RPCEmu has been ported to the Mac OS X platform, allowing RISC OS 4 to run alongside Apple’s shiny desktop. An experimental port of the open source RiscPC emulator was checked into its source code repository over the weekend after the emulator was adapted to run on Apple computers that use PowerPC processors. The port can run RISC OS 4 and 3.7 with mouse and keyboard support. The emulation of IDE hard discs and higher resolutions needs further testing, and the user interface needs more work. The emulator manages around 5 MIPS on a modest 800MHz G4 iBook – which makes the desktop fairly usable.
I mean I can understand why people run Windows (it’s the law, one just “has” it, too lazy to try out something else), Linux (mostly stability, some like it geeky) or Mac (design, too much dough, arrogant) – but why Risc OS? What can I do with Risc OS that cannot be done with any of the three above?
but why Risc OS?
*SIGH*. For the same reason people still use C64’s with GeOS. If you do not understand it, I really wonder what you are doing on this website.
‘To ask why, is to not understand’.
They do it, so that people have a better chance of trying RISC OS out and prevent misguided questions like yours.
Welcome to the world of computer enthusiasts, we’re not all extinct yet. Computers were a lot more fun before they turned into generic Windows appliances. I’m one of those people that used to format the hard drive on my 286 and install different versions of DOS, CP/M or whatever I could get to run on it, for fun. Personally I would love to try out RiscOS for no other reason than because I’ve never used it before. That’s why I come to this site. Of course you can also be productive with it just like any other OS. It’s not a question of what RiscOS can do that another OS can’t, some people just prefer it. Besides, this is OSNews so it’s only logical that they have…OS news.
And the #1 reason the above posters haven’t touched on: because the UI is superior in some ways, and the programs fit the tasks for a group of people.
+nostalgia of course.
deb2006,
That would be a good question if asked sincerely.
But looking back at your posting history, it doesn’t seem sincere.
You are mostly negative about everything… unless it is Debian/GNU Linux.
Hey, I’m a Linux guy, too. But you are not doing any good by being so negative.
I sometimes ask myself the same question about OSes featured here: “Why would anyone want to use it?”.
So, my fellow OSnews comrades, consider this a sincere re-presentation of what is actually a good question.
I doubt I’ll switch to it from Linux. (Though I don’t *totally* rule that out.) But I hope the extant base of users are enoying it, and that any who might follow do the same! 🙂
-Steve Bergman
Edited 2006-08-29 00:48
It is a fair question. As a RISC OS user myself, I find lots of good reasons to be using it, so the question needn’t be avoided either. It can be used both for fun (as others have suggested: just because it’s nice to use it, and it’s nice to be using something different) and for serious work as well (because it has many good applications that work well, and is productive for many tasks).
However, it’s also a bit of a complex question to answer in such a small space. OSNews already had a number of good articles that cover just some of the reasons, so it might be worth refering back to these. Here’s a couple:
http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=15403
http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=15098
One of the major downsides for RISC OS as a desktop OS is also one of it’s major attractions: it only works on ARM processors (not x86), so either you need the right harware, or you’re restricted to running it under emulation.
Well done on removing that post. I like to see more OS news like this instead of generic news. The more alternative the better. MacOS articles though should be banned from here… just kidding. There would be no-one to poke fun at then.
why do you remove my posting ??? It was meant as a serious question … Why was it a “misguided question” ??? This is rather rude considering I asked a simple question —
“why do you remove my posting ??? It was meant as a serious question … Why was it a “misguided question” ??? This is rather rude considering I asked a simple question —”
You mean rude as in calling OS X users “arrogant”, and windows users “lazy”. Rude like that perhaps?
Please don’t be surprised if people mod down when you fail to show even a modicum of courtesy.
And at the risk of sounding like a broken record, the answer to “why use it” is “because it’s their time to do with as they wish, their money to spend as they wish, their computer to install whatever sofware they so wish onto”.
That and the pretty obvious “None of the three OS’s you mention run RISC OS software natively”.
Serious question, was it, deb2006?
Below are a few of your thoughts from past postings.
I actually agree with a few of the things you say. I won’t say *which* ones. 😉 But presentation is important. And your presentation could use some work.
OSNews fans try, with varying degrees of success, to see things from the other guy’s point of view.
“Infinite Diversity In Infinite Combinations.”
Corny? Maybe. But it’s a bit of Vulcan philosophy that I picked up in the early 70’s that has never failed to enrich my life.
