“Gosh! I didn’t realize how much discussion my original article would create. A lot of people seemed to accuse me of living in cloud cuckoo land, whereas a lot more agreed with me. I think those who disagreed have either never used RISC OS or just liked a good rant! In either case, I feel compelled to write a short follow up article clarifying some of the points I made in the original article – all of which were perfectly valid.” Read the follow up article.
Follow Up: Why I Stay with RISC OS
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
I will ask a dumb question. Is RISC OS in active development? I mean if it’s not. I’d feel unconvinced. Otherwise I don’t have a problem with it. I mean as long as it’s not a relic of something that once was, it should be fine… right?
Another thing I do not understand is the fact that it sounds like apple in terms of the fact that you need specific hardware to use it… But I don’t know if that’s true or not.
Yes. Why would people carry on using an OS not in active development? This isnt Amiga.
> Why would people carry on using an OS not in active development? This isnt Amiga
AmigaOS is in active development.
Why does it even matter if the OS is under active development? If the functionality of the OS and its associated software serves your needs, that should be sufficient. Having a stream of updates to the OS or new applications being released for the OS is just icing on the cake.
I don’t know where people got this idea that operating systems have to have a continuous flow of updates. Sure it keeps us OS geeks happy because we get to see all of these novel features. On the other hand, I would propose that it is also detrimental: since the OS scene is evolving so rapidly, most of us are just skimming the surface of what is really there. We are not really examining operating systems in depth.
“Why does it even matter if the OS is under active development? If the functionality of the OS and its associated software serves your needs, that should be sufficient. Having a stream of updates to the OS or new applications being released for the OS is just icing on the cake.”
I would say that they’re more than just icing on the cake. I don’t know about you, but I wouldn’t use an operating system with no updates.
I mean really – if you’re telling me that updates aren’t necessary, then I would really like to have your attention span, your Operating system, and your uber super duper sweet copy of DOOM. Well maybe I am getting carried away. But I would love perfectness.. I haven’t run into an operating system that felt perfect to me since… forever?
Come on, who wants to use a web browser from 1998 for browsing regularly? I mean sure it’s nostalgic, but I want useful. Not nostalgic.
Now I have said my stupid thing I have been wanting to say
I mean really – if you’re telling me that updates aren’t necessary, then I would really like to have your attention span, your Operating system, and your uber super duper sweet copy of DOOM. Well maybe I am getting carried away. But I would love perfectness.. I haven’t run into an operating system that felt perfect to me since… forever?
It’s not a matter of the OS/apps being perfect, obviously there’s not much that’s perfect in the world of software. But an older application or OS, even one that hasn’t been updated in years, might still meet your needs better than the latest release. There are plenty of examples of newer and more successful products that are inferior to their predecessors, at least in certain ways.
Games, internet, and multimedia software may have moved on a lot in recent years, but I don’t think the same is true of most productivity apps. As long as you don’t need perfect compatibility with mainstream software, tasks like word processing, DTP and graphics are covered very well on RISC OS.
If that existing software meets your needs better than the software available on other platforms, why would it matter if it hadn’t been updated? Obviously RISC OS and the apps that run on it do still meet the needs of the remaining RISC OS users.
It’s all about using the best tool for the job, and that isn’t necessarily the newest option.
I have no argument for that. Well played
This is the third or fourth article on why/why not RISCOS for the week. Its getting distasteful!
However, the follow up article is at least less of a flamebait and doesn’t state how “windows users are stupid” and so on any more. For this I’ll admit that the follow up is better than the original.
This is the third or fourth article on why/why not RISCOS for the week. Its getting distasteful!
Why?
Thank you, I got modded down when I mentioned this last article but there are a few of us who cannot grasp the necessity of running article thread wars…
This can’t be interesting to even die hard RISCOS people anymore…I, a mac and linux and windows user, would be just as annoyed if 3-4 why i use/don’t use (mac|linux|windows)…
Hey.
This guy goes on for pages on end about how RISC OS is superior because “it produces smaller graphics that are smaller in size, but better quality” and because this and that text editor is better than anything he has ever tried.
This is completely meaningless. The availability of applications determines the usefulness of an operating system, but the operating system itself is what must set itself apart from everything else. There is no reason all this other stuff couldn’t be ported to any of the mainstream OS’s.
