| |
StudioSound |
| |
This is a long thread. Click here to view the threaded list. |
| |
|
Paul Johnson |
Message #114851, posted by nodoid at 07:21, 21/7/2010, in reply to message #114850 |
Member
Posts: 69
|
I've tried to contact Henrik before, but my emails have always been bounced back to me. If anybody is subscribed to the csa programmer's forum (I'm too thick to be on that), that would be the best place to leave a message asking if anybody has an up to date email address for him. He is still around, because Chris Wraight was in touch with him about 2 years ago.
Anyone fancy doing this? I try to avoid newsgroups now for many differing reasons (the biggest one is that I usually get drawn into some form of arguement and spend days on it!)
It would be fun to try and get this running again - Chris, do you have an up to date address?
[Edited by nodoid at 08:22, 21/7/2010] |
| |
 [ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Blind Moose |
Message #114868, posted by Acornut at 15:41, 24/7/2010, in reply to message #114851 |
 No-eye-deer (No Idea)
Posts: 487
|
Dunno if this is the right one on facewotsit !  |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Paul Johnson |
Message #114875, posted by nodoid at 11:55, 26/7/2010, in reply to message #114868 |
Member
Posts: 69
|
Dunno if this is the right one on facewotsit ! Worth a shot... Nothing on csap... |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Paul Johnson |
Message #114877, posted by nodoid at 10:14, 27/7/2010, in reply to message #114875 |
Member
Posts: 69
|
Dunno if this is the right one on facewotsit ! Worth a shot... Nothing on csap...
No reply from FB either... Looks like unless Chris (#1) has the source which hasn't been bascrunched, then it'll be a shed load of work...
Update : emailed Chris... reply pending...
[Edited by nodoid at 13:34, 27/7/2010] |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jon Robinson |
Message #114878, posted by castlevarich at 13:34, 27/7/2010, in reply to message #114877 |
Member
Posts: 55
|
Dunno if this is the right one on facewotsit ! Worth a shot... Nothing on csap...
No reply from FB either... Looks like unless Chris (#1) has the source which hasn't been bascrunched, then it'll be a shed load of work...
Update : emailed Chris... reply pending...
I've managed to find Henrik Pedersen's email address.
Chris Wraight has the uncrunched source and a lot of documentation for StudioSound.
I've emailed him, and I hope that the source code and documentation can be made available for download from somewhere, so that Paul and Terje can take a look at it.
Jon Robinson (Leeds)
|
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Paul Johnson |
Message #114884, posted by nodoid at 07:51, 28/7/2010, in reply to message #114878 |
Member
Posts: 69
|
Dunno if this is the right one on facewotsit ! Worth a shot... Nothing on csap...
No reply from FB either... Looks like unless Chris (#1) has the source which hasn't been bascrunched, then it'll be a shed load of work...
Update : emailed Chris... reply pending...
I've managed to find Henrik Pedersen's email address.
Chris Wraight has the uncrunched source and a lot of documentation for StudioSound.
I've emailed him, and I hope that the source code and documentation can be made available for download from somewhere, so that Paul and Terje can take a look at it.
Jon Robinson (Leeds)
Thanks Jon 
|
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jon Robinson |
Message #114888, posted by castlevarich at 13:47, 28/7/2010, in reply to message #114877 |
Member
Posts: 55
|
Dunno if this is the right one on facewotsit ! Worth a shot... Nothing on csap...
No reply from FB either... Looks like unless Chris (#1) has the source which hasn't been bascrunched, then it'll be a shed load of work...
Update : emailed Chris... reply pending...
[Edited by nodoid at 13:34, 27/7/2010]
Dear Paul & Terje (if you're reading this)
There's a version of StudioSound, dated 2007, available from here -
http://www.lym.iconbar.com/studio.htm
I don't have an Iyo (I'm still chugging away on a SA RiscPC, although I will be getting a Beagle at some stage), so I don't know whether it's 32 bit, but the BASIC code has NOT been crunched and the assembler still has comments in it, if anybody wants to take a look.
Does anybody have a copy of the manual in PDF or JPEG format ???
Best wishes Jon |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jon Robinson |
Message #114896, posted by castlevarich at 18:15, 29/7/2010, in reply to message #114888 |
Member
Posts: 55
|
Dunno if this is the right one on facewotsit !
