log in | register | forums
Show:
Go:
Forums
Username:

Password:

User accounts
Register new account
Forgot password
Forum stats
List of members
Search the forums

Advanced search
Recent discussions
- May News round-up (News:)
- Do you have any short anecdotes about Jim Nagel? (News:1)
- Baby steps... (PP:17)
- Adventures in Optimisation - Walls (News:3)
- The future of Archive magazine (News:3)
- RIP Jim Nagel - Computer Shopper to Archive (News:7)
- RiscCAD vs ProCAD (Gen:1)
- Quite addictive this RiscPC stuff. (Gen:47)
- RISC OS Direct Videos -3. Gaming and emulation (News:)
- Amcog games packs to keep you entertained in lockdown (News:)
Latest postings RSS Feeds
RSS 2.0 | 1.0 | 0.9
Atom 0.3
Misc RDF | CDF
Site Search
 
Article archives
The Icon Bar: General: Acorn Computers Ltd (2006) dissolved
 
  Acorn Computers Ltd (2006) dissolved
  This is a long thread. Click here to view the threaded list.
 
Daniel Nesbitt Message #112266, posted by solsburian at 09:52, 13/12/2009, in reply to message #112265
Member
Posts: 23
If you do want to release new RISC OS hardware, how intended to get around the licensing minefield?

With RISC OS Open almost there with the BeagleBoard/Cortex platform it would seem better (to me) then then the more moribund ROL branch (considering the A9 Port) plus you would probably have to give ROL money upfront for them to start any development.

Of course, with ROL clams of exclusivity, it would probably make your choice less clear cut.

[Edited by solsburian at 11:51, 13/12/2009]
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Andrew Hodgson Message #112267, posted by Andy_Hodgson at 10:54, 13/12/2009, in reply to message #112266
Member
Posts: 65
If you do want to release new RISC OS hardware, how intended to get around the licensing minefield?

With RISC OS Open almost there with the BeagleBoard/Cortex platform it would seem better (to me) then then the more moribund ROL branch (considering the A9 Port) plus you would probably have to give ROL money upfront for them to start any development.

Of course, with ROL clams of exclusivity that would probably make your choice less clear cut.
This is a discussion that needs to take place, although I am sure that it can be sorted.

I have already spoken to Pace several times and the rights and wrongs are quite clear in my mind (and Pace's) so hopefully we should be able to move forward with our plans.
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Mark Message #112268, posted by Mark76 at 13:37, 13/12/2009, in reply to message #112267
Mark76

Posts: 122
Will I be able to buy RISC OS on a CD or as a download in two to five years time and install in on a partition of the hard drive of an ARM A8 cortex powered computer?

And, just as importantly, will there be enough apps to make it a viable OS for the modern era?
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Peter Naulls Message #112269, posted by pnaulls at 14:23, 13/12/2009, in reply to message #112268
Member
Posts: 317
Will I be able to buy RISC OS on a CD or as a download in two to five years time and install in on a partition of the hard drive of an ARM A8 cortex powered computer?
I don't know, will you? Why is it important, and what assumptions went into your question?

In "2-5 years", A8 certainly won't be state of the art. The likely purchase will be the hardware (perhaps with RISC OS already installed), not the OS, which will probably be free. Such a computer could easily not have a hard-drive, also.

Apart from anything else, I think you are trying to conflate the existing situation of Linux, which for desktop systems runs on very different hardware, to that of future RISC OS.
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Gunnlaugur Jonsson Message #112272, posted by Gulli at 15:58, 13/12/2009, in reply to message #112263
Member
Posts: 138
I can understand why it might be tricky to port it to x86-32/64.
I may remember incorrectly but didn't Castle specifically say in the RISC OS shared source license that ROOL or anyone else wasn't allowed to port RISC OS to non-ARM platforms?


[Edited by Gulli at 15:59, 13/12/2009]
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Eric Rucker Message #112274, posted by bhtooefr at 16:39, 13/12/2009, in reply to message #112272
Member
Posts: 337
An x86 port is a really, really bad idea.

For one, what CPU architecture is almost every RISC OS application written for? Quite a few of those, no source code is available, meaning there'll never be an x86 port.

