Different email for a while... But here goes...
On Tue, 12 Mar 2002, Marcel Kilgus wrote: > Phoebus Dokos wrote: > >>b) I can tell you that there aren't thousands of QPC users out there > >>and even less Qx0 users, so how big could a potential ArmQL user base > >>be in the end? I say that a value with 3 digits is already a big goal. > > > > Not really because due to its platform the ArmQL CAN be used as a QL but > > not only for that, it can run RiscOS, Linux / Net(Open) BSD and even PalmOS > > :-) (V. 5 and above)... and with a potential for handheld operation as well > > :-) (Or industrial apps etc. etc. etc...) > > Fine, but this doesn't increase the user base for a potential SMSQ > window manager, does it? That's not the purpose of ArmQL. ArmQL is just a project I am working on very, very slowly. It has low priority at present, and could take 9-12 months to complete. So it's not immediately relevant. However, it will be relevant in a year. By then, we will have Goldfire (or whatever it is called by then). It will be much easier for people to upgrade their existing machines to Q60 performance levels without the expense of a Q60, but that does not increase the total number of systems out there, so it doesn't increase the QL user base directly, until Aurora II comes along. The Q40 and Q60 are relatively expensive, and represent a brute-force approach to the problem. They're immensely powerful, and emulate the QL at a hardware level, so that's pretty much all they can do (at present). The idea is to at least have an option, which exists as software, to buy a QL with at least moderate performance, lots of interfaces, and low cost. The ability to run other OSes *is* the point. If it is more widely manufactured, and sold into other markets that WILL support a profit, this will reduce unit costs for you. Significantly. An ArmQL isn't entirely relevant now, but in a year, when Motorola's processor roadmap is more clear, it may take on a much greater significance. IMHO Dave
