On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 05:49:10PM +0100, Andy wrote: > don't know about and aren't complete yet. Running on x86, intel/AMD 64 > bit, PowerPC, Motorola 68k, Sparcs, Alpha, Arm, MIPS, PA-RISC, s/390, > and CPU architectures that are unknown to the BBC or incomplete.
Steady on - why not Z80, OK a bit limited but the Z80000 was 32bit and about the same time as some of those above? Basically some of the listed processors above are dead for general-purpose computing in the home and they are used by a dwindling core of hobbyists (and usually not as their main machine). > So when is the BBC going to comply with "platform neutral"? Or does it > intend never to comply? What method of complying is it using (seems it > should have started by now)? Is it going to be a specification like an > RFC or is it going to be an open implementation which will serve as a > specification for interaction? > > I don't see any other way to achieve "platform neutral", any one else > got any idea how else platform neutral is going to be achieved? > > For the benefit of those who do not understand why I am stressing the > term "platform neutral" so hard, it is because the BBC Trust > explicitly specified the BBC must provide a platform neutral solution. It depends what you mean by platform neutral? Platform neutral means to me software that is independent of any particular feature or any software particular to one platform. Of course any widely used end-user platform must be supported. But at the moment that seems to be restricted to three operating systems on four processor families. -- Andy Leighton => [EMAIL PROTECTED] "The Lord is my shepherd, but we still lost the sheep dog trials" - Robert Rankin, _They Came And Ate Us_ - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
