NetNews Offline 2/NetNews Offline Volume 2.iso/news/comp/sys/amiga/misc-part1/4832

Internet Message Format | 1996-08-05 | 9.0 KB

Path: gos.ukc.ac.uk!njh
From: [e-mail] (Niki Hemmings)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.misc
Subject: Re: Acorn RiscPC --- a thought?
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 96 04:18:38 GMT
Organization: University of Kent at Canterbury, UK.
Sender: [e-mail]
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Niki Hemmings)
NNTP-Posting-Host: gos.ukc.ac.uk

In article <[e-mail]>,
Allan Girvan  <[e-mail]> wrote:
>On Tue, 06 Feb 96, Niki Hemmings wrote:
>> Allan Girvan  <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> >On Mon, 05 Feb 96, Neil wrote:
>> >> Has anyone in the amiga fold thought of looking at the Acorn RiscPC
>> >> platform? It seems to be in a similar vein to the BeBox, has loads of
>> >> native software, is really quick esp. with graphics, can run PC
>> >> software witgh a coprocessor too, has optional multi-processor
>> >> capability and runs NetBSD.

>A bit of selective snipping there. (Like my pointing out the fact that
>there is bugger all software for the Acorn). Still, it's your post and I
>suppose you can do what you like with it.

And quite right too, can't stand seeing threads that escalate to hundreds
of pages just because people feel the need to follow up *everything*.
Having said that, this post is pretty huge...

Yeah, I was going to address the thing about Acorns having hardly any
software, but decided not to because it's boring, and largely irrelevant.

If you recall, the original post simply suggested that we make an
observation in the general direction of the RISC-PC.  It didn't say that we
should all go and get one.  It didn't say that the ARM processor is the best
thing since sliced bread, and it certainly didn't say anything about AT
porting AmigaOS to the ARM!  (God knows where you got that one from)

>> >The fact remains that nobody (apart from Acorn) supports the ARM stuff.
>> >Apple tried using it with the Newton and look where that got them!
>>
>> Yeah, you've got a point there, the Newton's failure was obviously entirely
>> down to the processor they chose.  Like the way the 1084 monitors weren't
>> very popular because of the make of capacitors in them...
>>
>> I think not!
>
>You are entitled to your opinion. Your opinion, however, does not in any
>way alter the fact that the Newton used ARM chips. Neither does your
>opinion detract from the generally held view that the Newton has been an
>abject failure.

And, whilst you are correct to point these two out, this does not in any
way alter the fact that these two points are totally unrelated.  If you
really, honestly believe that Apple's target audience for the Newton
were even remotely interested in what processor the damn thing had, or
for that matter whether they actually knew what a processor was, I can
only suggest that you are somewhat misguided!

And no, it makes very little difference to the people who are writing the
software.  (A) because it's a hand-held pocket device that is designed to
have a small number of applications that do exactly what you want and
nothing else, *not* a general purpose PC for doing everything with, and
as such will have most of its software written by Apple anyway.
(B) because there are such things as compilers...

>What makes you think that Amiga Technologies would fare any better by
>porting Amigados to the same, almost unheard of, processor? Where are the
>third party developers? Who would bother converting their software?

No-one, but I can't imagine why the ARM processor has even entered this
discussion.  The original bloke didn't even mention the thing.  And if
you knew the first thing about the RISC-PC architecture then you'd know
that one of its chief principles is to be able to have different
processors in it, not just the ARM.

>> >The fact that it can emulate an IBM Clone is hardly a selling point - IBM
>> >Clones are cheaper.
>>
>> Now this is it.  This has to be the stupidest thing I've ever heard anyone
>> say, EVER!
>>
>> Like, suppose you suddenly introduce IBM compatibility into the Amiga,
>> instantaneously allowing it to run countless amounts of industry standard
>> software, and you say that's NOT A SELLING POINT?!?
>
>Again you have selectively snipped! I was talking about the Acorn. The fact
>that it (the Acorn) can emulate an IBM Clone is hardly a selling point -
>IBM clones are cheaper! I stand by this. I made no mention of IBM
>compatibility for the Amiga. But I will now...

