Re: To Upgrade or Not. What's the difference?

In message <1178319141.637812.157500@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Ams <ams@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On May 4, 11:21 pm, Steve Fryatt <n...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 4 May, John Cartmell wrote in message
<4edd9c2c13j...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:


<snip>

ROL have responded to feedback (which has been
quiet, and constructive, and private - as well as noisy, and negative,
and public). The Manuals, Tutorials, and PRMs that accompany RO6 show
that.


Oddly I'd agree with John Cartmell on that. ROL have, of late, been
more constructive about releasing documentation - and that I would
welcome (as I had in the past).

But nothing for Iyonix users.

Yes, but here's the thing - Iyonix users now have an alternative. We
will have the source for the OS - that will mean *individual* and
small groups of developers can implement rolling improvements that
could reduce or even eliminate the need (as was) for Select on Iyonix.
At the very least it may encourage ROL to *try* satisify the Iyonix
market - or else face the possibility of some of the Select-like
facilities being implemented independantly by open source programmers
on RO5.

ROOL will only have access to the RISC OS 5 sources and only the bits
they get permission to open source.

A number of the features of RISC OS 6 already work on the Iyonix but
for the full version it would appear depends on Castle allowing RISCOS
Ltd to be able to see the startup code for the Iyonix to do a softload
startup over RISC OS 5 (this was explained at the recent WROCC
meeting). The alternative that has been considered if this becomes not
possible since Castle has naturally said its commercially sensitive,
its a sort of "Features pack" - this is my term not that of RISCOS
Ltd's.

Castle my decide they don't want it on there Iyonix's and develop
there own version via ROOL.

So users may or may not have a choice soon.

--
Chris Hughes
Don't miss the Wakefield Show - 19th May
http://www.wakefieldshow.org.uk
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Castles plans
    ... Iyonix Ltd. ... Castle Technology Ltd owners of RISC OS. ... they don't have to pay anyone.... ...
    (comp.sys.acorn.misc)
  • Re: RISC OS Licencing : Facts not Fiction
    ... Didn't E14/Pace licence RISC OS to Castle for use in the Iyonix, ...
    (comp.sys.acorn.misc)
  • Re: Select (was:Re: Latest version of !Draw)
    ... Iyonix owners bought an iyonix and ... it works well why would Castle want Select functionality. ... commission ROL they had no alternative. ... ROL's reason for being is to keep RISC OS going isn't it? ...
    (comp.sys.acorn.misc)
  • Re: Wanted: Acorn/RISC OS Browser & Mail Client Recommendations for RISC PC
    ... That is really a hardware problem to be honest. ... FF is a very resource hungry browser and a Risc PC, ... However choice doesn't quite come into it as RO5 is tied to the Iyonix ... Castle realised that the RPC had a limited life-span and wanted to develop ...
    (comp.sys.acorn.misc)
  • Re: RISC OS source code release news
    ... Well as software on the RISC OS platform is usually somewhat cheaper ... I don't have an Iyonix and I still haven't seen an overwhelming case ... You could do the same with an Iyonix - can't think of any apps of the ... So that means that the majority of developers are likely to ...
    (comp.sys.acorn.misc)