It's very strange that as soon as people start getting optimistic about the future of the platform, some key player comes along and makes a rather stupid PR mess, RISCOS Ltd.'s Wakefield handout comes to mind.

If RISCOS Ltd. has no faith in its own market is there any way of taking over the company or bypassing it and deal with Pace directly?

Rumours about hardware manufacturers being unwilling to speak to one another and work together on a future for the platform have been getting stronger without anyone from any of the companies in question denying these rumours. The same rumours imply that some of these companies are unwilling to work with RISCOS Ltd.

If any of these rumours are true, do we really have a future?

Rumours about hardware manufacturers being unwilling to speak to one another and work together on a future for the platform have been getting stronger

The same article stated that MicroDigital were willing to license their technology to other manufacturers.

Ah, here we are. AU Aug 2001 page 44. Paul Middleton "suggested that there was no destopk market left. Surely that is what RiscOs Ltd was formed to do?" after saying that Pace STB's are the way forward for RiscOS. AU then point out the odness of his saying this immediately after the very upbeat Microdigital presentation. IMHO ROD may well have a future, but not if Mr Middletonisleft in charge. Sorrry, Paul. BTW posted this from my Psion 5. Apologies for typo's.

The best thing now, in my opinion, is for Castle and RiscStation (and MD if you insist!) to equally own and fund ROL, without PM anywhere in sight!

Having said that, I still hold faith in Castle and RiscStation and don't think they are about to let one fool ruin the market. Have some faith, people.

Problem i can see is how do you get them out of the market, leaving someone/company to develop the OS?

Easy - lobby the share holders. They are not all mindless drones who think the sun shines out of the current ROS Ltd's managements a**e.

sorted, then i spose thats the way forward then,
how d'ya lobby the share holders thou :/ ?

Write to them, explain clearly and unemotionally the problems and propose a bloodless coup.

Problem i can see is how do you get them out of the market, leaving someone/company to develop the OS?

Easy - lobby the share holders. They are not all mindless drones who think the sun shines out of the current ROS Ltd's m
anagements a**e.

Contact as many as possible, starting with the B-share holders.
A full list is on page21

...is there any way of taking over [ROL] or bypassing it and deal with Pace directly?

On the news thread this discussion came from, Doug wrote:
"...faced with a RISC Os base of 4000+ or 1,000,000 plus in varying types of [Pace-derived]machines then I think the latter will provide a way of sustaining our operating system. Oregano is one example of this in that the main code is for a STB/Internet TV yet Castle pays for the RISC OS add ons. "

Doug seems to be implying that the Pace browser does not run under RiscOS. Or was that a typo for "Castle pays for the *desktop* add ons."?

If Doug's comment is true, this really confuses me. What is going on?

Either way, have Castle bypassed ROL and gone to Pace direct?

On the news thread this discussion came from, Doug wrote:
"...faced with a RISC Os base of 4000+ or 1,000,000 plus in varying types of [Pace-derived]machines then I think the latter will provide a way of sustaining our operating system. Oregano is one example of this in that the main code is for a STB/Internet TV yet Castle pays for the RISC OS add ons. "

Doug seems to be implying that the Pace browser does not run under RiscOS. Or was that a typo for "Castle pays for the *desktop* add ons."?

If Doug's comment is true, this really confuses me. What is going on?

Last I heard Pace favoured Fresco and didn't use Oregano. What Doug is saying is that Castle are paying for the extra work necessary to bring Oregano to the desktop machines - although there are STBs which run RISC OS the environment in which the browsers run isn't necessarily the desktop that we know and love. This is one of the reasons why Oregano has an user interface that does not conform to the style guide.

Last I heard Pace favoured Fresco and didn't use Oregano. What Doug is saying is that Castle are paying for the extra work necessary to bring Oregano to the desktop machines - although there are STBs which run RISC OS the environment in which the browsers run isn't necessarily the desktop that we know and love.

So do we have two STB browsers - Fresco (used by Pace) and Mother-of-Oregano (to be converted for Castle)? And then the ROL bundled stuff.

