of 22ANN.lu
Posted by JKD on 03-May-2004 13:44 GMT
In reply to Comment 3 (itix):
Honestly have no clue if the former Acorn machines even had a market outside the UK....would be unsurprising if most of the rest of the world had little clue what an Acorn Risc Machine was...

The ARM stuff was awesome way back when Opost home computer revolutio (BBC MIcro, Sinclair ZX81, Spectrum, Vic20, C64 et al.) but I think it was a 'solution' without a market.

I'd be tempted to suggest that the only difference between RiscOS and AmigaOS is the number of users still active.

Steve
RISC OS vs. AmigaOS : Comment 8 of 22ANN.lu
Posted by Don Cox on 03-May-2004 14:07 GMT
In reply to Comment 7 (JKD):
"The ARM stuff was awesome way back when Opost home computer revolutio (BBC MIcro, Sinclair ZX81, Spectrum, Vic20, C64 et al.) but I think it was a 'solution' without a market."

The main market was British schools. A big advantage of the Acorn machines was that not only the OS but some useful applications were in ROM. The kids couldn't mess it up.

The Amiga never made it in education because it didn't have built in networking. Networking a classroom full of A500s would be very expensive.

The Acorn machines were gradually replaced by poor quality PCs from a company called Research Machines.
RISC OS vs. AmigaOS : Comment 9 of 22ANN.lu
Posted by Graham_nli on 03-May-2004 14:50 GMT
The few Acorn fans at school were such snobs... they never worked out why there were 2 people sitting around the Acorn and 10 around the Amigas.

The Acorn did have a lot more processing power than the Amiga, its little 8MHz ARM processor was a better processor than a 7.3MHz 68000. Sadly the graphics were simple framebuffer as far as I recall. 8 channel audio though, but I don't know how much work the audio chip did compared with Paula.

I still think that C= should have made a more powerful version of the A500 back in 1988 or so to sell along side for a couple of hundred quid more. Full 1MB memory and a processor that was at least twice as fast. It would have provided the "drool" machine for people that could only afford the A500, it would have provided a higher spec machine for games that needed more processing power (3d games for example) and the cost would have come down. Because the faster processor version existed, games would have been written for it, driving demand for the faster machine, and creating a necessary upgrade routine, like with current PCs. The A600 and A1200 were too little, too late.
RISC OS vs. AmigaOS : Comment 10 of 22ANN.lu
Posted by Darth_X on 03-May-2004 14:56 GMT
In reply to Comment 8 (Don Cox):
And now those poor quality PCs and maybe even Acorns can be replaced with Pegasos systems! ;)
RISC OS vs. AmigaOS : Comment 11 of 22ANN.lu
Posted by Christophe Decanini on 03-May-2004 15:10 GMT
In reply to Comment 8 (Don Cox):
Weren't the Archimedes with Riscos the first end user computers with a program/task bar ?
RISC OS vs. AmigaOS : Comment 12 of 22ANN.lu
Posted by minator on 03-May-2004 15:27 GMT
In reply to Comment 7 (JKD):
>Honestly have no clue if the former Acorn machines even had a market
>outside the UK....would be unsurprising if most of the rest of the
>world had little clue what an Acorn Risc Machine was...

Probably true but the ironic thing is they probably own one!
The ARM CPU Acorn created was spun off into a different company and there's more of those things sold per year than x86 CPUs - for instance they have a huge chunk of the Mobile Phone market.
RISC OS vs. AmigaOS : Comment 13 of 22ANN.lu
Posted by Kolbjørn Barmen on 03-May-2004 16:25 GMT
In reply to Comment 3 (itix):
Well, having used both, I can say that there are lots of things in RiscOS we have yet to see in AmigaOS; unicode and modular system for networking filesystems for instance (meaning that you can access smb, nfs and whatnot through the same interface, the protocols are implemented as plugins)

On the other hand, RiscOS has no command line as we know it (their command line is more alike ARexx Shell) and also RiscOS is cooperative multitasking.
Also I find the userinterface a tad too much focused on drag and drop.

Oh, and btw.. the Windows taskbar? Stolen from RiscOS :)
RISC OS vs. AmigaOS : Comment 14 of 22ANN.lu
Posted by Joe "Floid" Kanowitz on 03-May-2004 16:57 GMT
In reply to Comment 12 (minator):
As far as I can tell, the big difference is that all the ARM solutions have stuck with ARM cores... Which would be akin to limiting Amiga to ColdFire in this day and age.

There seem to be differing opinions of how competetive the RiscPCs were when released, and I vaguely remember someone digging one up or importing one (to the US) back in the BBS days... It seems that however much attention they may've deserved then, the present offerings have the prices of A1s or Pegasosen, but even less performance.