Also, to support x86, you either have to support a very limited subset of hardware, like Apple does, or support every device under the sun, which results in either poor support (like the first decade or so of Linux,) or lots of money being thrown at the problem (like Microsoft does.)

Not to mention, there's a lot of ARM assembler in RISC OS.

"RISC OS for x86" would likely be a total rewrite, and would have to emulate an ARM for most software. At which point, it's less effort to improve RPCEmu, and target that, if you want RISC OS on x86. (Of course, that's a whole 'nother can of worms.)

Real ARM hardware really is the best bet, I think.
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Mark Message #112275, posted by Mark76 at 17:06, 13/12/2009, in reply to message #112274
Mark76

Posts: 122
The problem being that the only ARM hardware ROS currently runs on is at least 10(?) years old.

Hence my asking when, and if, it's going to be ported to the newer generation of ARM chips.

I think it's a fair question. Especially in light of ARM's unexpected return to the PC arena.
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Eric Rucker Message #112276, posted by bhtooefr at 17:11, 13/12/2009, in reply to message #112275
Member
Posts: 337
And if you would scroll up a few posts, you'd see that RISC OS is *CURRENTLY* being ported to current ARMs, starting with the OMAP3530, and runs (although it's definitely rough around the edges) on the BeagleBoard, a low-cost hobbyist market OMAP3530 development board.
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Andrew Hodgson Message #112278, posted by Andy_Hodgson at 18:02, 13/12/2009, in reply to message #112275
Member
Posts: 65
I think Mark is referring to RISCOS Limited and RISC6.

Unfortunately I am not aware as to Paul's plans for RISC OS, at the minute

If you are looking at newer hardware then you would need to contact Paul or Speak to ROOL about their branch as any offering from us well be a while coming, as we would need to sort licensing and R&D first.
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Gunnlaugur Jonsson Message #112279, posted by Gulli at 18:04, 13/12/2009, in reply to message #112274
Member
Posts: 138
An x86 port is a really, really bad idea.
[snip...]
"RISC OS for x86" would likely be a total rewrite, and would have to emulate an ARM for most software. At which point, it's less effort to improve RPCEmu, and target that, if you want RISC OS on x86. (Of course, that's a whole 'nother can of worms.)

Real ARM hardware really is the best bet, I think.
The whole thing depends on what the idea is with RISC OS. If the plan is just to keep it as it is with occasional minor facelifts or just become an embedded OS then there's no point in moving to other platforms.

If on the other hand people want to see RISC OS move forward and become a modern desktop OS then an almost complete rewrite is required anyway to facilitate for things like pre-emptive multitasking, memory protection, multi-threading and other things that people expect from a modern desktop OS. This would create most of the same problems with legacy applications so limiting such a rewrite to ARM-only hardware would be insanely stupid.

The feasibility of such a rewrite is of course an entirely different matter.


[Edited by Gulli at 18:18, 13/12/2009]
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Jeffrey Lee Message #112281, posted by Phlamethrower at 18:26, 13/12/2009, in reply to message #112279
PhlamethrowerHot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot stuff

Posts: 15094
If on the other hand people want to see RISC OS move forward and become a modern desktop OS then an almost complete rewrite is required anyway to facilitate for things like pre-emptive multitasking, memory protection, multi-threading and other things that people expect from a modern desktop OS. This would create exactly the same problems with legacy applications so limiting such a rewrite to ARM-only hardware would be insanely stupid.
You say that, but if you take away the ARM support (or expand the OS to support more than just ARM), and if you take away the existing singletasking APIs and replace them with similar but incompatible multitasking ones, then how much of RISC OS is left? The only real feature left is the WIMP, which you can (kinda) get on Linux already with ROLF. Add a modified version of RPCemu (or similar) into the mix and you could conceivably have emulated WIMP apps seamlessly running on your ROLF desktop alongside ROLF-ised native Linux apps.