Other than that, even though the comments are a bit ridiculous, I must admit that I sort of agree with the people complaining about all the articles about RISC OS on OSNews these days. I mean, OSNews is also about esoteric niche-OS’s, but this is just silly. The thing about RICS OS is that nobody really cares. It is not going to become a mainstream OS, as it simply does not have the features people need and want (such as for instance multitasking, I am told).
Arguing about it is a waste of time. The only interesting thing about it is the technical curiosities, which everybody seems to ignore.
– Simon
Edited 2006-12-14 09:25
Nobody realy cares do they? A user base of about 3000.
The only thing missing from RISC OS is a decent Media Player, which if Andrew Hodgkinson carries on development of his project Prism or Cineroma is released then there will be no problem.
Also the Browser, Flash, and Java problems are nearing being solved.
Please do some reasearch before making comments about an OS you know nothing about.
Unfortunately I doubt that RISC OS will ever have a decent media player application.
There’s two significant problems to overcome. First there’s the prolific amount of codecs used for media. Secondly some codecs (such as H.264) require a powerful processor for decoding.
I find it doubtful that you’ll ever find a media player on RISC OS that will be compatible with enough codecs to have people truly satisfied.
As for the likes of H.264 – my 768MB, 1.25GHz G4 eMac tends to struggle with these when they’re SD resolution. H.264 tends to be used for HD material, which my Mac can’t cope with.
In terms of raw computing power a top end Iyonix has less than half the ability of my eMac. I seriously doubt that it could play an H.264 video in half SD resolution at 30 fps, let alone full SD or HD.
Wow. A user base of 3000.
No, I don’t mean to be an assh*le, but that is really not a considerable number of people, certainly not enough to justify the recent amount of non-technical articles on the subject. RISC OS is a curiosity, and these articles have not focused on any of the subjects that I am sure are very interesting about RISC OS, only complained about how nobody uses it but should.
Then again, it isn’t meant to be a critique of OSNews, which (as the name implies) covers everything OS-related, it’s more a critique of the hardcore RISC OS users who seem to not understand that the world has moved on, possibly in a bad direction, but moved on nevertheless.
And “RISCOSMike”… please drop the inflammatory tone. It’s not doing you any good.
– Simon
There might be a user base of 3000 now, but almost every school child in the UK would have used RISC OS at some point during the 90’s. This adds up to quite a lot of interest on the subject. I myself would use RISC OS if it were not for the prohibitively expensive hardware, and somewhat lack of direction at the moment.
Acorn’s peak was in the 1980s, with the BBC Micro. By the 1990s (when I was at what the US would term “high school”), schools had already begun to replace their BBC Micros with PCs, mainly with Nimbus machines from RM. From 1987 when the first Archimedes came out, I never saw a trace of a RISC OS-based machine. By then, Windows had already won.
I used RISC OS until shortly after Acorn imploded in 1998. It had some lovely features, but nowadays, it just looks quite dated, which is quite sad. There are still a number of compelling applications for it – thanks to the efforts of Martin Wuerthner and Peter Naulls, amongst others – but I see no real reason why I should switch back. The platform is on the decline, and it seems to be the same old people sticking with the platform until their dying days.
Where are the grand plans for RISC OS? Some (all, eventually?) of it is being open-sourced, which might lead to more development on that side. Peter Naulls (Firefox) and the Netsurf guys are doing a sterling job on the browser side and Artworks is still an outstanding vector graphics application.
And the hardware? Castle Technology are selling a three year old 600MHz Iyonix which offers less than a Mac mini. The Iyonix is nice enough, but totally overpriced for what it is. There have been few developments on the hardware side since it was originally released, save a slightly less antique graphics card.
3000 people is 3 times more than SkyOS or several of the other OS’s we talk about.
I see the changes in the PDA world. I know I will use my sony clie tg 50 for a long time. it has a built in keyboard…I won’t buy a pda without a keyboard and i don’t want a phone.
I won’t need to run photoshop or MS Office or even firefox on it. it does the job I need which is keep track of simple stuff, let me take notes, record and play sound.
Like riscos, the clie is also an ARM cpu and palmos doesn’t have the modern OS features. so I do tend to sympathize…
I sort of agree with you on quantity of RISCOS news (this week) and their importance /*personally*/.
But in the end, if guy likes it and knows why he uses it… it is not up to us to understand and agree (he didn’t force anyone to use RISCOS either), it is up to us to leave guy freedom to choose and express him self without beating him to a pulp for his beliefs.
Fine, let him use RISCOS, but does he have to write about?
