• Has the PC made computing dull?

    From weetomuncher@weetomuncher@yahoo.co.uk (Weetomuncher) to comp.sys.sinclair,comp.sys.cbm,comp.sys.amstrad.8bit on Tuesday, July 08, 2003 16:20:04
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

    Do you think that the PC has made computing dull with its monopoly on
    the computing world?

    I know systems like the Mac and Amiga can still get by (the Mac whoops
    the PC in many ways!) but the sheer support behind the PC gives it
    massive sway. I know a variety of OSs are available but there is
    little available non-Windows software available, particularly in
    gaming which is not done any favours by the lumpy Windows.

    What has happened to our era when a computer could be upgraded to an
    extent but ran to a standard spec, much like a console. We also didn't
    need to contend with lengthy installations or awkward upgrades. Our
    machines also had their own characters and foiables.

    Who could forget the Spectrum colour clash or the C64 'block'
    graphics?

    These things are as fondly remembered as the strengths of those little
    8-bit workhorses!

    Who could say that of modern machines in a few years?
    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From Larry Anderson@larry@portcommodore.com to comp.sys.sinclair,comp.sys.cbm,comp.sys.amstrad.8bit on Wednesday, July 09, 2003 04:02:10
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

    I don't think the modern computers made computing dull, it's a bunch of factors:

    1. There are a lot more dull folks using computers, many of which don't give
    a darn about programming of fiddling with the machines, only on surfing the net and printing excel spreadsheets. Since the 'average user' is in the majority then the 'hobbiest' or 'advanced user'. A lot of the stuff widely available is 'average'. :-/ And the media is driven to satisfy more
    'average' tastes such as buying pre-made games instead of making them.

    2. A lot of the systems are hard (or impossible) to access in features and programmability, maybe if you have a few grand to go to some high-end programming courses and about another grand or two for some serious programming tools, these overly complex OSs and chipsets may be more interesting. Even with that you are at the mercy of what languages and drivers you have for your machine not many tools let you get 'down and
    dirty' with the hardware anymore.

    3. Many of the tools out there aren't all that fun to work with, they are high-end developer tools more suited to create/manage a 1,000,000 record relational database than print a biorythm or play a little tune on the computer's sound card. With all the nifty innovations in modular
    languages, object oriented programming, etc. It does leave the casual programmer struggling just to say up.

    4. The big electronics market is moving toward 'information/entertainment appliances' and away from do-all general computing. Software/entertainment companies would prefer that you be only able to lease/play back your
    licensed media, not do something they won't get $$s from.

    That said, I try to ignore a lot of the above, keep with what works for me
    and not buy into the hype. I'm trying to learn Linux, it's hella hard with
    it not as refined installers, all the 'in-joke' terms and such, but the fun and excitement of something new and accessible is there without the
    consumer market trying to shape it into something more 'palatable'. But unlike the old days I won't know the entire system, but I'll know a lot
    more of it than any Windows of Mac box I've used in the last 16 years.

    Other than that I am expecting the C-1 to fill my 'down and dirty' bit-banging, let's try something different, inventive urges.

    It's not going to be like it was but it isn't all past either. You just
    have to look around more to find your excitement.

    Larry

    Weetomuncher wrote:

    Do you think that the PC has made computing dull with its monopoly on
    the computing world?

    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From Ross Simpson@Hi_Mr_Spammer@nowhere.com.au to comp.sys.sinclair,comp.sys.cbm,comp.sys.amstrad.8bit on Wednesday, July 09, 2003 16:55:40
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

    "Weetomuncher" <weetomuncher@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message...

    Do you think that the PC has made computing dull with its monopoly on
    the computing world?

    No sorry, it's high time to take this form of questioning elsewhere. What do you think most of us will say here, since we choose to use older computers?

    Why not talk about it in comp.sys.ibm.pc.classic (no maybe that's inapproate too, since it's for people who use the older ibm pc's.

    There's a number of Windows newsgroups around, ask them!

    Either indicate that you're off-topic or post elsewhere!


    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From The Starglider@the_starglider2002@yahoo.co.uk to comp.sys.sinclair,comp.sys.cbm,comp.sys.amstrad.8bit on Wednesday, July 09, 2003 08:17:43
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

    On Wed, 9 Jul 2003 16:55:40 +1000, "Ross Simpson" <Hi_Mr_Spammer@nowhere.com.au>
    wrote:

    "Weetomuncher" <weetomuncher@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message...