Does anybody have a copy of the manual in PDF or JPEG format ???
Dear Paul
Can you put your email address on here in a disguised form - I can't find it on your website.
I've just received a scan of the manual in JPEG format from Henrik, and I'll send it to you and Terje, if I can have your email address.
Best wishes
Jon Robinson (Leeds)
|
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Paul Johnson |
Message #114900, posted by nodoid at 12:35, 30/7/2010, in reply to message #114896 |
Member
Posts: 69
|
Dear Paul
Can you put your email address on here in a disguised form - I can't find it on your website.
I've just received a scan of the manual in JPEG format from Henrik, and I'll send it to you and Terje, if I can have your email address.
Best wishes
Jon Robinson (Leeds)
paul
at
all
!+
the
!+
johnsons
dot
co
dot
uk
replace the dot with what you think and also !+ with whatever (logically) !+ is
Paul
P.S. Emailed terje yesterday, no reply as yet. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jon Robinson |
Message #114903, posted by castlevarich at 11:14, 31/7/2010, in reply to message #114900 |
Member
Posts: 55
|
Dear Paul
Can you put your email address on here in a disguised form - I can't find it on your website.
I've just received a scan of the manual in JPEG format from Henrik, and I'll send it to you and Terje, if I can have your email address.
Best wishes
Jon Robinson (Leeds)
paul
at
all
!+
the
!+
johnsons
dot
co
dot
uk
replace the dot with what you think and also !+ with whatever (logically) !+ is
Paul
P.S. Emailed terje yesterday, no reply as yet.
Paul
You need to be a bit less cryptic about what the !+ is replaced by.
The manaul is waiting for you, but with ! in front of the and in front of johnsons, it just gets bounced back to me.
Best wishes Jon |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
VinceH |
Message #114904, posted by VincceH at 12:58, 31/7/2010, in reply to message #114903 |
 Lowering the tone since the dawn of time
Posts: 1600
|
Paul
You need to be a bit less cryptic about what the !+ is replaced by. By !+ he means - |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jon Robinson |
Message #114938, posted by castlevarich at 12:41, 3/8/2010, in reply to message #114904 |
Member
Posts: 55
|
Paul
You need to be a bit less cryptic about what the !+ is replaced by. By !+ he means -
If anybody wants a copy of the manual, I now have a copy as a series of JPEGs that Henrik has kindly sent me.
For the moment, if you want a copy, just email me and I will send it to you fairly quickly.
My email is -
castlevarich <at> yahoo (dot) co (dot) uk
Also if anybody finds that their copy of StudioSound locks the machine up when they do quit from the iconbar, you can get around this by doing Alt-Break and then clicking on Stop to be returned to the desktop.
Jon Robinson (Leeds) |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Paul Johnson |
Message #114945, posted by nodoid at 12:13, 4/8/2010, in reply to message #114938 |
Member
Posts: 69
|
Just a quick heads up - following a HDD disaster, I'm only just about getting things working properly at home again.
Delays expected.... |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Terje Slettebø |
Message #115001, posted by tslettebo at 22:50, 16/8/2010, in reply to message #114888 |
Member
Posts: 3
|
Dear Paul & Terje (if you're reading this)
There's a version of StudioSound, dated 2007, available from here -
http://www.lym.iconbar.com/studio.htm Thanks, Jon, I'll look into what may be done with it.
As I replied to Paul Johnson (in mail), I've got quite a few other things on my plate these days: One thing I'd like to work on is getting OpenGL support for RISC OS (probably by porting Mesa3D, such as the earlier IyonixMesa project), and working on the BeagleBoard.
Therefore, when it comes to StudioSound, I'd prefer to just do the minimum amount needed (unless someone else does it) to get it working on the Iyonix/BeagleBoard, which means no full rewrite of the code in a different language...
As Jeffrey Lee pointed out: Our main constraint these days is the availability of developers with time/skill/inclination to work on projects like this.