Does this really need an explanation?  Looks like it...  Alright, you have
your Acorn chaps here, with their Acorn machines, and their Acorn software.
They like their machine, but they're annoyed that they can't run all the
PC software on it.  They're about to switch over to the PC when suddenly,
Acorn goes and makes a machine that will do both.  Yes, it's more expensive
than an ordinary PC, but that's because it's more than just an ordinary PC.
People don't need to chuck out their old software library now, they can
just carry on using it, and at the same time use all the new PC software
they are getting.  It's an obvious move from a company that sees its user
base dissappearing to an expanding PC market, and you can be certain that
it HAS made a difference to their sales!

Come on, it really isn't THAT hard to see!  Just think about it a bit!

>Picture the scene - Person "A" goes into a local computer shop wanting to
>buy a machine that will run Doom! The helpful salesperson says "No problems
>- buy this here 486 job for six hundred quid and all your problems will
>be solved, or... you could buy this Acorn - it costs a fortune, uses an
>obscure processor and runs Windows reasonably well". (What exactly is the
>price of a top of the range RISC-PC these days? And forget the educational
>discount!)

Yes yes, if you just want to run Doom, great, you don't need a RISC-PC.
In fact, very few people DO need a RISC-PC.  But the fact remains, without
the PC-compatibility, the RISC-PC would have sold less units than it has,
and that alone stands as evidence that PC compatibilty is a selling point.

>"Or you could buy this Amiga - it's about the same price as a Mac and it'll
>run all of your IBM and Mac software and it has its own multitasking OS
>built in"

Wouldn't it be great eh...  I'd also like to see an Amiga that could take
extra hardware in physical 'slices', but I daren't suggest that to you
in case you accuse me of trying to get AmigaOS ported to the ARM...

>So what was the point of the original post?

>How about...
>
>"Hey guys, has anyone considered porting Amigados to the 6502 - you can
>plug in a Zilog Z80 and get full CPM emulation!"

Who mentioned porting Amigados?  Nope, I'm still completely stumped about
where you got this idea from...

>Or this...
>
>"Hey guys, have you looked at the way the Cray X-MP does things? Wouldn't
>that be great for the Amiga?"

Sure it would.  I bet you could learn a thing or two from it, such as how
nice it is to have proper memory protection, and other stuff that we're
currently doing without.

>> The point is, there are a lot of sensible, clever things about the RISC-PC,
>> and the Amiga community would do well just to take a look at it.
>> Personally, the thought of being able to slap a Pentium into my Amiga and
>> start running the latest PC software from the same box, in an intuition
>> window, at full speed, rather appeals to me.
>
>I agree! I agreed in my original post (I think my exact phrase was "It's
>technically brilliant" but you seem to have snipped that!) I will still be
>agreeing long after Acorn have died a slow and painful death. The harsh
>reality is that hardly anyone actually uses the bloody things so it's not
>going to happen.
>
>The likelihood of Acorn RISC Machines being around next year is considerably
>less than PPCs still being around.

*nnnnnggghh*!!!!  What on earth has that got to do with anything?????
You've just said yourself that they're technically brilliant machines, so
what has Acorn's lifespan got to do with it?  Unless you're implying that
technical brilliance is to be the cause of the company's death!

>If you were in charge of AT, which one would you go for?

You know what, it sound to me like you agree with the original poster, but
you have some strange grudge against Acorn machines, and want to slightly
alter the debate so that you can slag the machines off a bit!  We all know
that Acorn machines aren't much use to most people, but look: THAT ISN'T
THE POINT!!!  What IS the point, is that there are various features about
the machine that make it nice to use, various clever architectural
concepts around it regarding upgradability, and in general it's full of
smart ideas.  The fact that Acorn is going down the pan simply has nothing
to do with it.

There are many NICE thing about the RISC-PC, and no amount of slagging-off
of the ARM processor, no amount of complaining about software
incompatibilities, and no amount of ridicule of Acorn's business
practices is going to change that.

Nik.