What if I write an article about why I continue to eat Munster cheese? Sure it can be ugly with it’s bright orange/yellow edge, but the cheese is great. With munster I can do so much more than any other cheese too! I can melt it, you can’t melt cheddar or mozerella like you can munster. In fact with munster, you can’t go wrong anywhere!
Tomorrow, I’m going to write an article about the discussion about my munster article to clarify that although cheddar actually makes a much better melted cheese sandwich than munster, I’m a munster zealot so I don’t care about any other type of cheese.
What if I write an article about why I continue to eat Munster cheese?
I won’t read it;)
Same was with these articles. In case when article is not attractive I browse trough first comments and that it.
What if I write an article about why I continue to eat Munster cheese? Sure it can be ugly with it’s bright orange/yellow edge, but the cheese is great. With munster I can do so much more than any other cheese too! I can melt it, you can’t melt cheddar or mozerella like you can munster. In fact with munster, you can’t go wrong anywhere!
Frankly, I wouldn’t read it if you submitted it here.
But then this is OSnews, not CheeseNews.
“whereas a lot more agreed with me.”
From the comments on here and The Icon Bar http://www.iconbar.com/ I disagree. The majority of people imply you are wrong.
In-fact I don’t think a single person agreed with him on some of his more unusual claims.
Some people using it as their main OS.
Lots of people using it injunction with another OS because they like some feature/program that only RISCOS has.
I don’t remember seeing a single message supporting his wider claims.
And no-one else making statements that could be read as insults to users of other OSes either.
But it’s enough. What’s next? Half a dozen articles talking about “Why I still use BeOS/AmigaOS/Windows 1.0/put_your_favourite_os_here”?
I’m all for good written articles that make good points showing that you don’t need a cutting-edge system to get your work done. They’re not big deal, I’m sure that most OSNews readers have dealt with an “outdated” system at some time, but it’s nice to see that some systems still have some “magic” even right now.
Now, having these “reply to comments” or “reply to another article” (Linux War is belong to us, or something like that) is just worthless.
I would not mind myself, but only if the author told us of the real benefits they get from using said OS.
Now, having these “reply to comments” or “reply to another article” (Linux War is belong to us, or something like that) is just worthless.
That is exactly how I feel about it. We don’t need one article to retaliate against another article which will then produce a never ending cycle of articles about which OS is better. I read the articles because I want more information on a subject, not because I want to hear the person defend themselves.
…if those articles where at least written by an adult who would on top of that even have basic knowledge, but …my goth… this stuff is written by an webdesigner who thinks image compressing is an integral part of an operating system.
So please… enough is enough.
I too have the feeling that the RISCOS days are over. I left the platform more than 10 years ago, and nothing much has changed in the mean time.
But, I do think that RISCOS deserves some credit. At the time of the introduction of the A5000 machine the hardware and it’s OS were way, way ahead of the competition. It blew everything away concercing PC’s, Amiga’s and (at that time dying) Atari.
The menu structure, the menu bar (RISCOS was the first OS with a menu bar), the multi tasking capabilities,…
So please let’s show some respect for a real classic OS.. 🙂
I don’t think many people would disagree with you. RISC OS is indeed a fine OS, even now.
However the author of these articles has done little to aid the cause of his preferred OS. Quite the reverse in fact.
The article written by John H (sorry I forget his exact name), was a far more well-reasoned article that did deserve to be aired: whether or not you agreed with him, he made his points clearly, honestly (it seemed to me), and without vitriol.
Bottom line: if an OS (any OS) works for you, fine. If not, don’t stress out so much. Use another one. Life really needn’t be that complicated.
Don’t insult me and and every other competent web designer that has actually studied and understands the language of design, typography, photography etc.
I see the quality graphics and web pages you can produce with your Risc OS apps:
http://www.vigay.com/
Class, sheer class 😉 I like the links in the web portfolio section, very 1987… a bit like Risc OS.
Come on man, get over your obsession. I loved Risc OS as much as the next man, the GUI was amazing, the programs so small and fast, but there are now much better and fast alternatives even if they are CISC.
I particularly liked the fact that he bragged about his lean mean code. The HTML source is littered with tables, font tags etc. Then he has the cheak to include a CSS validation link at the bottom of the page. The use of font tags with CSS strikes me as particularly amateur. Lean mean code, not possible if you are going to use tables all over the places.
The images he shows in his follow up article are funny. The RiscOS images are clearly smoothed and Mac ones not. Any screen artifacts are smoothed away at the price of the detail. Also I don’t think that Mac app is particularly good. I would like to try the excellent freeware app infranview on it, but the link to the source image he references goes nowhere.