There are many ways in which RISC OS could be given a future, but it's hard to see which is the correct path to take, especially since everyone is likely to have different ideas about what it is that makes RISC OS RISC OS.
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Simon Willcocks Message #112283, posted by Stoppers at 19:03, 13/12/2009, in reply to message #112281
Member
Posts: 293

You say that, but if you take away the ARM support (or expand the OS to support more than just ARM), and if you take away the existing singletasking APIs and replace them with similar but incompatible multitasking ones, then how much of RISC OS is left? The only real feature left is the WIMP, which you can (kinda) get on Linux already with ROLF. Add a modified version of RPCemu (or similar) into the mix and you could conceivably have emulated WIMP apps seamlessly running on your ROLF desktop alongside ROLF-ised native Linux apps.
Thanks for the plug, although ROLF already has its own emulator, as well as SWI dispatcher code that allows both RISC OS modules to run under emulation and SWIs to be implemented using native C code. It´s run BASIC105 and AWRender modules, for example.

See the blog entry from Wednesday, July 01, 2009:
"What's working" (http://ro-lookandfeel.blogspot.com/)

A lot could be achieved by using RO modules in ROLF, but there´s no way I´m going near any original RO code, other than for internal testing.
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Alan H James Message #112284, posted by alanex at 19:08, 13/12/2009, in reply to message #112272
Member
Posts: 4
I may remember incorrectly but didn't Castle specifically say in the RISC OS shared source license that ROOL or anyone else wasn't allowed to port RISC OS to non-ARM platforms?
For what it's worth, I think anything non-ARM is bad anyway. With everything going 'green' people are looking to low power consumption and long battery life. Which may be the reason for the stream of ARM based devices. RISC OS already has a slight advantage in that it's always been on ARM.

As for 'Acorn Computers', I say well done Andrew. At least he's trying to help RISC OS, instead of moaning and putting it down all the time. I'm very interested in what Andrew has planned and I'll wait patiently. Am I the only one who'd prefer an ARM desktop instead of the Touch Book idea? Just fed up of reliability issues with laptops and the inability to upgrade them or replace screens cheaply. Maybe I'll shove a BeagleBoard in my spare RPC case!

Finally, thanks to ROOL and especially Jeffrey for all the effort their putting in.

[Edited by alanex at 19:13, 13/12/2009]
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Gunnlaugur Jonsson Message #112287, posted by Gulli at 20:16, 13/12/2009, in reply to message #112281
Member
Posts: 138
If on the other hand people want to see RISC OS move forward and become a modern desktop OS then an almost complete rewrite is required anyway to facilitate for things like pre-emptive multitasking, memory protection, multi-threading and other things that people expect from a modern desktop OS. This would create exactly the same problems with legacy applications so limiting such a rewrite to ARM-only hardware would be insanely stupid.
You say that, but if you take away the ARM support (or expand the OS to support more than just ARM), and if you take away the existing singletasking APIs and replace them with similar but incompatible multitasking ones, then how much of RISC OS is left?
Which is partly why I questioned whether or not this would be feasible. Had such decision been made 6 years ago I would have supported that move but I'm pretty sure that it's already too late, the OS has dropped way too far behind and too many users and developers have left.
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Peter Naulls Message #112289, posted by pnaulls at 21:09, 13/12/2009, in reply to message #112284
Member
Posts: 317
RISC OS already has a slight advantage in that it's always been on ARM.
So has ARM Linux ;-) Never mind its long list of other advantages.


As for 'Acorn Computers', I say well done Andrew. At least he's trying to help RISC OS, instead of moaning and putting it down all the time.
He is? So far, he's promised nothing, and delivered nothing. Nothing wrong there, but to say he's "trying to help RISC OS" is awfully premature. There are already several parties with long track records who are helping RISC OS, with at least some broad goals.

RISC OS has seen many "false prophets", who are long on talk and short on action; I'm betting AmigaOS has too. Remember all the crazy promises of MicroDigital? Genuine skepticism should be encouraged. Blindly encouraging people because they superficially appear to be doing something positive isn't that productive.

As for myself, Andrew has said a number of odd things to date, which doesn't suggest entirely complete knowledge of the current RISC OS situation.