Regards,
Terje |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Paul Johnson |
Message #115011, posted by nodoid at 10:24, 18/8/2010, in reply to message #115001 |
Member
Posts: 69
|
The big problem is the assembler. I think going forward shifting this from assembler to C would make a hell of a lot of sense. From my incredibly limited knowledge of ARM assembler, the bulk of the code looks to be purely for speed on older hardware - something that's no longer needed.
--> rant begins
I'm taking the pragmatic view - with a platform with so few developers and for whom, most are using OS 4.0x or above, why should we be bothering with anything under the ARM7500FE machines? If someone is using an ARM3 box with OS 3.1, then sod them. Seriously, sod them.
Acorn really dropped the ball with the insane requirement to make sure that no-one ever needed to buy newer hardware or a newer operating system by ensuring everything was backwards happy. It not only cost Acorn dearly, but also killed off the likes of RiscStation and MicroDigital - why should people buy new hardware and the OS when it still works.
I hate saying it, but this is one instance where MS and Apple did get things right. Support software for one version of the OS below the current but press on - if you're machine won't handle the software, hard lines, get a new box.
Oh well...
end rant ----> |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Andrew Rawnsley |
Message #115012, posted by arawnsley at 11:29, 18/8/2010, in reply to message #115011 |
R-Comp chap
Posts: 600
|
To be fair, I don't think we can really blame Acorn for this. Software support is largely down to developers, and there was never a real need to cut off olders (ie. reducing revenue).
It could be argued that Acorn should have provided more "out of the box" functionality in terms of libraries, APIs and so on to entice developers to later OSs, but even then, I have to say that as a developer, if a couple of extra days work allows us to make more sales, it is probably worth it.
It is the downside of a small market, to be honest - you need to allow everyone to run the software to make it viable! |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Paul Stewart |
Message #115014, posted by sa110_mk at 11:49, 18/8/2010, in reply to message #115012 |
Member
Posts: 144
|
But surely there has to come a time when software developers themeselves realise that for the platform to move forward everyone should be running a more recent version of the OS? The OS devlopers can only do so much. As developers drop support for older OS versions, then users still running on say pre RISC OS 4 would then be encouraged to upgrade. This could mean they simply purchase ROL's upgrade CD, or perhaps download the VIDC version of RISC OS 5. It could also mean new hardware sales for the A9home or RComp's range of Virtual Acorn boxes.
Of course one way to encourse users to upgrade maybe for someone to start marketing a 1Ghz ARM based RISC OS system. (Firefox may at least become quite usable then!) |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Paul Johnson |
Message #115020, posted by nodoid at 22:26, 18/8/2010, in reply to message #115012 |
Member
Posts: 69
|
To be fair, I don't think we can really blame Acorn for this. Software support is largely down to developers, and there was never a real need to cut off olders (ie. reducing revenue). On the contrary, Acorn is completely to blame. It was they who made the choice to make sure everything worked on everything. I have no problems with backward compatibility - hell, if Sony delayed their PS3 because of 3 PS1 games not working correctly, that's good enough for me. However, forward compatibility is another matter. Why the hell should a RPC running either OS 3.6 or 3.7 have to cater for OS 3.1 users? That's insane and costs dearly in the wallet and foot!
It could be argued that Acorn should have provided more "out of the box" functionality in terms of libraries, APIs and so on to entice developers to later OSs, but even then, I have to say that as a developer, if a couple of extra days work allows us to make more sales, it is probably worth it.
Again though. If Acorn had made the decision to kill off 3.1 users and effectively make them do as Apple and M$ do and invest in new hardware then your argument would probably not be holding as much water.
Don't get me wrong, I completely understand your point - it just doesn't help.
It is the downside of a small market, to be honest - you need to allow everyone to run the software to make it viable!
But only because the company behind it didn't get the whole "you need new hardware" argument... |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Paul Johnson |
Message #115023, posted by nodoid at 00:20, 19/8/2010, in reply to message #115014 |
Member
Posts: 69
|
Of course one way to encourse users to upgrade maybe for someone to start marketing a 1Ghz ARM based RISC OS system.
Doubt it. You'd still get the same bunch of folks defending using their archaic OS 3.1 machines and so not investing in new hardware - and I wouldn't blame them.
Unless someone could bring out a viable bit of kit for not stupid money (the Iyonix was a nice box, just cost massively too much), you'll not get the updates.