    Do you think that the PC has made computing dull with its monopoly on
    the computing world?

    No sorry, it's high time to take this form of questioning elsewhere. What do >you think most of us will say here, since we choose to use older computers?

    Why not talk about it in comp.sys.ibm.pc.classic (no maybe that's inapproate >too, since it's for people who use the older ibm pc's.

    There's a number of Windows newsgroups around, ask them!

    Either indicate that you're off-topic or post elsewhere!

    FFS Ross, what is your problem? If you don't like the post, why do you bother to
    reply? Is your newsgroup that dull, that you must respond, just so you have something to do?

    Weetomuncher asks a perfectly decent question, and you have to drag it down again.

    Yes, we shoose to use older computers, but we also use the modern ones too. WHy the hell do you think there's emulation around?

    Why should he ask the question in just the windows newsgroups. A PC is not restrictetd to Windows based machines. A Mac is a PC. "Personal Computer" - that's what it stands for. It's the software that makes a difference, and his question would still stand otherwise.
    --
    ****************The Starglider***************** Remove "wibble" in
    * Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com * E-Mail address
    * * TO REPLY.
    *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk* _WW_
    * * /_ _\
    *********************************************** | O O | ___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo___________
    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From Frodo Morris@graham.lee@invalid.wadham.oxford.ac.uk to comp.sys.sinclair,comp.sys.cbm,comp.sys.amstrad.8bit on Wednesday, July 09, 2003 09:15:29
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

    Ross Simpson wrote:
    "Weetomuncher" <weetomuncher@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message...


    Do you think that the PC has made computing dull with its monopoly on
    the computing world?


    No sorry, it's high time to take this form of questioning elsewhere. What do you think most of us will say here, since we choose to use older computers?

    Dunno about you, but I'd say no. I use a PC at home, and find it a very interesting system to develop for and to use. But then, I will admit it
    was boring in my nearly Windows-only days (between removing OS/2 and installing Linux); Delphi livened me up for a while however I wouldn't
    touch it with a bargepole these days.

    What were you expecting us to say? "Yeah, PCs are so boring that I
    never use them"? Wel, *I* might be able to get away with that (strokes
    his SunRay) but *you* couldn't :-P


    Why not talk about it in comp.sys.ibm.pc.classic (no maybe that's inapproate too, since it's for people who use the older ibm pc's.

    Which is what these days, anything <300MHz I suppose. Can't mean
    anything running MS-DOS, because there are new systems doing that (for
    use as controllers/data acquisition tools); including ones running
    FreeDOS which is still actively supported.


    There's a number of Windows newsgroups around, ask them!


    /me still cannot see reference to Windows in the original post.

    --
    FM

    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From D.B.@sorry@no.spam to comp.sys.sinclair,comp.sys.cbm,comp.sys.amstrad.8bit on Wednesday, July 09, 2003 11:44:17
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

    X-Archive-No: Yes

    "Weetomuncher" <weetomuncher@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message news:28e19b30.0307081520.134db162@posting.google.com...
    Do you think that the PC has made computing dull with its monopoly on
    the computing world?


    As far as programming is concerned, I still get the same kicks from
    programming my WinXP box as I used to get from programming my c64.

    And for other computer uses, well, don't you think flying a plane in the pioneer days of aeroplanes, was much more exciting than going on a
    commercial flight nowadays?


    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From Ross Simpson@Hi_Mr_Spammer@nowhere.com.au to comp.sys.sinclair,comp.sys.cbm,comp.sys.amstrad.8bit on Wednesday, July 09, 2003 19:56:16
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm


    "Frodo Morris" <graham.lee@invalid.wadham.oxford.ac.uk> wrote in message...

    Do you think that the PC has made computing dull with its monopoly on
    the computing world?

    No sorry, it's high time to take this form of questioning elsewhere.
    What do
    you think most of us will say here, since we choose to use older
    computers?

    Dunno about you, but I'd say no. I use a PC at home, and find it a very interesting system to develop for and to use. But then, I will admit it
    was boring in my nearly Windows-only days (between removing OS/2 and installing Linux); Delphi livened me up for a while however I wouldn't
    touch it with a bargepole these days.

    What were you expecting us to say? "Yeah, PCs are so boring that I
    never use them"? Wel, *I* might be able to get away with that (strokes
    his SunRay) but *you* couldn't :-P

    Well that's the general idea! ;-)

    Why not talk about it in comp.sys.ibm.pc.classic (no maybe that's
    inapproate
    too, since it's for people who use the older ibm pc's.

