À (At) 1:00 -0500 6/12/02, Andrew Thiel écrivait (wrote) :
>Okay, that's good. I actually meant legal restrictions on copying and/or
>distribution, but that was another question I should have asked.
I think we can provide patches that apply to the ROM (either as REx
which just are added to the ROM Base) or as real patches that will
modify it.
>Yeah, too small... Fear that in writing I would run my stylus off the
>edge and stab myself in the leg. But I suppose I could always bite the
>bullet and write smaller (come to think of it my handwriting fits 2
>words per line max with portrait)!
Wow. Brian's last message is interesting regarding this issue.
>It would have to be adaption, since you've just been arguing that we
>*can't* design our own. :)
Yes, I argued in that direction, but as you point it:
>What is your estimate based on? We can spit out numbers 'til our styli
>snap, but until we do research they are meaningless. (Mr. PCBman, feel
>free to jump in and give us a more realistic number.)
I don't have any number. So I might be totally wrong. Like Steve
Weyer who argued in the direction of a software way to handle this, I
am rather a software developer. It would be good if some hardware
developer come and comments on your proposition.
Another advantage of a software solution as I see it is that it's gradual.
- first step is to get an emulator working on desktop computers
(emulating the whole hardware, replacing the Voyager's driver to
avoid emulating this chip we lack the specifications of, for example
with a REx as I describe)
- second step is to adapt it to new hardware. In that very second
step, one could start with existing hardware such as PocketPC as I
mentioned or hardware that would be designed from scratch.
Even if we stop with first step, it would be a great help for the
Newton community.
> > Plus once this hardware will die, we'll be nearly at the start point.
>
>Am I missing something, or isn't this true of all computer platforms?
Yes and no. If we port NewtonOS on top of a Unix, especially
something as portable as NetBSD, it would warrant a large support on
a large set of hardware. Of course, such a project has to be open
source.
>But, nonetheless the other people on the list are leaning toward the
>emulator, so in the end the majority rules. That's good, but I still
>can't get over the fact that the Newton has a superior form factor.
Most users agree with you. To be honest, I have never tried to write
on a PocketPC. I think that you're right saying it would be much less
convenient than the Newton. I don't write that big, though (I write
larger on the screen than on paper, mostly because of the resolution
and the precision of the pen).
>But
>still, I'd be willing to bet that a new PocketPC will come around with
>the durability, screen rotation, screen size, etc. before all the
>Newtons are dead, so in my eyes the emulator idea is a good idea... as
>soon as a viable hardware replacement is available.
Of course we need screen rotation. This is a software issue and shall
be part of the emulator. I can write on my Newton in portrait mode, I
guess if I had to use a PocketPC to take notes, it would be in
landscape.
Now, this is just a suggestion. It's not because some people right
now have given their point of view like me that it's (a) the way to
go and (b) going to happen (this way). As in most projects, it's
going to happen the way the people who will work on it will decide to
go. Hence the fact that it's important that you describe your own
needs and point of view before anything really starts.
Paul
-- NPDS: http://newton.kallisys.net:8080/ Apache: http://www.kallisys.com/-- This is the NewtonTalk list - http://www.newtontalk.net/ for all inquiries List FAQ/Etiquette/Terms: http://www.newtontalk.net/faq.html Official Newton FAQ: http://www.chuma.org/newton/faq/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Wed Jan 01 2003 - 10:01:55 EST