new to acorn

new to acorn

Post by Theo Marke » Wed, 31 May 2006 21:11:44



[snip]

Moving rapidly off-topic into .advocacy territory it occasionally amuses me
that RISC OS people cite DHCP as a noteworthy feature. Most other platforms
take it for granted - I think Windows has had it since Windows 95. It's not
really a major marketing point for other platforms, and is only so on RISC
OS because it too so long to come out that many people who had a need for it
were stuck waiting for it and made a fuss.

Lots of other platforms support ZeroConf (as included in Select), but I've
not seen any fuss made of it either on this or other platforms. Which is
probably as it should be, since it's not exactly awe-inspiring. I think I'd
say the same about DHCP.

Theo
[crossposted and followups set to comp.sys.acorn.advocacy]
 
 
 

new to acorn

Post by Steven Pam » Thu, 01 Jun 2006 01:34:53

In article <KOr* XXXX@XXXXX.COM >, Theo Markettos




Most OSs have had proper DNS support for years, but Windows only picked up
on that at W2k. Until then the system used every other possible avenue and
only then checked DNS. Even in 2k DNS isn't the default first option.


MS have been warbling about their version for ages, and it doesn't work
properly.


When properly set up it works, on all Windows versions including XP unless
service packed to the latest version it causes problems on the server. (see
the MS knowledge base for details)

--

Steve Pampling

 
 
 

new to acorn

Post by Vince » Thu, 01 Jun 2006 03:29:58


It _is_ noteworthy in that it's a distinction from versions of
RISC OS up to 3.7 ( or was 4.0x the last without it?) and those
after that point, for which it is therefore a selling point.

Not a selling point to users of other platforms (unless it's
someone specifically planning switch to, or the addition of, RISC
OS[1]), but a selling point to those people who may be using RISC
OS versions which lack it.

[1] Which seems to be what this thread is all about.

--
VinceH - http://www.yqcomputer.com/
 
 
 

new to acorn

Post by John M War » Thu, 01 Jun 2006 08:41:01

In article < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >,





I know this is on the "cards", as they say ;-)

So many hardware accelerations are now available to us (I have several
of them myself) and not just on full-size desktop machines like my
Iyonix. Even the pocket-sized A9home has working accelerations (and
other enhancements) "head"-ing our way, and already demonstrated at
shows.



As in the next Select, I gather -- or is it already in Select? I must
look into that, one of these days...


Ah! They have finally learned from the example of Sprites22, 23 and 24
options (three sizes!) that we have had for well over a decade.

I just knew they'd get there eventually...

Amazing what our limited resources have continued to achieve, though,
despite the sheer enormity of most other platforms and their vast
resources. It is very, VERY impressive, and not to be sneered at or
belittled in any way by anyone. I am proud of it!

--
John Ward in Medway, Kent - using RISC OS since 1987
Now using an Iyonix, an A9home, 2 RiscPCs and Virtual-RPC!
Acorn/RISC OS web page: www.john-ward.org.uk/personal/john/computers
Read my "Councilling RISC OS" series in Qercus, from Issue 276 onward
 
 
 

new to acorn

Post by Tony Hough » Thu, 01 Jun 2006 09:21:22

In < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >,



Is the hardware up to it? IIRC it takes about a 400MHz x86 to decode
PAL/NTSC MPEG 2 in real time and that's with FP. And then it needs
scaling; can RISC OS make use of the hardware scaling on any of the PC
graphics cards it uses these days?


It's a bit ironic that RISC OS had Draw etc but now it's been left
behind with fixed size bitmap icons while other GUIs have got or are
about to get antialiased vector icons. Even with bitmaps, the others
have been able to show them at (more than two) different sizes for
years.

--
The address in the Reply-To is genuine and should not be edited.
See < http://www.yqcomputer.com/ ; for more reliable contact addresses.
 
 
 

new to acorn

Post by Peter Naul » Thu, 01 Jun 2006 11:31:56

In message < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >



Select, (but of course, not RISC OS 5) does indeed have much of this,
with its Image File Renderer, and is supported well by its filer for
thumbnails, etc. Of course, the icon bar is of fixed size, etc, etc.

--
Peter Naulls - XXXX@XXXXX.COM | http://www.yqcomputer.com/
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
RISC OS Community Wiki - add your own content | http://www.yqcomputer.com/
 
 
 

new to acorn

Post by Tony Hough » Thu, 01 Jun 2006 12:21:56

In < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >,





That's a huge help, but AFAICS the SM501 only offers acceleration for
things like colourspace conversion and scaling of decoded frames. NVidia
and ATI cards have motion compensation acceleration, but the APIs are
closed and the RO market is maybe too small to get licences. So I think
RISC OS will have to rely solely on software decoding. Even 600MHz VIA
C3 processors struggle and rely on the MPEG decoders on their Unichrome
graphics chips. Those CPUs are renowned for lousy FP, but it's got to be
better than none at all.


Apparently the Filer can display thumbnails and the module it uses to do
it can render Drawfiles. But it doesn't say whether it can antialias
Drawfiles (or render Artworks with antialiasing), and there's definitely
no sign of Drawfiles replacing Iconsprites.


That's one size for three different pixel formats, not three sizes.