Is this code fork healthy, when resources are so stretched?

So do we have two STB browsers - Fresco (used by Pace) and Mother-of-Oregano (to be converted for Castle)? And then the ROL bundled stuff.

Is this code fork healthy, when resources are so stretched?

In addition to Andrews comments - just because Pace own RISC OS and design STBs doesn't mean they're the only ones using RISC OS in STBs. They could be licensing RISC OS for use by other vendors who may choose to package Oregano instead of Fresco. These vendors are NOT in competition with Pace - they're in competition with other STB vendors. AIUI Pace work on the same basis as ARM - licensing designs.

The code fork is healthy because it's not being paid for by the desktop market. ANT fund Fresco through their own sales and Oregan must do likewise for Oregano. The only resources used are those required to being either to the desktop market and, AIUI, the rewrite for Oregano 2 should make this even easier (require less resources).

Firstly there's this bit, which I take offence at:

Some of the Comp.Sys.Acorn newsgroups and Website discussion forums have carried extensive threads which have usually originated from postings by one or two people who have personal axes to grind against RISCOS Ltd.

Luckily most adult RISC OS users have little interest in reading postings from immature students who feel the need to liberally spread e******ves into their messages as their way of trying to make out that their view is the correct one because they feel so forcefully about it.

Many of you will have seen the August 2001 issue of Acorn User which contained a report on the RISC OS 2001 Expo in Holland, which mistakenly reported that my speech at the show stated that there was no desktop market left and that I had been very negative, offering no direction for desktop computers. To put matters straight there will be a follow up article in the next issue of Acorn User which will correct many items raised in that article and others in the same issue.

Firstly there's this bit, which I take offence at:

Some of the Comp.Sys.Acorn newsgroups and Website discussion forums have carried extensive threads which have usually originated from postings by one or two people who have personal axes to grind against RISCOS Ltd.

Nonsense. The items posted are from concerned individuals. Not over the future of ROS Ltd, more the future of the OS and the latest effort of the company behind the desktop version to save it's own neck by offering vague promises without saying if it will benefit the market.

Luckily most adult RISC OS users have little interest in reading postings from immature students who feel the need to liberally spread e******ves into their messages as their way of trying to make out that their view is the correct one because they feel so forcefully about it.

Um, where? The current crop are pretty tame in comparison. This sort of comment makes me think that Paul is becoming more like a laterday Lady Thatcher in not being aware what the grass roots feelings really are.

About the AU thing, Paul said:

Many of you will have seen the August 2001 issue of Acorn User which contained a report on the RISC OS 2001 Expo in Holland, which mistakenly reported that my speech at the show stated that there was no desktop market left and that I had been very negative, offering no direction for desktop computers. To put matters straight there will be a follow up article in the next issue of Acorn User which will correct many items raised in that article and others in the same issue.

Ah. A right to reply about something he said. Sounds convincing. By ROS Ltd saying that there will be no 32 bit development, they've shown the direction of the market - down a big pan with a odd odour about it.

I feel very strongly about this sort of rubbish. Why won't he come clean, enter into an BBC style IRC chat where everyone can put their complaints/grievances around, but with the g/tee that Paul will not be his normal arrogant self (this is my opinion of his attitude at the recent shareholders meeting - if someone didn't agree, then they were wrong and nothing would change his mind as he refused to listen)

I'm just going to quote a couple of bits from the latest Foundation newsletter about the Select scheme which seem relevant to this thread.

Interestingly this would make the second newsletter I've not received by email since I resubscribed. Nothing has changed at my end so either Yahoo are blocking them or I've been left off the list. RISC OS Ltd really aren't inspiring my confidence.

Luckily most adult RISC OS users have little interest in reading postings from immature students who feel the need to liberally spread e******ves into their messages as their way of trying to make out that their view is the correct one because they feel so forcefully about it.

I'm not surprised you take offence - I do too. I wonder if Paul appreciates the efforts being made in this market by "immature students". In addition this "immature student" now has a substantial income and Paul is not encouraging me to spend it on the RISC OS market.