    Which is what these days, anything <300MHz I suppose. Can't mean
    anything running MS-DOS, because there are new systems doing that (for
    use as controllers/data acquisition tools); including ones running
    FreeDOS which is still actively supported.

    <300Mhz, oh dear. I've been trying to kick those out as well! ;-) I'd
    just draw a line at 486! ;-)

    There's a number of Windows newsgroups around, ask them!

    /me still cannot see reference to Windows in the original post.

    That's because I snipped it out! ;-)


    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From Nomenluni@nomenluni@big*spam*foot.com to comp.sys.sinclair,comp.sys.cbm,comp.sys.amstrad.8bit on Wednesday, July 09, 2003 11:56:14
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm


    "Weetomuncher" <weetomuncher@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message news:28e19b30.0307081520.134db162@posting.google.com...
    Do you think that the PC has made computing dull with its monopoly on
    the computing world?


    Yup, PC's are dull. Deadly dull. Opertaing systems are dull. Dull, dull, dull, dull, dull.

    Fortunately for people who like emulators of "old" computers, there's a vast quantity of emulators and games - anything in fact for the retro gamer/enthusiast. Therefore the necessary evil of PC and with all it's dullness is sustaining and even introducing new people to Spectrums, Amstrrad and CBM's (albeit in emulator form). Hey, but who's to say they won't go out and get a real one and get hooked even more.....

    Nomenluni


    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Michael_J=2E_Sch=FClke?=@news0307@mjschuelke.de to comp.sys.sinclair,comp.sys.cbm,comp.sys.amstrad.8bit on Wednesday, July 09, 2003 12:56:24
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

    Brian Gaff wrote:

    The big crying shame to me is that you just cannot get a PC, switch it on, sit down with an easy to understand book and write things that do stuff in a few minutes any more. You need to buy a programming language, and most of these are geared to business or high power user/experts to start with.

    Actually, the last time I /bought/ a compiler was Turbo Pascal 7 in
    1993. Nowadays, I do most of my programming in C++, Java or Perl -- and
    you can get compilers and tools for all of these for free.

    There are great introductory books for all of them. Have a look at the
    Java tutorial (at java.sun.com, though you can also buy it as a book),
    for instance, or at O'Reilly's Learning Perl.

    Perl, especially, let's you write small, useful programs in a couple of minutes.

    Where is the syntax checking on entry and helpful text in easy to
    understand manuals?

    I don't know which 8 bit platform you're coming from, but most of them
    didn't have either...

    BTW, if it's syntax checking you want, try JBuilder Personal.

    Regards,
    Michael
    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From The Starglider@the_starglider2002@yahoo.co.uk to comp.sys.sinclair,comp.sys.cbm,comp.sys.amstrad.8bit on Wednesday, July 09, 2003 12:23:56
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

    On Wed, 9 Jul 2003 19:52:28 +1000, "Ross Simpson" <Hi_Mr_Spammer@nowhere.com.au>
    wrote:


    Fine, I won't bother with the little git any more! Either way you'd abuse me >for being
    off-topic, or 'am not responding properly. He asked a question which
    deserves to be
    answered & this is my answer! :-( There was no attempt to indicate this was >off-topic
    either! :-( Or maybe you'd just think I'm picking on them just to get a few >kicks out
    of.
    But again, it is not an off-topic post. This is what hurts my brain about your posts. You constantly go on about his off-topic posts, but I've really yet to see one that I would consider "off-topic", in any of the newsgroups that the message has been posted in.

    An off-topic post would be "Who would you shag: Jodie or Jordan?" (But I know for a fact that is certainly more of a subject we would willingly respond to without flaming at CSS. But simply asking if PC's had made computing dull (in relation to the old days of Spectrum, Commodore or Amstrad), is very much relevant.


    That was an example, maybe I should have suggested 'e.g. Try a Windows >newsgroup'.

    And again, why should the question be restricted to a Windows Based machine? Is the question not relevant if you use MacOS, Linux etc...?


    --
    ****************The Starglider***************** Remove "wibble" in
    * Web site:http://www.starglider.dynu.com * E-Mail address
    * * TO REPLY.
    *E-Mail: the_starglider2002@yahoo-wibble.co.uk* _WW_
    * * /_ _\
    *********************************************** | O O | ___________________________________________________________oOO_\/_OOo___________
    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From The Doctor@thedoctor@thedeathzone.free-online.co.uk to comp.sys.sinclair,comp.sys.cbm,comp.sys.amstrad.8bit on Wednesday, July 09, 2003 16:10:19
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

    In message <28e19b30.0307081520.134db162@posting.google.com>
    weetomuncher@yahoo.co.uk (Weetomuncher) wrote:

    Do you think that the PC has made computing dull with its monopoly on
    the computing world?