Lastly he has not addressed how the quality of the image is improved when compressed by RiscOS. Maybe he gets confused by resizing done automatically when your OS / browser tries to make a 1600 x 1200 image fit in a 400 X 300 space.
” Lean mean code, not possible if you are going to use tables all over the places. ”
In his defense, the majority of the world still uses IE 6.0 and everyone knows how well it does without the use of tables.
I don’t mind people using tables. But I just found it amusing that he would brag about his markup when it was actually quote amateurish.
Also the layout he uses on his site is not difficult with pure CSS in IE. Yahoo has even made it dead easy. They’ve done all the work for simple CSS grid type layouts that are compatible with major browsers. One day I’ll get around using their work but check out: –
– http://developer.yahoo.com/yui/grids/
– http://developer.yahoo.com/yui/reset/
– http://developer.yahoo.com/yui/fonts/
Maybe someone should email him those links.
By then, it was already dying out; being replaced by PCs.
The contracts were given on an per-LEA basis, and Acorn wasn’t remotely UK-wide. By the early 90s, RM had a much stronger foothold than Acorn did.
The Archimedes was certainly in widespread use, but ‘almost every school child in the UK’ is a massive exaggeration.
I have to admit, I had never even heard of RISC OS before I started reading OSNews. I had heard of Acorn computers before, but I have never seen one in person. I was only vaguely aware that ARM meant Acorn RISC Machine. This is probably because I am American, and I do not think Acorn ever sold their wares in the states.
Anyway, I was a die-hard Amiga fan from 1987 when I bought my first Amiga, to replace my C64, until the mid 90s when I finally stopped using my Amiga 3000 and switched to Linux full-time. I followed the Amiga “phoenix” projects closely for a while, always hoping that the Amiga would make a comeback. I’ve always had fond memories of the Amiga, but I moved on, all the same.
I think it’s probably about time that the RISC OS users (all 3000 of them) do the same. If you want to use your almost-orphaned system as your primary computing platform, go right ahead. But, please stop posting articles about how your OS is superior to everyone else’s. You are just wasting your time writing them.
Even if the platform is the greatest thing since sliced bread and the GUI is the most efficient piece of software engineering ever devised, you are not going to convince anyone who is not currently running RISC OS to switch to a platform with a miniscule user base, very little software, and no name recognition to speak of outside the UK.
Deep down, I really wish the Amiga had succeeded. I really wish that people would get behind the AROS project. I really wish Microsoft was the one who went under and it was now a battle between Mac, Linux, and Amiga. But, I don’t think that posting rants about how great the Amiga was is going to sway anyone to jump from their current (properly supported) platform and go back to an Amiga or even one of the newer Amiga-like platforms.
I think the same applies to RISC OS. The time that RISC OS could have been a mainstream OS has long passed. You can rant all you like about how great it was/is, but with only 3000 users (How many are actualy software developers?) and a lack of modern software and hardware support (codecs, iPods, etc.), how can you expect to convince anyone to come over to your side?
So, please. Use your machine and be happy. But, stop wasting your time writing articles about how great it is and how awful Windows/Mac/Linux are. (Although I tend to agree about Windows. 😉
Edited 2006-12-14 14:19
>But, please stop posting articles about how your OS is
>superior to everyone else’s. You are just wasting your
>time writing them.
I think it’s probably about time that you and many others around here stopped reading the articles about RISC OS. You can quite easily censor these articles yourself. There is no need to ask (or tell) someone else to stop writing about something they care about. If you don’t care, ignore it and move along. Don’t waste your time and his by reading the articles and posting replies like this.
Well said.
Nice, what a quality article
Sizes of pictures and their quality as a proof of OS’s superiority? Yeah, right 
First of all, I noticed the pictures created under Mac OS X were much sharper. But as far as I recall, you can choose the amount of image smoothing when saving under Gimp as a jpg, too. And please, a text editor as a proof of an OS’s superiority?? I’m not saying anything about the quality of either, but well, this article is standing on pretty shallow ground..
Well, I just tried in Gimp to resize that spider image, convert it to 8bit image and so..Resulting file size 24.6kb, and looks more or less the same as the one created under RiscOS.. What does that tell about my OS?
Not much
Except that your OS does not run the vaunted RISC OS Photodesk!