I seriously wonder how many people involved in RISC OS are not doing most of their dev work under VRPC or rpcemu-spoon |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
John Hoare |
Message #115024, posted by moss at 07:17, 19/8/2010, in reply to message #115023 |
Posts: 9348
|
Buying an Iyonix was one of the poorest financial decisions I have ever made. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jeffrey Lee |
Message #115025, posted by Phlamethrower at 07:44, 19/8/2010, in reply to message #115023 |
 Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot stuff
Posts: 15100
|
1Ghz ARM based RISC OS system Unless someone could bring out a viable bit of kit for not stupid money (the Iyonix was a nice box, just cost massively too much), you'll not get the updates. £117 from Farnell. Admittedly it's not the most consumer-friendly form factor, but there seem to be enough users getting behind the idea. As far as I can see the problem isn't the users, it's the developers - there simply aren't enough of them that are willing to work on the OS - they don't know C, they don't know assembler, they aren't skilled enough to work on the kind of code they need to, or they vanish after a couple of months because they don't have enough time/dedication to stick with the project.
The only way to stop software being backwards compatible all the way to ARMv2 is if the new version of the OS provides features which aren't available in the old version (And specifically for the OMAP port, these features would be things like VFP support or access to the video overlays). And the only way that's going to happen is if developers pull their finger out and add support for those features to the OS. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
VinceH |
Message #115026, posted by VincceH at 08:15, 19/8/2010, in reply to message #115023 |
Lowering the tone since the dawn of time
Posts: 1600
|
I seriously wonder how many people involved in RISC OS are not doing most of their dev work under VRPC or rpcemu-spoon My impression - not based on anything more than conversations at shows, or by email, where the subject of tools used might come up in passing - is that the majority* of developers either do their work on an Iyonix or on Linux.
Amongst those using Linux there is a tendency to also have and use RPCEmu, but the 'work' is done on Linux itself, cross compiling with GCC.
Amongst those using an Iyonix, depending on what their OtherOStm box is many if not all have one or other of the two emulators, but the 'work' is done on the Iyonix, using either GCC or Norcroft.
* Obviously, that's the majority to whom I've spoken in one way or another, and may not be representitive of the RISC OS developer community as a whole. The value of shares can go down as well as up. Do not try this at home. No. Really. Do not try this at home.
[Edited by VincceH at 09:23, 19/8/2010] |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Paul Johnson |
Message #115030, posted by nodoid at 13:05, 19/8/2010, in reply to message #115025 |
Member
Posts: 69
|
Unless someone could bring out a viable bit of kit for not stupid money (the Iyonix was a nice box, just cost massively too much), you'll not get the updates. £117 from Farnell. Admittedly it's not the most consumer-friendly form factor, but there seem to be enough users getting behind the idea. As far as I can see the problem isn't the users, it's the developers - there simply aren't enough of them that are willing to work on the OS - they don't know C, they don't know assembler, they aren't skilled enough to work on the kind of code they need to, or they vanish after a couple of months because they don't have enough time/dedication to stick with the project.
In that case, what needs to be done is this...
1. Someone packages the beagleboard so that Joe Public can just plug it in and the hard drive is there and other such things the standard user wants/needs - Out of the door at £250 would be good.
2. Developers are a problem. To that end, we need a benefactor willing to invest time and money into training and development. Entice some of the developers back and reward those still here.
3. Put a fatwa on unpleasantness between devs. If someone is being unpleasant, they're bit slapped! This extends to companies. The spat between ROS Ltd and ROOL has done the platform no good and caused more problems than enough.
You're right about the time/dedication point. The problem though is that RISC OS is now a hobby. It would be great to get back to 1998, but that's gone. Thing with hobbies is just that - they're hobbies. If I get bored with my train set, I put it away; there is no reason for me to carry on playing with it.
Make it a viable business proposition and it'll work.
The only way to stop software being backwards compatible all the way to ARMv2 is if the new version of the OS provides features which aren't available in the old version (And specifically for the OMAP port, these features would be things like VFP support or access to the video overlays). And the only way that's going to happen is if developers pull their finger out and add support for those features to the OS.