    I know systems like the Mac and Amiga can still get by (the Mac whoops
    the PC in many ways!) but the sheer support behind the PC gives it
    massive sway. I know a variety of OSs are available but there is
    little available non-Windows software available, particularly in
    gaming which is not done any favours by the lumpy Windows.

    There lies the problem.
    It's not the PC itself (the hardware) that is the problem.
    Most people (that's /most/, not /all/) don't care what hardware they use
    as long as it's reliable.
    On the other hand, Microsoft Windows with /its/ monopoly on the
    computing world /has/ had this effect.

    What has happened to our era when a computer could be upgraded to an
    extent but ran to a standard spec, much like a console. We also didn't
    need to contend with lengthy installations or awkward upgrades. Our
    machines also had their own characters and foiables.

    Bit like the old Acorn RiscPC.
    When you think how slow and obsolete the original spec RiscPC 600 was
    (Arm6 33mhz CPU, 8mb RAM, 420mb Hard drive, etc..) and how far it
    could/can be upgraded (Kinetic 266mhz CPU, 256mb RAM, 60gb Hard drive,
    6 IDE devices, USB card, SCSI, 10/100base networking, Viewfinder
    graphics, etc...) and how easy it is to do, you begin to realise how
    obsolete even relatively modern PCs are.
    Try taking a 1995 PC and fitting a CPU 7-8 times faster, 256mb RAM and
    a 60gb hard drive and I think you'll encounter a few problems.

    Who could forget the Spectrum colour clash or the C64 'block'
    graphics?

    They were good because programmers tended to push them as far as they
    could rather than just relying on people upgrading to a faster CPU and
    graphics card (they simply weren't available).
    These things are as fondly remembered as the strengths of those little
    8-bit workhorses!

    Who could say that of modern machines in a few years?

    Who knows? We can only wait and see (and hope?)
    Cheers!
    --
    Graham
    The RISC OS software site - www.thedeathzone.free-online.co.uk/software
    The RISC OS hardware guide - www.thedeathzone.free-online.co.uk/hardware Deathzone Emulation - www.thedeathzone.free-online.co.uk/emulation
    The Main Control Room - www.thedeathzone.free-online.co.uk
    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From richard@richard@systemeD.not (Richard Fairhurst) to comp.sys.sinclair,comp.sys.cbm,comp.sys.amstrad.8bit on Wednesday, July 09, 2003 20:11:33
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

    Weetomuncher <weetomuncher@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

    Do you think that the PC has made computing dull with its monopoly on
    the computing world?

    For fuck's sake.

    *plonk*

    --
    | Richard Fairhurst where.geowiki.com/x=435500&y=219000
    | The point is not to put poetry at the service of the revolution,
    | but to put the revolution at the service of poetry.
    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From spike1@spike1@freenet.co.uk to comp.sys.sinclair,comp.sys.cbm,comp.sys.amstrad.8bit on Wednesday, July 09, 2003 20:55:32
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

    Michael J. Sch?lke <news0307@mjschuelke.de> did eloquently scribble:
    Brian Gaff wrote:

    The big crying shame to me is that you just cannot get a PC, switch it on, >> sit down with an easy to understand book and write things that do stuff in a >> few minutes any more. You need to buy a programming language, and most of
    these are geared to business or high power user/experts to start with.

    Perl, especially, let's you write small, useful programs in a couple of minutes.

    I'd dread to think how an average perl script'd torture a text->speech
    synth. Now that'd be painful on the ears.

    Where is the syntax checking on entry and helpful text in easy to
    understand manuals?

    I don't know which 8 bit platform you're coming from, but most of them didn't have either...

    Sinclair did... to the point it wouldn't let you enter the line if the
    syntax was wrong...
    :)

    -- ______________________________________________________________________________ | spike1@freenet.co.uk | | |Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)| "The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't | | in | suck is probably the day they start making | | Computer science | vacuum cleaners" - Ernst Jan Plugge | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From Maciej Witkowiak@ytm@elysium.pl.andremowe.me to comp.sys.sinclair,comp.sys.cbm,comp.sys.amstrad.8bit on Wednesday, July 09, 2003 20:31:45
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

    spike1@freenet.co.uk wrote:
    Perl, especially, let's you write small, useful programs in a couple of
    minutes.

