
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
From: Kroc
You assume that because it is minority, it is therefore hard to use?
I read Bringbackanonposting's comments to be a reference to application availability and format compatibility (or lack thereof) offered by RISC OS, as opposed to "the big three" as termed by the linked weblog entry.
Although, I must say I did enjoy RISC OS and the applications that were included. I had sporadic exposure to it on Acorn boxen during 1994 - 1997 at a high school, and it was used a lot for DTP work (the newsletter, yearbook, and other publications were done, in majority by students, on those systems). Certainly a breath of fresh air against Win 3.11 (and later Win 95) systems in the other lab, and (my view only, of course) in many ways comparable to the experience of Macintosh systems at the time, which was what I was using at home.
(I guess you could say my OS use "heritage" is a little outside the norm, since until just before the turn of the century I had no regular exposure to Windows of any sort...)
But back to the topic at hand, let RISC OS be marketed. It may be an "alternative" OS, but it's a worthy one nonetheless.
Member since:
2005-11-16
I will never buying or run it myself. I am not that much a masochist to torture myself with another minority OS. Linux is still tough enough to get by nowdays. Good luck to them though, no disrespect.