There in lies the problem :-( |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
VinceH |
Message #115033, posted by VincceH at 14:56, 19/8/2010, in reply to message #115030 |
Lowering the tone since the dawn of time
Posts: 1600
|
£117 from Farnell. In that case, what needs to be done is this...
1. Someone packages the beagleboard so that Joe Public can just plug it in and the hard drive is there and other such things the standard user wants/needs - Out of the door at £250 would be good.
Do you know anyone that wants to lose money on this? I'm afraid that's what they'll be doing at that price.
The spat between ROS Ltd and ROOL Do you mean between ROL and CTL? ROOL aren't directly involved in any spats with anyone. (They could be said to be indirectly involved in the ROL/CTL spat - but that doesn't make it a spat between ROL and them.)
Make it a viable business proposition and it'll work. No. Making it a viable business proposition doesn't mean it'll work, it just means you'll have something on paper, something more formal and more thought out and researched than vague mutterings on a web forum, which you could then use to try seeking investment. And even if you successfully get that backing, it could still fail.
Note also that most investors will want more than just numbers on paper saying 'this is what I expect to happen' - amongst other things they'll expect you to have actually started selling your product in order to show that there is a viable market, to show that the expectations you have down on paper are based on a market that has been, and is being proven. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Eric Rucker |
Message #115034, posted by bhtooefr at 16:49, 19/8/2010, in reply to message #115030 |
Member
Posts: 337
|
1. Someone packages the beagleboard so that Joe Public can just plug it in and the hard drive is there and other such things the standard user wants/needs - Out of the door at £250 would be good. Joe Public wouldn't take a Beagleboard-based system running RISC OS for free, much less actually pay money for it.
If you want to sell computers for that price to Joe Public, Atom is the way to go, not ARM, and get a Windows license for each one.
 |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Trevor Johnson |
Message #115078, posted by trevj at 12:01, 23/8/2010, in reply to message #115025 |
Member
Posts: 660
|
....As far as I can see the problem isn't the users, it's the developers - there simply aren't enough of them that are willing to work on the OS...
...(And specifically for the OMAP port, these features would be things like VFP support or access to the video overlays). And the only way that's going to happen is if developers pull their finger out and add support for those features to the OS. One former RISC OS development company, which AIUI left the scene some time ago, is Eidos. I presume that their historical work on video compression is what eventually spawned the current Forbidden Technologies online editing software. I wonder whether Chief Exec Stephen Streater is in any way interested in following the recent RISC OS (aka JLOS) developments. 
One possible reason why developers may be dissuaded from adding direct support for new features into the OS is the licensing conditions (specifically clauses 1.2.3 to 1.2.5 and notwithstanding the situation with respect to ROL licensing). AIUI new feature support as an integral part of the OS would permit others to make use of such newly developed features without necessarily having committed any resources to their development. IANAL but it would seem that any third party modules/software which could be considered a Derivative Work would be available to all. What developer seeking a return on their investment (if only to recover costs) would risk this?
Edit: ...Unless such developers arrive at a mutually agreeable payment with ROOL, of course.
[Edited by trevj at 19:21, 23/8/2010] |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Michael Emerton |
Message #115079, posted by MEmerton at 13:25, 23/8/2010, in reply to message #115033 |
Member
Posts: 75
|
£117 from Farnell. In that case, what needs to be done is this...
1. Someone packages the beagleboard so that Joe Public can just plug it in and the hard drive is there and other such things the standard user wants/needs - Out of the door at £250 would be good.
Do you know anyone that wants to lose money on this? I'm afraid that's what they'll be doing at that price.
What about this? (Quick google code)
https://specialcomp.com/beagleboard/order.htm#BeagleLCD2
Obviously there are other costs ect but still its out there |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Trevor Johnson |
Message #115412, posted by trevj at 08:17, 20/9/2010, in reply to message #115078 |
Member
Posts: 660
|
One former RISC OS development company, which AIUI left the scene some time ago, is Eidos. I presume that their historical work on video compression is what eventually spawned the current Forbidden Technologies online editing software. I wonder whether Chief Exec Stephen Streater is in any way interested in following the recent RISC OS (aka JLOS) developments. Stephen Streater will be a guest at the ROUGOL meeting on 15 November. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
| Pages (2): |< <
2
|