    I'd dread to think how an average perl script'd torture a text->speech
    synth. Now that'd be painful on the ears.

    Here you have:

    --8<--

    #!/usr/bin/perl

    use Speech::Rsynth;

    $rs = Speech::Rsynth->new();
    $rs->start;
    $rs->say_file(STDIN);
    $rs->stop;

    --8<--

    will read aloud any text passed to standard input of that script.

    ytm

    --
    Najlepsza sygnatura to brak sygnatury.
    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From Nick Humphries@nick@egyptusWIBBLE.co.uk to comp.sys.sinclair,comp.sys.cbm,comp.sys.amstrad.8bit on Wednesday, July 09, 2003 21:36:08
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

    On 9 Jul 2003 20:31:45 GMT, Maciej Witkowiak <ytm@elysium.pl.andremowe.me> wrote:

    spike1@freenet.co.uk wrote:
    Perl, especially, let's you write small, useful programs in a couple of >>> minutes.

    I'd dread to think how an average perl script'd torture a text->speech
    synth. Now that'd be painful on the ears.

    Here you have:

    --8<--

    #!/usr/bin/perl

    use Speech::Rsynth;

    Wow... I've been looking for something like this for a while now. How well
    does it perform?

    --
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    | Nick Humphries nick@egyptus.co.uk |
    | The Your Sinclair Rock'n'Roll Years: http://www.ysrnry.co.uk/ |
    | The YSRnRY TV Show (Coming Soon) http://www.ysrnry.co.uk/tvprog/ |
    | The Tipshop: http://www.the-tipshop.co.uk/ | ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From Maciej Witkowiak@ytm@elysium.pl.andremowe.me to comp.sys.sinclair,comp.sys.cbm,comp.sys.amstrad.8bit on Wednesday, July 09, 2003 20:52:00
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

    Nick Humphries wrote:
    #!/usr/bin/perl

    use Speech::Rsynth;

    Wow... I've been looking for something like this for a while now. How well does it perform?

    It is as good as rsynth package. Festival probably has better quality and wrapping it for use from within perl should be easy. I don't know about non-open source speech synthesis packages.

    ytm

    --
    Najlepsza sygnatura to brak sygnatury.
    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From spike1@spike1@freenet.co.uk to comp.sys.sinclair,comp.sys.cbm,comp.sys.amstrad.8bit on Wednesday, July 09, 2003 22:06:09
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

    Maciej Witkowiak <ytm@elysium.pl.andremowe.me> did eloquently scribble:
    spike1@freenet.co.uk wrote:
    Perl, especially, let's you write small, useful programs in a couple of >>> minutes.

    I'd dread to think how an average perl script'd torture a text->speech
    synth. Now that'd be painful on the ears.

    Here you have:

    I.... think you misunderstood...
    I didn't means a perl script to DO text->speech...
    I meant text->speech reading a perl script.

    -- ______________________________________________________________________________ | spike1@freenet.co.uk | | |Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)| "The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't | | in | suck is probably the day they start making | | Computer science | vacuum cleaners" - Ernst Jan Plugge | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From White Flame \(aka David Holz\)@whiteflame52@y.a.h.o.o.com to comp.sys.sinclair,comp.sys.cbm,comp.sys.amstrad.8bit on Wednesday, July 09, 2003 16:08:43
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

    "Weetomuncher" <weetomuncher@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message news:28e19b30.0307081520.134db162@posting.google.com...
    Do you think that the PC has made computing dull with its monopoly on
    the computing world?

    step 1: see message subject
    step 2: go away

    --
    White Flame (aka David Holz)
    http://www.white-flame.com/
    (spamblock in effect)


    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From Paul Allen Panks@panks@sdf.lonestar.org to comp.sys.sinclair,comp.sys.cbm,comp.sys.amstrad.8bit on Thursday, July 10, 2003 00:40:53
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

    Hello,

    To put it mildly, the PC is a technological piece of crap. Even the
    Commodore and Sinclair engineers designed a better computer than what we
    have today.

    Unfortunately, the "monopoly" is too hard to break. Intel, Micro$oft, and
    IBM have much to do with that more than any other group.

