Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 15th Oct 2005 15:56 UTC
RISC OS The debate over whether or not RISC OS should be open sourced took another turn this week when Peter Naulls argued that "certain parts" of the OS could be released under an open source licence. The State-side coder behind various ports including Firefox said this would ideally include "crucial parts that affect all users, even if they don't realise it, parts that can be created from scratch and made much better than the Acorn original, and parts which can managed by specific developers who already understand them well."
Thread beginning with comment 45539
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: yeah.. xscale..
by Andrew Youll on Sat 15th Oct 2005 18:52 UTC in reply to "yeah.. xscale.."
Andrew Youll
Member since:
2005-06-29

Yes Xscale is a rather poor ARM Implementation, Intel decided they didn't need some of the ARM instructions, namely some of the ones RiscOS uses lol, but Castle Systems has gotten RiscOS to work on Xscale CPU's as evident by its Iyonnix systems.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: yeah.. xscale..
by chocky on Sun 16th Oct 2005 18:21 in reply to "RE: yeah.. xscale.."
chocky Member since:
2005-08-26

"Intel decided they didn't need some of the ARM instructions".

Suuuure they did. Of course, no such thing happened, and the company in question is "Castle Technologies".

Let's try for some facts instead of making things up:

The XScale, like _all_ ARM implementations since the StrongARM, lacks the old 26-bit mode in favour of using the room for more useful functionality. The conversion of RISC OS to 32-bit was largely done by Pace, not Castle, although it's true that Castle (and Tematic) did the specific chip-specific support for the XScale and their Iyonix hardware.

More info:

http://www.riscos.info/32bit/

And here's the original article:

http://riscos.blog.com/356092/

Reply Parent Score: 1