Am I the only one who'd prefer an ARM desktop instead of the Touch Book idea?
I doubt it; but there are any number of "nettop" targets that are waiting for ports. Most of them are already listed on riscos.info


Just fed up of reliability issues with laptops and the inability to upgrade them or replace screens cheaply. Maybe I'll shove a BeagleBoard in my spare RPC case!
It's unclear that any ARM-based system might not have the same reliability problems that you've seen on x86. x86 laptop hardware varies enormously, and the volume is magnitudes different to remotely comparable ARM stuff.
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Andrew Hodgson Message #112293, posted by Andy_Hodgson at 22:09, 13/12/2009, in reply to message #112289
Member
Posts: 65
Genuine skepticism should be encouraged.
I couldn't agree more.

As for myself, Andrew has said a number of odd things to date, which doesn't suggest entirely complete knowledge of the current RISC OS situation.
Any thing in particular?
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Alan Robertson Message #112294, posted by nytrex at 22:41, 13/12/2009, in reply to message #112293
Member
Posts: 36
As for myself, Andrew has said a number of odd things to date, which doesn't suggest entirely complete knowledge of the current RISC OS situation.
Any thing in particular?
Well my own thoughts are that the use of 'Risc Os', instead of the widely known 'RISC OS' comes across as strange or simply lacking in attention-to-detail.

The talk about 2Ghz being a real boon for RISC OS, is also *very* optimistic. Probably another 6 months before any of these devices hit the shelves, and even then technical information may not be available for porting.

I don't want to dampen your enthusiasm, but I believe, that to move forward, certain steps need to be taken in the right order, at the right time. At the moment, I'm not sure what your plans are, but I wish you well.
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Andrew Hodgson Message #112301, posted by Andy_Hodgson at 09:32, 14/12/2009, in reply to message #112294
Member
Posts: 65
The talk about 2Ghz being a real boon for RISC OS, is also *very* optimistic. Probably another 6 months before any of these devices hit the shelves, and even then technical information may not be available for porting.

I don't want to dampen your enthusiasm, but I believe, that to move forward, certain steps need to be taken in the right order, at the right time. At the moment, I'm not sure what your plans are, but I wish you well.
OK, I will talk about this first.
Yes the 2GHz processor has only just been announced and would be a while coming. However, if you want to move forward you need to look at these things before they are here to see if there is something that can be done with them. Google, Microsoft and Apple are planning what they are going to be doing NOW. Not after the event when do one cares any more.

Well my own thoughts are that the use of 'Risc Os', instead of the widely known 'RISC OS' comes across as strange or simply lacking in attention-to-detail.
RISC OS to me always looks like you are shouting. Such as WINDOWS OS (yes I have been reading the comments on usenet) and GOOGLE OS
My Preference is Risc OS.
Attention to detail. Checkout the specs on the Sega Dreamcast box and see how they write it.

Now I'm sorry Alan, because it looks like I am having a go at you. Let me assure you I am not.

However, there are some people (I think the vocal minority) that do not want this to happen. Now I am thick skinned, and I have no problem with people abusing me. I have had lets of emails of support but they have been outweighed by petty minded and cowardly idiots that use throw away email address, that think it is ok to send threating and abusive email about my family. IT IS NOT.

I had hoped with the talk, that I had heard, that people would have liked to have the name & logo back. And to some it would.

So for them you need to contact Julien Clairet (the trademark owner) at data.excess@gmail.com
I did have a meeting set for the end of December and if any one is stupid enough to want to try and help the community, then he is available on the 21-23rd of December in London.

Again, this is not a rant with Alan and I'm sorry that his message was the last one.

You have some very good people here, including Steve from ROOL, and to those I am sorry. But for me my family is the MOST important thing for me, and I will NOT stand my and have ANYONE threaten them.

GOOD-BYE
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Glenn Burgess Message #112302, posted by DiscoBurgess at 10:51, 14/12/2009, in reply to message #112301
Member
Posts: 22
Hi guys, what's going on in this thr-

Oh. Fast work, everyone.

indiff
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Trevor Johnson Message #112303, posted by trevj at 11:08, 14/12/2009, in reply to message #112301
Member
Posts: 660
[...]abusive email about my family.

[...]But for me my family is the MOST important thing for me, and I will NOT stand my and have ANYONE threaten them.[...]
I'm sure I'm not the only one to be truly shocked on reading this! For the moment, never mind differences of opinion and whether forum members and others choose to support or criticise Andrew's initiative.

