h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

hullo, hullo!
bludragon here. Just rummaging around in your things a little.

***DISCLAIMER: I am NOT a programmer***
I have a question about RISC OS. [please read above disclaimer before replying] I know that Macintosh has been using RISC chip architecture for quite a while and that it was one of the things that allowed them to achieve high processing speeds. I am curious about the relationship between RISC OS and the RISC chip. Please discuss in semi-laypersons terms.
[read above disclaimer before replying]
Thank you.


}:=8

Hmmm...

I think, basically, the family of computers which RISC OS runs on was the first family of computers to use RISC chips, hence they got dibs on the name, so to speak. Lots of other systems now use RISC chips architecture, but they ain't running RISC OS because that's no longer a generic term...

I don't actually know whether this is right, but it's an informed guess at least

26199

very interesting!
Any suggestions of links or anything with more information???
Thanks!


}:=8

Hmmm. Some of the links in the article might be worth a try... beyond that... haven't a clue, I'm afraid

26199

Hi.

I'm not a programmer either, well not much but BASIC anyway, but I have been using RiscOS (or it's predecessor 'Arthur') for over 10 years. The article pretty much reads as a mission statement for Acorn Users (but I'd like to point out I do NOT wear sandals). There's already some interesting stuff about RISC in the Guide - I found some by just searching for RISC - including a description of the difference between RISC and CISC processors. If you want to know more about RiscOS systems poke around the web ring at the end of the article - that's how I got here, and I joined up just to answer your question!

PS You'll find some pretty heated anti-Windows stuff on the ring - eg 'this page is for RiSC users, if you're using IE4 *&%$(&%$ off!' - but were not all like that.

Thank you, Researcher 119253!
I will follow the links you mention. I am pretty familiar [from a non-programming point of view, at least] with the RISC/CISC differences. But am interested in this RISC OS, having never heard of it before.

Oh, and I really dont mind the anti-windoze bias...
I have no love of Micro$loth myself. Although I can use windoze [and dos] if I have to. I have also used all kinda OS's starting with the Sinclair and Trash-80. And I am learning Linux.

But, I much prefer my lovely Macintosh G3 Powerbook. It sleeps at the foot of my bed...


}:=8

PS stick around the Guide, it's a very interesting place. You can have serious discussions, ridiculous discussions, and just about everything in between. Leave a message here if you have questions. I will see it.

Shome mishtake, shurely?

The concept of RISC architecture was invented by IBM (at TJW, if I remember correctly) in the early 70s.

The Acorn series was (possibly) the first microcomputer to use RISC chips, but I suspect someone else had tried it before then, possibly only with minicomputers though.

Acorn had problems with the RISC OS name anyway - MIPS had also used the name, and before Acorn I think - that's why Acorn people were always pedantically correcting people who pronounced it RISK-OSS, as that was the MIPS name - Acorn had to use RISK-OH-ESS to avoid legal problems (bizarre as it sounds).

And MIPS are the guys who made the chip that powers the N64 console, not Acorn, unless someone changed the world behind my back.

Tim

PS. Of course, some say the 6502 was the first RISC chip Actually, didn't Chuck Peddle try to launch a desktop system based on some RISC architecture - the Sirius or something? I vaguely remember the PCW cover...blah.

*grin* Thanks... so much more reliable, aren't they?

People who know what they're on about, I mean

26199

MIPS are currently a subsid of SGI (Silicon Graphics) who use MIPS chips in their Unix workstations (and probably in the Cray supercomputers they build as well).
And yes the N64 uses a varient of one of the chips.

There are quite a few RISC architecture chips out there, but surely it wasn't the 6502 that was the first, but the intel 4004, the first microprocessor (1971 in case you really didn't want to know ), mainly because they couldn't do too much with the technology to make it complex.

Back to RiscOS machines a friend at uni had (and still has) one. Nice machines they were indeed.

> Nice machines they were indeed.

Oi! Less of that past tense, thankyou!

We are trying to launch a promotional site at http://www.riscos.org , only don't go there just yet, unless you want to see some naff graphics.

-OPD

Just thought to say: he development page for riscos.org can be found at http://www.sackman.co.uk/riscos/ . The links to the outline of the resources may prove useful.

-OPD

Well, that's hardly fair - as you say the 4004 was so simple they couldn't do anything complex as it was the first.

But if you compare the 6502 to its peers of the time (notably the Z80) you'll see the 'RISC philosophy' even if it hadn't been formalised then.

Rockwell went for simple 8-bit registers and no fancy stuff and clocked it fast (~3-4MHz), whereas Zilog put in 16 bit registers and some fancier instructions and it went slower as a result (~1-2MHz). But the Z80 instructions did more than 6502 ones, so it kind of balanced out in the end.

That's what I was getting at. Sort of.

All facts and figures are approximate. No user serviceable parts inside

Tim

Err... I'm back again, finally (forgot I'd joined to be honest - must find out how to change my name from 119253 to 'No Sandals Me' or something). Just to say that I read a lot of the Acorn etc. mags at the time and as far as I can remember Acorn acknowledged that their ARM chip was based in some way on the 6502 architecture (which they used in their earlier machines).

Ahh, the 6502 ... now that I could program ...

Anyway, no other contribs since June, so I guess I'm talking to myself.

Yep

26199