Out of curiosity, I downloaded the source sprite file for the bar graph in Vigay’s article and performed by own tests:
Using GraphicConverter 5.9.3 on OS X, I immediately ‘Saved As’ a 32-bit PNG file: 8,606 bytes.
Vigay’s PNG generated by GraphicConverter is 9,914 bytes and dithered.
Resaving the original sprite as a GIF with GraphicConverter: 13,617 bytes.
Vigay’s GIF from GraphicConverter: 14,403 bytes and dithered.
I don’t know why his GraphicConverter files are larger than mine.
I then pulled my resulting PNG into Photoshop CS and used ‘Save for Web’ to make an optimized PNG: 3,520 bytes.
Vigay’s best PNG generated by Photodesk on RiscOS: 5,480 bytes (almost 2K larger!)
Finally, I used Photoshop CS again to save an optimized GIF: 9,868 bytes.
Vigay’s best GIF: 11,198 bytes (1.3K larger!)
No dithering was needed as the bar graph has only 21 colors.
I couldn’t test the JPG because the link to the source file is broken.
All Paul has proven is that GraphicConverter may be inferior at optimizing graphics compared to Photodesk. Photoshop does a better job, and there are other apps available for Macs and PCs that will optimize even more. In any case, the underlying OS makes no difference.
I know while it catches you by surprise, there’s always going to be those who disagree with you no matter how valid your points are or how much you enjoy something.
I understand the compelling feeling to write another update/article…but don’t turn this into an everybody-should-like-RISCOS-fest by continually writing articles to back up points.
It’s a war that can never be won as everyone has their opinions and preferences. I commend your efforts though, and have nothing against RISC OS!
Of course, we’re a little behind on our Java port…
Why is using tables amateurish? They are perfectly fine as long as you don’t use too many of them and don’t nest them, and CSS is applicable to them for fonts, borders, colors, etc.
What makes someone an amateur? I think that accusing someone else of bad practices or believing that you are a better developer (or better anything for that matter) than the next person does not say much for your character.
Did you even read his articles? The second article was better but the first was so superior.
He was not called an amateur, the use of tables for simple layouts is amateur, but that does not mean he is amateur.
I never said I was a better anything than him. In much the same way as an art critic may know what makes great art that does not mean they are great artists. Whether or not I can write better markup is IRRELEVANT.
The use of tables for layout violates current web design principles; its bulkier, content is not seperated from presentation making updates more difficult among other things and it breaks the whole point of the semantic web. But I am not the one who claimed I produced lean fast loading code, he did. If I ever did that I would make sure that my site was what I claimed.
If you cannot read with comprehension its best you don’t comment or make character judgements.
My comment was to the comment regarding his HTML example, not to his article or comments regarding the value of the article. Maybe YOU should address YOUR comprehension skills.
I’ll address your original comment point by point.
Why is using tables amateurish?
Its not amateurish if used for table type data or for layout where no other readily available or easily implementable solution will work. But if you use tables for simply layout you are violating previously explained web design principles. Using tables in this manner is typical of someone who is an amateur. Please note that this does not mean the person is an amateur it is just typical of one. At times professionals produce amateurish work for a variety of reasons. I won’t elaborate.
The fact that you can use CSS on tables is irrelevant. Best practice requires the use of correct semantics. CSS for layout will never be semantically correct and will also always break the ideal of seperating content from presentation.
What makes someone an amateur?
Never said he was an amateur or that using tables necessarily makes someone an amateur. See above for clarification. I’m an amateur by the way.
I think that accusing someone else of bad practices or believing that you are a better developer (or better anything for that matter) than the next person does not say much for your character.
I am sure thats not the cleverest thing you ever said. I hope that you didn’t think that through before you typed it. Don’t worry though even the most intelligent people say stupid things from time to time. So please be careful not to say I am calling you stupid, I’m not.
Back to why that statement not thought through. Believing that you are better than someone is not necessarily arrogant or even wrong. I am sure Michael Shumacher thinks he can race a car better than me, but he has every right to, his belief is grounded firmly in reality. Anyone getting there nose bent out of shape because someone thinks they are better at something than you is prideful. Please take particular note that there is a difference between thinking you are generally better than someone i.e. have more worth than them than thinking that you are better AT something.
Its also one of those statements convicts the person making the statement. You say that thinking you are better than someone does not say much for their character. Implicit in the statement is the belief that your character is better. It therefore follows that you have just convicted yourself of the same vice.
But I never claimed to be better than anyone at anything.