No, you're missing the point. Windows' ability to display icons at
different sizes and offer a resizable task/icon bar has been slightly
more flexible than RISC OS for years. MacOS X and common Linux desktops
are further ahead still to a similar extent that RISC OS' font rendering
is ahead of DOS. ISTR hearing that Vista will support vector icons too.

--
The address in the Reply-To is genuine and should not be edited.
See < http://www.yqcomputer.com/ ; for more reliable contact addresses.
 
 
 

new to acorn

Post by Vince » Thu, 01 Jun 2006 17:17:40


Although this is a matter of personal opinion, I've always felt
the icon bar was *too big* from the outset, but became more
acceptable when we were able to use higher resolutions - though,
obviously, it's possible to go from one extreme to the other.

Different people will no doubt have different views - and even
those who share mine will have a different view on what screen
res. makes it 'just so'.

--
VinceH - http://www.yqcomputer.com/
 
 
 

new to acorn

Post by John M War » Thu, 01 Jun 2006 17:41:01

In article < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >,





I'd agree with all of that, having come all the way from 640 x 256
resolution up to (nowadays) 1500 x 1200 on one machine, and dual-head
2560 x 1024 (or 2048 x 1280) on another.

Although I don't fancy the idea of a "double decker" icon bar myself,
having a choice would be an enhancement, though -- as ours auto-scrolls
anyway -- not a very important one. Indeed, I can't recall the topic
ever having arisen before now.


I think we adapt as resolutions change, and most of us have tended to
switch to larger monitors as resolutions have increased, so the
displayed size of the icons (for example) does not change that much in
practice. Even with my poor eyesight I have no difficulty in dealing
with and identifying the various icons, and there's typically a huge gap
between the two groups on my dual display, so there's no risk of filling
up the icon bar either.

So, these are my findings, and I hope they will be of some use in this
sub-thread about the icon bar.

--
John Ward in Medway, Kent - using RISC OS since 1987
Now using an Iyonix, an A9home, 2 RiscPCs and Virtual-RPC!
Acorn/RISC OS web page: www.john-ward.org.uk/personal/john/computers
Read my "Councilling RISC OS" series in Qercus, from Issue 276 onward
 
 
 

new to acorn

Post by Dave Higto » Fri, 02 Jun 2006 03:57:17

In message < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >



Well, the icon bar may be of fixed height, but certainly not fixed
width.

In any case, the ability of windows to cover the icon bar is a great
advantage over Windoze. That, plus the ability to get the icon bar
back again just by moving the mouse to the bottom of the screen,
makes the size of the icon bar irrelevant. IMHO.

The only thing we don't have is an icon on the icon bar for each
open window; occasionally I miss this. The flip side is that the
Windoze implementation leaves every icon too small to be of any use
when there are lots of windows open - precisely the time you most
need to be able to read it.

Of all the systems I've used, RISC OS has my favourite functionality
in this area.

Dave
 
 
 

new to acorn

Post by Peter Naul » Fri, 02 Jun 2006 04:44:05


Yes, but look at Tony's point. Windows is far from the last
word in icon or windowing functionality. Mac OS and the endless Unix
window managers (KDE is of worthy note here), display just
about every behaviour conceivable, and with a wild array
of configurability. Most of them are noticably slow than
RISC OS, but still - the features are there, and RISC OS lacks
them by and large. Let's stop apologising for RISC OS and
realise that it has a great deal that needs fixing or
improving.
 
 
 

new to acorn

Post by Tim Hil » Fri, 02 Jun 2006 04:51:37

In article < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >, Dave Higton





Huh? How may I configure it across only half the screen? :-/


Not irrelevant but perhaps unnecessary. I have just this moment chastised
Egg for having too much white space on their web site, forcing me into a
full- and off-screen browsing experience. :-o


If there is a utility somewhere which does this at least RISC OS lets you
add it to the iconbar with TinyDirs.


I like the windoze icon bar way of sliding off the screen and being able
to drag it around but hate the useless icons too when the bar is only one
high. As I keep the address bar visible, there is room for only three
icons unless I drag it out across half the screen, which, at least, /can
be done/.


Yes, it has readable icons! (On windows, open about twelve web pages with
MIE and then work out which is which from their icons. Do the same with
NetSurf by iconising each window. :-)

T

--
* Cheap phone bills? Gift shopping? www.timil.com/usenet.php
* Spam-proof Usenet address? Visit www.invalid.org.uk
or email me: postmaster at invalid dot org dot uk
* ( XXXX@XXXXX.COM is deleted unread - please use my valid address above)

... "A friendly eye could never see such faults" Jul Caesar, Act iv, Sc.3
 
 
 

new to acorn

Post by druc » Fri, 02 Jun 2006 05:05:08


Especially when Microsoft are so vain their name must appear at the beginning
of everything, so you have:-

Micros... Micros... Micros... Micros... Micros... Micros... Micros...

But then they did introduce the feature to stack multiple windows in to each
icon when you have more than so many windows for each application, to make it
just that little more difficult to use.

---druck

--
The ARM Club Free Software - http://www.yqcomputer.com/
The 32bit Conversions Page - http://www.yqcomputer.com/
 
 
 

new to acorn

Post by Dave Higto » Fri, 02 Jun 2006 05:44:47

In message < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >





But why on earth would you want to? It never gets in the way.

It can never be less than the width of the screen, but it can be as
much wider than the screen as necessary.

Dave