It sounds like at the very least he's owed some sincere apologies. At the worst, if I were him I wouldn't hesitate in presenting evidence of harassment to the police.

Edit: Merry fucking Christmas and an Unhappy New Year!

[Edited by trevj at 15:54, 14/12/2009]
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Simon Willcocks Message #112304, posted by Stoppers at 11:12, 14/12/2009, in reply to message #112301
Member
Posts: 293
I have had lets of emails of support but they have been outweighed by petty minded and cowardly idiots that use throw away email address, that think it is ok to send threating and abusive email about my family. IT IS NOT.
Of course it isn't, and I can't believe it's legal, either. Have you told the police? At the very least they should be able to identify where and when the account(s) were opened from.

Secondly, you can't seriously believe that a RISC OS geek would do any genuine harm, surely?
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Jeffrey Lee Message #112306, posted by Phlamethrower at 11:27, 14/12/2009, in reply to message #112304
PhlamethrowerHot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot stuff

Posts: 15094
I'd like to second/third/fourth what other people have said here. If you believe the threats against you and your family are serious enough for you to distance yourself from this new project, then they're certainly serious enough for you to get in contact with the police (especially if you're serious about not standing by and letting people threaten your family!)

If they were all sent from throwaway accounts then it wouldn't surprise me if it was just one random nutjob sending them out from his parents basement for kicks.
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Jason Togneri Message #112308, posted by filecore at 11:44, 14/12/2009, in reply to message #112301

Posts: 3867
RISC OS to me always looks like you are shouting. Such as WINDOWS OS (yes I have been reading the comments on usenet) and GOOGLE OS
My Preference is Risc OS.
Attention to detail. Checkout the specs on the Sega Dreamcast box and see how they write it.
First of all, the editor in me would like to point out that "RISC" is an acronym (Reduced Instruction Set Computer), while "Google" and "Windows" are nouns. Acronyms are normally fully capitalised. I would also argue that words which exist as proper nouns - in this case, trade names such as Google, Windows and Sega - may or may not be capitalised for stylistic reasons, but that there is no grammatical rule for this, making "Sega" a poor example.

Now...

But for me my family is the MOST important thing for me, and I will NOT stand my and have ANYONE threaten them.

GOOD-BYE
I am also shocked and dismayed to hear this, and saddened that such a promising start (and so recently, too!) should be brought down by nothing more than an immature, throwaway troll message. Please don't blame the community on TIB for this, and please don't stop what you were only just starting - while I remain somewhat sceptical until I see more solid plans, it sounds good and I am very interested to see where all these plans would be heading. It would be a terrible shame to see it all halted here and now simply due to one idiot's bad temper.
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Glenn Burgess Message #112310, posted by DiscoBurgess at 11:53, 14/12/2009, in reply to message #112308
Member
Posts: 22
Suddenly the secrecy seems like a great idea.
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
VinceH Message #112315, posted by VincceH at 12:11, 14/12/2009, in reply to message #112301
VincceH
Lowering the tone since the dawn of time

Posts: 1598
[Some complete pricks have sent Andrew abusive/threatening emails re his family]

GOOD-BYE
Your reaction is entirely understandable. This isn't the first time an incident like this has occurred - IIRC Justin Fletcher withdrew his software as a reaction to something very similar.

If it was me, as someone with no dependents, I'd call the bluff of whatever lowlife scum is making the threats - the chances are, it will amount to nothing because it's most likely just some turd hiding behind the anonimity of the internet without the courage or conviction to back their words up. However, with a family, you obviously can't take that chance.

All I can say, as comments from others here make clear, you obviously the full support of us mature, grown up and sensible people - even though we sometimes don't act that way. wink

We may criticise and nitpick, but it should be seen as constructive criticism, and is done with the best intentions.

