Date : Fri, 09 Oct 2009 00:27:32 +0100
From : darren.grant@... (Darren Grant)
Subject: Electric Dreams last night.
On 08/10/2009 23:00, "Rick Murray" <rick@...> wrote:
>
> Oooh! Strong mail! :-)
>
Yes sorry, it did sound a bit harsher than intended when I re-read it.
>> BBC FanBoi alert !!
>
> Gee, now which mailing list was this? Remind me...
>
Although a BBC list I think it is safe to say most people have a general
interest in old tech and your message seemed quite dismissive of other
systems.
>> I personally preferred BBC basic in part because of teletext mode but
>> also because you typed the words rather than having them assigned to keys.
>> Took a bit of getting used to having to find the keywords on a spectrum.
>
> Isn't this what I've been saying as the main criticism of the machine?
>
It sounded a lot harsher than that, sounded like retro snobbery to me.
>
> I can equally attack Acorn machines - persistent refusal to implement FP
> meaning the platform just wasn't going to cut it with FP-heavy
> applications, illogical design decisions meaning a so-called expandable
> computer was already bottlenecking it's main bus (but, credit, they got
> ARM and x86 co-existing side by side and Win95 in a window!). Rather
> lame and uninspired IDE support... I won't drag on.
>
To be fair, regardless of what Acorn did they were never going to stay in
business, In fact none of the quirky manufacturers, Acorn, Commodore, Atari
were going to succeed as by then people had cottoned on to the idea of
standardisation. Some genuine and some imagined benefits from compatibility
with others was the way forward, it is just unfortunate that such a crippled
platform the IBM PC was the one that came out on top. Other platforms such
as RISC had architectural advantages but due to limited market penetration
never attracted the big software houses like Autodesk, Adobe, Quark etc and
obviously no Microsoft.
It is amazing that Apple managed to survive but what saved them was simply
they had a strong international following in some significant niches and had
some of the key software available including the Microsoft. If it wasn't for
the strong hold Apple had in publishing with Adobe software the Mac would
have gone the way of all the others. More recently Apple seems to have
learnt some lessons and in the main keeps to standards instead of building
their own quirky things like AppleTalk and ADB.
> I think he concentrated ONLY on the education aspect in order to portray
> it negatively to the kids. Like "this is cool, that's like being at
> school". Deny this.
>
My point entirely, it was incredibly realistic as if you were an average
person going into a high street shop like Dixons or WH Smith (I don't think
sold BBC's) the sales pitch you would get would be to buy a spectrum or C64.
They would be telling you that there were many more fun games on these
platforms, hundreds on their shelves compared to a handful of BBC titles
they would have. I distinctly remember going into John Menzies and having a
plethora of Spectrum an C64 titles and one small area for others including
BBC Micro, Electron, Vic20 etc.
> Numerous Spectrums at school. Nobody programmed them for fun, not beyond
> a few simple type-ins. The necessity to use key combinations (what with
> some keys holding three different keywords) meant it was clumsy and
> annoying in use. That is MY opinion, and largely the opinion of my
> friends. Great for games, but the ability to spell out programs would
> have vastly speeded things up. Don't say "you could learn", it's initial
> impressions like that which would put you off wanting to commit to
> learn. You yourself said "because you typed the words rather than having
> them assigned to keys" meaning that this was by no means a peculiarity
> to us, rather than a peculiarity to the Spectrum. Exactly how much
> experience is necessary to recognise and comment on this problem?
The interesting thing is the Spectrum 128k did have the option to type
instead of using the assigned keys.
>
> Isn't the new Mac based upon some sort of Linux-like thing?
It is a BSD unix system but with a decent GUI so that your average no tech
can us it, it is what Linux could be one day if only the devs could abandon
X-Windows and build a new windowing system.
>
> I'm pleased Mac is still around and there is still a mainstream player
> other than Microsoft; but Mac is a bit Acornish in making both the
> computer and the OS. Perhaps the strength of the PC is that there was no
> such dependence one on another, yet this could eventually be Microsoft's
> undoing as more and more move to Linux.
Yes the Mac is a lot like Acorn in the respect that they make hardware and
software.
The interesting thing is that it was the fact that the PC was copied by so
many manufacturers that gave Microsoft their dominance as in order to be in
the game these PC's had to run MS-DOS and then later Windows. The trouble is
that Windows isn't the only game in town any more. Like you say Linux is
creeping up on them and every badly written Windows driver that makes
windows crash further damages Microsoft even though it isn't directly their
fault. As much as I dislike Microsoft I do think that windows can actually
be a lot more stable than it is given credit for given decent hardware with
reliable drivers.
>> and you really want to share that with them but really they don't
> give a monkeys.
>
> Some people are just uninterested. This is why so much crap hardware is
> around. Next time you see a webcam, tell me its resolution. You might
> (or might not...) be surprised to see it scream 1.2 MEGAPIXELS, and in
> tidy writing admit that it's an interpolated figure and in reality it's
> a massively lamer third-of-a-megapixel imager inside.
> The tech sector is full of this sort of nonsense. Many if the drooling
> masses gave enough of a damn to listen to the passionate geek, they
> might walk away with a camera that really is what it claims to be
> instead of smoke and mirrors.
>
My point exactly, the majority don't care, can I chat to my relative in some
other place via Skype? great I'll have one.