About the AU thing, Paul said:

Many of you will have seen the August 2001 issue of Acorn User which contained a report on the RISC OS 2001 Expo in Holland, which mistakenly reported that my speech at the show stated that there was no desktop market left and that I had been very negative, offering no direction for desktop computers. To put matters straight there will be a follow up article in the next issue of Acorn User which will correct many items raised in that article and others in the same issue.

So does this make the Acorn User writers liars? Are they reporting stuff which hasn't been said? Did they get the wrong end of the stick? It seems a pretty straightforward comment to me.

However I am glad that a followup article to put the record "straight" will be published in AU. I guess this means waiting another month. If Paul has been misquoted then perhaps he and the article author should try to find out why the author felt the way he (she?? I haven't got the mag in front of me and I haven't read all that article yet) did. The RISC OS Select scheme was a PR disaster and now this appears to be another one.

As Steve Turnbull says in his editorial - communication is one of the keys to survival -however, as I see it, miscommunication is becoming increasingly damaging.

I'm just going to quote a couple of bits from the latest Foundation newsletter about the Select scheme which seem relevant to this thread.

Firstly there's this bit, which I take offence at:

Some of the Comp.Sys.Acorn newsgroups and Website discussion forums have carried extensive threads which have usually originated from postings by one or two people who have personal axes to grind against RISCOS Ltd.

Luckily most adult RISC OS users have little interest in reading postings from immature students who feel the need to liberally spread e******ves into their messages as their way of trying to make out that their view is the correct one because they feel so forcefully about it.

About the AU thing, Paul said:

Many of you will have seen the August 2001 issue of Acorn User which contained a report on the RISC OS 2001 Expo in Holland, which mistakenly reported that my speech at the show stated that there was no desktop market left and that I had been very negative, offering no direction for desktop computers. To put matters straight there will be a follow up article in the next issue of Acorn User which will correct many items raised in that article and others in the same issue.

Firstly there's this bit, which I take

Nothing personal I assure you, except in sofar as the fate of RiscOS is close to my heart. Looking at ROL's performance (a judgement I make largely from the publicity it produces, such as its annual report, writeups in AU, etc), I have to ask: if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, then what is is?

A freshwater, off-colour, overfed Tasmanian Bladderfish?

[Edited by andrew at 10:41, 25/7/2001]

I'm just going to quote a couple of bits from the latest Foundation newsletter about the Select scheme which seem relevant to this thread.

Firstly there's this bit, which I take offence at:

Some of the Comp.Sys.Acorn newsgroups and Website discussion forums have carried extensive threads which have usually originated from postings by one or two people who have personal axes to grind against RISCOS Ltd.

Luckily most adult RISC OS users have little interest in reading postings from immature students who feel the need to liberally spread e******ves into their messages as their way of trying to make out that their view is the correct one because they feel so forcefully about it.

So he is reading this! My God, take it all back. If I was to take all the "immature students" away from the market, which is possible, then ROL would have lost a large percentage of their userbase. As said before ROL don't have *any* obvious sign of customer care and if our helpdesk behaved in this way then we'd be shot on the spot.

Obviously I am taking this all too much to heart but as Paul Johnson has said, the reason we are "apparently rubbishing ROL" is that we are dead worried about the market and it seems the more you know about the market the more concerned you get.

About the AU thing, Paul said:

Many of you will have seen the August 2001 issue of Acorn User which contained a report on the RISC OS 2001 Expo in Holland, which mistakenly reported that my speech at the show stated that there was no desktop market left and that I had been very negative, offering no direction for desktop computers. To put matters straight there will be a follow up article in the next issue of Acorn User which will correct many items raised in that article and others in the same issue.

This shows that you should have been more careful because if one person can take it "the wrong way" then many of the audience will have taken it as such as waiting another month for AU to put right the wrong is leaving the gap too wide for losing more of your cherished userbase or customerbase as it *should* be known.
Maybe you should make a public apology that it was taken the wrong way and write down what you actually mean and then get it checked and sent.

