Nicholas Clark <n...@ccl4.org> writes:
> On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 01:49:01PM +0000, Tony Finch wrote:
>> On Tue, 17 Mar 2009, Matthew King wrote:
>> >
>> > For its time (and with the rose-tinted goggles of hindsight) I can find
>> > very little to practically hate about Risc OS and its ancestors.
>>
>> No memory safety. Shit multitasking (but still better than contemporary
>> windows and Mac OS). Windows only resizable from one corner (like the
>> Mac). Unkeyboardable GUI.
>
> The limitations of ADFS E format.
> (77 files to a directory, max 10 character filenames)
>
> (Sure, there were other file systems, but not useful for the local hard disk)
>
>
> The lack of a (viable) shared library system.
>
> (As demonstrated by the Toolbox in 3.5, followed by the Toolbox in ROM,
> followed by the !Boot thingy to unplug the Toolbox modules, because being
> in ROM caused problems)
>
>
> Lack of virtual memory and demand paging. (Everything was blocking waiting,
> despite the fact that the lowest level disk accesses provided a DMA-based
> API, so the lowest levels of the OS provided the right foundations)
>
>
> Lack of development tools, caused by Acorn spinning out ARM but not securing
> a useful-to-Acorn licence for the toolchain as part of that deal.
Well that's a relief. I thought there might be no ammunition for this list.
Matthew
--
I must take issue with the term "a mere child", for it has been my
invariable experience that the company of a mere child is infinitely
preferable to that of a mere adult.
-- Fran Lebowitz