Even a stream of “Debian Rocks” postings would be more effective than this set of “Your OS Sucks” postings.
It’s hardly surprising that your “serious” question was “misconstrued”.
Lighten up a bit, hey? 🙂
===
About Upstart and Ubuntu
===
Well, I wonder how SUSE, Red Hat/Fedora, Slackware, Gentoo, Debian etc. can exist _without_ upstart. They must have really crappy systems and customers that give a damn about the quality of their software.
But along comes Ubuntu that has “problems” only upstart can solve. It’s just funny that Ubuntu is a Linux distribution. But hey, never mind … it’s just a side note
===
More about Upstart and Ubuntu
===
These comments read as if Ubuntu was its own distribution. Well, it’s not. It depends on Debian. If Debian is fine, Ubuntu is fine. But if Ubuntu invents more and more things on its own not taking care where Debian is moving to, then there is a slight problem with that dependency. It’s more a problem for Ubuntu, because the development is done – well, 95%, I should say – on the Debian side.
===
Yet more about Upstart and Ubuntu
===
Why do we need yet another init system? And why does Ubuntu need one? Hopefully at least Debian is going to use it otherwise there’s another good-bye from the Ubuntu developers.
Ah well, I forgot. This is UNIX where everything has to be developed at least three or four times. What a waste …
===
About Mac OS X
===
… but who gives a ?§$%&$§%& about Mac OS X? This article is about PC-BSD. Mac users tend to think it’s necessary to some kind of promote their system everywhere. Well, just relax and read about other operating systems. Some people just have different needs and prefer _not_ to use bloatware …
===
About Solaris
===
“more consistant and mature software”??? Please take a good look for example at the Solaris userland tools – they are a joke. They are very old, and the way they are implemented is just terrible. The only thing that interests me in Solaris is the kernel – but then I think the Linux kernel has its good sides too. Sun Studio Creator is nice – is it open source? Does it produce faster binaries than gcc? Solaris gets a lot of innovation – compared to the innovation Linux gets it’s a margin.
===
About ReactOS
===
OSS advocates won’t leave Linux or *BSD just because of this (well, I certainly won’t and I don’t know anyone who is evenm remotely considering it). Windows users generally don’t care whether something is open or closed source. So who needs this? I mean it is a lot of work …
Well? It’s nice of you to assemble some of my postings. But what do they prove? That I am somewhat retarded? That I am right? That there is a grain of truth in it?
1. Upstart: Noone has convinced me that Linux needs yet another init system. I still don’t understand why Ubuntu needs it.
2. Mac OS: Mac OS users tend to think it’s always interesting to everyone what’s so great about Mac OS X. Well, they’re mistaken.
3. Solaris: If you look at Solaris you’ll notice it has a great kernel BUT old and ancient userland tools. That’s why I think Nexenta OS is the best idea
4. ReactOS: It’s nice – but it’s just not worth the effort. Windows users mostly don’t care about OSS and therefore they’d either use it or leave it. But the problem is they simply don’t care.
Yes, my personal opinion. I dare to offer it. Anyone willing to tear it to pieces
“””Well? It’s nice of you to assemble some of my “””postings.
Don’t mention it. 🙂
“””But what do they prove?”””
That you can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar?
“””That I am somewhat retarded?”””
Not at all! You can’t use Debian and be retarded at the same time. (There is something terribly politically incorrect about this last bit. Any mentally retarded Debian users, please feel free to comment on that one.)
“””That I am right?”””
I’d stop short of that.
“””That there is a grain of truth in it? “””
Yes. But don’t try to offend people who enjoy diversity .
I, personally, love Linux. But I’m so very glad that there is a world outside of that, in which people can explore new ideas that don’t fit into a POSIX scheme.
We all depend upon each others’ ideas.
What’s the point in drawing lines between people who essentially agree with each other already?
Diversity! Diversity!
Computing is not a zero sum game.
This brings back memories of using Acorn computers in school in the UK
So, I go back to 1981 and my first micro computer. We had 4 different operating systems on an 8-bit Atari machine alone. Apple had a couple of choices and Commodore even had choices. By the mid-1980s, there were many more choices.
We were learning something from each other. It wasn’t always friendly but it wasn’t so contentious, either.
I’m glad to have choice now with so many people blindly stumbling along using Windows.
Don’t complain about choice and alternative operating systems–they might lead to the operating system you use being updated with more useful features. It’s the whole “two heads are better than one” adage.