Paul Middleton: I do come across more and more as against ROL and that is because my desperation of the market has come to an all time high and is at the point where nothing you say to me will be believable. Maybe I know too much but your customer service skills to posts is not brilliant and there are many people who would proof read it before being sent.
I am, in a word, disgusted.

Sorry.

Stuart Halliday - Acorn Cybervillage.

We don't care if he was just talking about RISC OS. We _do_ care that he was talking about the future of the desktop computer, since this is what we use. Set top related things are irrelevant to us.

I only see desktops being wiped out if set top boxes offer the same features... even then it's very unlikely.

I discovered that this AU article was written by a person who's english is not his first language.
I also spoke to a director of a RISC OS hardware company who was also at the show and heard this talk.
Seemingly Paul M was talking about the general future of the desktop Computer, not just RISC OS.
Pace and others like myself see the set-top box taking over from the desktop computer as we know it for the general public in the years to come.

That being the case, this whole PR mess-up is Acorn User's fault for not double checking such a serious statement. Mr. Middleton please accept my apologies for jumping to conclusions on this matter.

Still, a public press release to point this out should have quickly killed off this thread and many people would have felt a lot more confident about the market. I have regained some of my confidence in it just by reading the above, now please announce that work will soon start on the 32bit OS and I'll be a happy RISC OS user.

Gulli

[Edited by Gulli at 19:03, 2/8/2001]

We don't care if he was just talking about RISC OS. We _do_ care that he was talking about the future of the desktop computer, since this is what we use. Set top related things are irrelevant to us.

I only see desktops being wiped out if set top boxes offer the same features... even then it's very unlikely.

I think its unlikely too. That having been said the sales of "commodity" computers like PCs is likely to decrease. Special interests computers (like RISC OS based ones) are, I think, likely to fair better as its ENTHUSIASTS who purchase rather than the Computer Novices that tended in the past to wind up with a Packard Bell bought from PC world or the like.

There is a space for settop boxes too, and if that crossfeeds into the desktop RISC OS market so be it.

I discovered that this AU article was written by a person who's english is not his first language.
I also spoke to a director of a RISC OS hardware company who was also at the show and heard this talk.
Seemingly Paul M was talking about the general future of the desktop Computer, not just RISC OS.
Pace and others like myself see the set-top box taking over from the desktop computer as we know it for the general public in the years to come.
I'm sure people here must have visited the Pace site where it shows you their idea of home computers. If not go there now. http://www.pace.com/
You'll see RISC OS has a big future in this dream of Pace's.

Stuart Halliday - Acorn Cybervillage.

H'mm. So no more desktop computers in the home. Not for RISC OS, not for Apple, Linux, Microsoft, BeOS, not for no-one. Pardon me for asking, but why is ROL in the business of developing and selling the RISC OS desktop for a host market that they say is even deader that I thought they were saying?

The correct url is http://www.pace.co.uk/ if your browser can cope with the animation. Future home users will probably use all those neworky gadgets, in order of popularity, for phone calls, films, games, downloading porn, shopping, email and printing the holiday snaps.

Even if Pace do run with RISC OS rather than Linux (which they are getting increasingly involved in), I really don't see where the RISC OS *desktop* - or ROL - fits into the picture.

All this doesn't change anything I've said.

if ((customer_care>0) || (clue_1 > 0) || (PR_ability > 0))
{
printf("Well, I'll be jiggered\n";
exit(EXIT_SUPRISED);
}

I wouldn't believe much I read in Acorn User as regards news! I just read it for the adverts and the odd decent review!!!

Aren't you the AU webmaster?

It seems to me that if the RISCOS Ltd shareholders have any sense then they'll throw Middleton out, then everyone will get what they want which is 32bit RISC OS.........
All the manufacturers want it, we want it, that can only mean That Idiot goes and 32bit appears

If you read the Annual Report you will see that this has been tried before.
If the Shareholders wish to remove TI they would have to have yet another General meeting and another vote of no confidence.
This is unlikely to happen.

Secondly if TI is asked to leave, then he can still be given a Directors role by the holders of the B-Shares. But he can also be quickly removed/suspended by these same people.

Their names are in the Annual Report.
Try them first.