Meanwhile, if you still have them, I'd be interested in seeing those emails. The sender(s) may be technical enough to do a good job of hiding their identity - but it's just as possible they haven't, (Again, IIRC, in Justin's case, I have a vague recollection that he said he had been able to determine who sent them, but never divulged that identity). Use the address I use to post to usenet - it's a perfectly valid address.
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Jason Togneri Message #112319, posted by filecore at 13:05, 14/12/2009, in reply to message #112315

Posts: 3867
Nah, post the text (plus full headers) here, and we'll see what we can make of it. As for the reasoning behind the attack:

http://blog.wisefaq.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/GreaterInternetDickwadTheory.jpg
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Alan Robertson Message #112326, posted by nytrex at 14:53, 14/12/2009, in reply to message #112319
Member
Posts: 36
@Andrew - I'm very sorry to hear about the threats. I am sure any decision you make will be right one. I'm not going to say any more on the matter, as its rather depressing to be honest. Oh, and no offence was taken in the slightest - I know it can be quite difficult to judge whether a posted message will be taken in a way in was not intended, but you've no worries there.
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Andrew Hodgson Message #112327, posted by Andy_Hodgson at 15:08, 14/12/2009, in reply to message #112319
Member
Posts: 65
I fully intended to leave both the forums and community this morning. However, I was alerted to your messages.
Thank you for your support.

I have handed the police both the emails and server logs, and at their request I won't (for now) make public the contents of the emails.
Normally I would have brushed it of as an idiot with nothing better to do, however the emails contained personal information that even my good friends Dave Moore and Richard Hanson don't know.
It is possible that this information could have come from the internet as, until now, I have never protected my facebook or twitter accounts, but I do not feel I can take that chance.

I did understand that the idea, may not have supporters and I was happy to accept that and discuss the concerns and issues with anyone that cared to do so.

I put up with prejudice everyday as I have two disabled children (1 with autism and my youngest has severe hearing loss). They are my life, my blood and I will defend them forsaking everything else.

Whoever this person(s) are. If you feel as strongly as you do. I would have meet you face to face and discussed this through with you. But you don't even have the curtsy to do that. Well FUCK YOU. If you come near me or my children you will regret it. You are a worthless piece of shit and have no right to be in or around this community.

As for RISCOS, first you are right RISC is an acronym and grammatically it should be capitalised. It just looks like you are shouting all the time wink
I also do think that RISCOS has a bright future and depending on the next few days, I might be inclined to offer my services.

I'm sorry if this is all over the place. I feel absolutely drained at the minute and has so far took an hour of rewriting to get into any sense.

I feel very saddened about what has happened, however I believe it is a vocal minority. I believe that most of the people in the community really are good people.

For now I intend to take myself of the grid for a couple of days to regroup and decide where, if anywhere, I want to go.

I wish you all luck in everything you do, and thank you again for your support.

Best Regards
Andy
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Jason Togneri Message #112329, posted by filecore at 15:10, 14/12/2009, in reply to message #112327

Posts: 3867
As for RISCOS, first you are right RISC is an acronym and grammatically it should be capitalised. It just looks like you are shouting all the time
Given the state of the current RISC OS community, we kinda have to wink
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Martin Bazley Message #112330, posted by swirlythingy at 15:12, 14/12/2009, in reply to message #112315

Posts: 460
[Some complete pricks have sent Andrew abusive/threatening emails re his family]

GOOD-BYE
Your reaction is entirely understandable. This isn't the first time an incident like this has occurred - IIRC Justin Fletcher withdrew his software as a reaction to something very similar.
Personally, I'm (unusually optimistically) reserving judgement. I know we lost David Barrow and Justin Fletcher in similar ways, but don't forget (mentioning no names...) that there have been false alarms too. We'll probably know for sure in a couple of months or so...

Hmm. Except http://acorncomputers.info has just gone down with a 404. So it does look rather terminal, doesn't it?

Frankly, in my naivety, I don't see why he would have received threatening emails in the first place. Surely any such internet dickwads have absolutely no knowledge of Andrew's family whatsoever and no means to do anything? And what did they take objection to in the first place? Surely a trademark can't be that fiercely adored?

EDIT: Wow, this thread moves fast - sorry Andy. I'm switching back to 'reserving judgement'...

[Edited by swirlythingy at 15:14, 14/12/2009]
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Pages (6): |< < 3 > >|

The Icon Bar: General: Acorn Computers Ltd (2006) dissolved