Amusingly, whoever's doing RiscOS now had some sort of GPL squabble a year or two back, but it's been a while, and I can't remember what the issue was; it seems to have gotten resolved.
RISC OS vs. AmigaOS : Comment 15 of 22ANN.lu
Posted by Ronald St-Maurice on 03-May-2004 17:14 GMT
It's not very pretty, the marble texture is not very pleasing to the eyes. But I'd still love to try RISCOS out.

One thing that bothers me though is this: 26/32bit C/C++ development suite annual subscription/. I have heard of 24-bit memory addressing (i80286 protected mode, found on MS OS/2 and Xenix) and 24-bit colour mode but 26-bit?

And for some weird stuff: they have Intel inside too. lol
RISC OS vs. AmigaOS : Comment 16 of 22ANN.lu
Posted by Seehund on 03-May-2004 17:36 GMT
In reply to Comment 1 (Ole-Egil):
Huh?
Since there's a smiley I guess there's a joke somewhere in your post, but I must be a particularly humourless bore today because I just can't seem to find it.

BTW, someone posting a link to my website doesn't deprive my life of content. I haven't even had any extrasensory perception of this earth shattering event today.

BTW2, this is not "Seehund's petition". It's the petition of everyone who signs it.

BTW3: Muhahahaah! Taste my Hyperlink Wrath above and prepare to be brainwashed! ;)
RISC OS vs. AmigaOS : Comment 17 of 22ANN.lu
Posted by Graham_nli on 03-May-2004 20:21 GMT
In reply to Comment 15 (Ronald St-Maurice):
The 26-bit addressing is a quirk of the early ARM designs. More modern ARM designs don't have that restriction, and even old designs like ARM7 only have it as a backwards compatibility issue. As this was designed in 1984, a 64MB address space would have been seen as amazingly huge, and it simplified some of the other implementation issues.

ARM1 was used in BBC Micro second processor units. ARM2 was used in the Acorn Archimedes. 32-bit addressing arrived with the ARM Version 3 (ARM6, ARM60, ARM600, ARM610, etc) processor / macrocell.

I think that ARM are currently on Version 5 or 6 of their instruction set.
RISC OS vs. AmigaOS : Comment 18 of 22ANN.lu
Posted by Hammer on 04-May-2004 08:16 GMT
In reply to Comment 8 (Don Cox):
>The Amiga never made it in education because it didn't have built in >networking. Networking a classroom full of A500s would be very expensive.
Note that Amiga** has made it to certain section of the TAFE* system in Oz.

*Part of Oz's tertiary education system.
**(Recalling) Mostly, Amiga 2000, Scala and corporate presentation/multimedia.
RISC OS vs. AmigaOS : Comment 19 of 22ANN.lu
Posted by Raffaele on 05-May-2004 06:40 GMT
Well... the author of the article simply points regarding the situation of the market, the userbase and the production of software...

There are no comparisons between the two OSes and the different hardware systems...

So it is useless to chat about these thingies...

Correctly interpreting his article reveals that situation is that RiscOS lays in a worst situation than Amiga OS...

And he could cry and cry that RiscOS lays in the same situation as AmigaOS, but the cruel truth fact is that RiscOS has a VERY VERY POOR USERBASE...

At least Amiga can count on over 15.000 fanatics worldwide... but RiscOS fans are how much... 1500? 2000?

A number that couldn't reach ignition point that potentially has Amigabase...

Important now for Amiga (Both AONE and Peggy) is not to lose all these interested people...

...mainly all these UNIQUE persons...
RISC OS vs. AmigaOS : Comment 20 of 22ANN.lu
Posted by dirty dave on 05-May-2004 09:27 GMT
In reply to Comment 7 (JKD):
yeah we had Acorn machines down here in Tasmania (australia) they sucked arse basically, nah they were ok i guess, and about the toolbar, i reckon they probably were, i remember using em in grade four (1990) and they had the taskbar in the Os then, i think winblows would have still been at whatever was before win95 (3.1 was it called? Im to young to know this shit)
RISC OS vs. AmigaOS : Comment 21 of 22ANN.lu
Posted by Kjetil on 05-May-2004 19:08 GMT
In reply to Comment 19 (Raffaele):
Yes looked trow feature list of RiscOS 4 on www.riscos.com, I can't say it can be compare whit the feature list of AmigaOS 4, I totally agree whit Raffaele there is nothing to compare.

It most be a way to get this other communities whit oss, maybe it's called marketing, AmigaOS/MorphOS needs to provide some of the things they need, to be of any interest, on the other hand we can't trow away Amiga features to become more like RiscOS, that will violate every thing holly.

So how do we market AmigaOS and MorphOS on other small natch markets?
RISC OS vs. AmigaOS : Comment 22 of 22ANN.lu
Posted by NutsAboutAmiga on 23-Jun-2004 12:35 GMT
In reply to Comment 6 (Kjetil):
Yet you care about spamming the comments there with your clueless babbling.
Anonymous, there are 22 items in your selection
Back to Top