as@prg.ox.ac.uk (Andrew Stevens) (02/05/91)
rogersh%t1d@uk.ac.man.cs writes >>Have you ever tried !Edit's task window? It gives a full multi-tasking >>environment to run command-line based applications. > > Yeah - and its both *very* bugged and *very* slow. Acorn >made several mistakes when writing RiscOS - amongst others: In an ideal world I would agree with roger, but in the real world where hitting ideals costs a lot of money I really have to take issue with Roger's comments. > 1) No *proper* usage of MEMC's dynamic paging facilities > 2) No pre-emptive context switching > 3) No virtual memory > 4) No POSIX compliance > 5) A WIMP without an X interface mechanism > 6) Hacked up in ARM code - resulting in multiple > obscure bugs. How many UNIX boxes have to be hard reset > at least twice in every serious software development > session? - the Arch. does. This operating system exists. It is called RISC-IX. However, given the inevitable resource implications it costs quite a lot - software and disk space to store. Not nearly as immediate, controllable, and *fun* as RISC-OS. Quite frankly, once you're in this ballpark you may as well pay a few percent more and buy a SUN. > 7) Included all sorts of irrelevant trash in ROM (sound generators > etc.) when they should of concentrated on a minimal > kernel providing core facilities like comms, i/o > redirection, pipes, vmem, device transparency, etc. That irrelevant trash makes using the Arch entertaining as well as useful - if I wanted a purely utilitarian machine I would have bought a PC with System V or MINIX. > 8) A flawed reasoning that native mode BBC semi-compatibility > was a good idea - it wasn't. Better to write a half > decent OS then put a fast beeb emulator on top if > you want to retain the technophobic teacher market. Well, maybe, but on the other hand if Acorn had started writing a ``proper'' kernel the software would have taken a lot longer to come out, and would have been a lot more expensive. Acorn probably would have been bankrupt without the modest cash-flow generated by the Arthur Archies. Operating system's aren't free, just bundled. I think in all fairness, Acorn did a pretty reasonable job in getting things up, running, entertaining, and affordable with RISC-OS. The TASK window of !Edit was an inspired stop-gap towards pre-emptive multi-tasking, mighty nice for running command lines and stuff like Prolog. The active work on upgrades looks highly promising too. The bugginess, incidentally, seems much reduced with recent version of the C library. > 9) Writing a slow and inefficient PC Emulator as an afterthought > rather than designing in an optional h/ware 80x86 co-proc. > from the start (what is the most ubiquitous architecture > around?) The Arch was already relatively expensive compared to competitors - 32 bit bus etc - adding a a second CPU, with totally different bussing arrangements etc would be incredible costly. Especially given the very hardware dependent nature of the PC ``standard''. Given the looming availability of the ARM-3 I reckon software was the right way to go. Made the emulator real cheap too. Frankly, folk who *really* want to run PCware will be better off with a PC anyway. For the rest of us who want the odd specialist utility etc, a s'ware emulator that does a 8Mhz or so 8086 on an ARM-3 is fine. Mind you, one thing I'd love to know - can you get DOS CD-ROM stuff working under emulation if you've got a SCSI CD-ROM? > As a result ever loyal Acorn customers have the machines with >the best (and fastest) h/ware pound for pound on the market, but with >the worst s/ware (and a marketing effort which requires temporary >suspension of belief in order to appreciate the sheer extent of it's >ineffectiveness.) The main reason *I* bought the Arch was the quality of the bundled operating environment at its particular price/performance point. UNIX is too expensive, MINIX too beta-test and spartan, DOS doesn't bear contemplating, DOS extensions expensive, the ST (from 3 years experience) a horrid DOS-mess 68K-style, the Amiga serious competition, but loaded down with too much semi-obsolescent video hardware. Incidentally, hardware-wise, I have always felt the Arch is pretty spartan - an elegant example of good cost-effective engineering trade-offs, but hardly amazing. The Arch is most certainly *not* the fastest *hardware* pound for pound. Cheapo 386's and 486's are somewhat better and still steadily falling in price. Cheap SPARCstation clones knock it into a cocked hat, albeit at a much higher price-point. Problem with 386's is the software to use them as 386's currently costs a bomb. > However despite all this (I could mention the total lack of >technical assistnce on the other end of Acorn's phone line(s), the >idiocy of their attempts at corporate mega-secrecy about updates to >RiscOS, the lack of a unified approach to RiscOS/UNIX, If you ever owned an Atari you'd appreciate the virtue of companies that don't vapourware. Amazing all the things they (at one time or another) announced. > the failure >to realise the benefits of selling *every* Arch. with a hard disk, I was pretty happy that the Arch didn't demand a winchester until my income tax sorted itself out just before I finally bought. >their dogged attachment to the (not very lucrative on a per unit basis) >education market, their reliance on a totally non-helpful dealer >network for customer support, the lack of a 24 hr help line. etc. etc.) >they do make the best hardware out - I'll continue buying it... Money, money, money. If you want 'phone support buy IBM or Apple or Dell ... but they cost. You could, alternatively, buy from Watford Electronics. Yes indeed, folks, I bought Watford. Since dealers are almost always expensive box-shifters (and often annoying ignorami to boot), I bought from a cheap, silent, box-shifter. I was amazed when I tried their support service! The odd techno question I asked in the early days was *indeed* helpfully answered. Mind you, their speed in getting me a replacement keyboard (CAPS LOCK key dead!) however is disappointing to say the least - that presumably would cost them tenners not 10 pences. It is amazing how different people's percetions can be... Andrew
dbh@doc.ic.ac.uk (Denis Howe) (02/06/91)
In article <1210@culhua.prg.ox.ac.uk> as@prg.ox.ac.uk (Andrew Stevens) writes: rogersh%t1d@uk.ac.man.cs writes > the failure >to realise the benefits of selling *every* Arch. with a hard disk, I was pretty happy that the Arch didn't demand a winchester until my income tax sorted itself out just before I finally bought. Me too. Pray explain Roger, what are the benefits of not selling the cheaper, upgradable configurations? >their reliance on a totally non-helpful dealer >network for customer support, the lack of a 24 hr help line. etc. Their dealers aren't _totally_ non-helpful and Acorn people do respond to net news! -- Denis Howe <dbh@doc.ic.ac.uk> +44 (71) 589 5111 x5064 What is DiazaBicycloHexene ?