    Sincerely,

    Paul Allen Panks (a/k/a "Dunric")
    dunric@yahoo.com
    ICQ# 12234336

    In comp.sys.cbm Weetomuncher <weetomuncher@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

    [snip]

    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From Peter de Vroomen@peterv@ditweghaluh.jaytown.com to comp.sys.sinclair,comp.sys.cbm,comp.sys.amstrad.8bit on Thursday, July 10, 2003 10:30:38
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

    Do you think that the PC has made computing dull with its monopoly on
    the computing world?

    Yes, definately. And PC's made computing harder too. It's simply that
    computers have been around for a while now, that people don't percieve the computer as 'hard to use' anymore. But I remember how easy it was to start a game in the old days. These days, I have to install all sorts of stuff and possibly have to reboot before I can start playing. I'm talking about a PC
    with Windows 2000.

    On the other hand, my current computer can do a lot more than those
    8-bitters :). Hell, it can even emulate 20 or more 8-bitters at the same
    time, without slowing down :).

    PeterV


    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From Peter de Vroomen@peterv@ditweghaluh.jaytown.com to comp.sys.sinclair,comp.sys.cbm,comp.sys.amstrad.8bit on Thursday, July 10, 2003 10:37:37
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

    use Speech::Rsynth;

    That's cheating! You can't make me believe the Speech package is written in Perl itself :).

    PeterV


    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From Brian Gaff@Briang1@blueyonder.co.uk to comp.sys.sinclair,comp.sys.cbm,comp.sys.amstrad.8bit on Thursday, July 10, 2003 10:08:30
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

    And the next graduate from the charm school is......

    Brian

    --
    Brian Gaff....
    graphics are great, but the blind can't hear them
    Email: briang1@blueyonder.co.uk ____________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________


    "White Flame (aka David Holz)" <whiteflame52@y.a.h.o.o.com> wrote in message news:bei6p2$1nk2$1@barad-dur.nas.com...
    | "Weetomuncher" <weetomuncher@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
    | news:28e19b30.0307081520.134db162@posting.google.com...
    | > Do you think that the PC has made computing dull with its monopoly on
    | > the computing world?
    |
    | step 1: see message subject
    | step 2: go away
    |
    | --
    | White Flame (aka David Holz)
    | http://www.white-flame.com/
    | (spamblock in effect)
    |
    |


    ---
    Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
    Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
    Version: 6.0.495 / Virus Database: 294 - Release Date: 30/06/03


    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From Frodo Morris@graham.lee@wadham.ox.invalid.ac.uk to comp.sys.sinclair,comp.sys.cbm,comp.sys.amstrad.8bit on Thursday, July 10, 2003 10:26:35
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

    Darren Salt wrote:
    I demand that Frodo Morris may or may not have written...


    Ross Simpson wrote:

    [snip]

    Why not talk about it in comp.sys.ibm.pc.classic (no maybe that's >>>inapproate too, since it's for people who use the older ibm pc's.


    Which is what these days, anything <300MHz I suppose.


    Oh good. My Risc PC qualifies ;-)

    Well, if you ignore the implicit "PC Compatible" requirement, then I
    suppose so. But catch up man, even Amiga have GHz systems on sale these days... :-P

    --
    Frodo Morris http://users.ox.ac.uk/~wadh1342
    All your bast are belong to us AKA Graham Lee, Wadham College SpectrumSofts currently on show at URL/speccy/: Speccy@Home SETI Client
    Also the home of iloveyou.bas, the first PC virus ported to the ZX82!!!

    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From Maciej Witkowiak@ytm@elysium.pl.andremowe.me to comp.sys.sinclair,comp.sys.cbm,comp.sys.amstrad.8bit on Thursday, July 10, 2003 12:11:58
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

    Peter de Vroomen wrote:

    use Speech::Rsynth;
    That's cheating! You can't make me believe the Speech package is written in Perl itself :).

    (to this and other two similar opinions)

    That's not cheating. That's the beauty of Perl. That's CPAN where ready for
    use modules are available for, well, everything. I don't care that rsynth is a separate library. I can use it from Perl without any hassle.
    I really got interested in Perl when someone showed me a very short program for 3D graphs of functions - with rotating, zoom, height represented by colour
    etc. All that stuff that I'd have to learn OpenGL quite some time to achieve. And it was screaming fast.
    Without CPAN awk is good enough too.

    ytm

    --
    Najlepsza sygnatura to brak sygnatury.
    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From Maciej Witkowiak@ytm@elysium.pl.andremowe.me to comp.sys.sinclair,comp.sys.cbm,comp.sys.amstrad.8bit on Thursday, July 10, 2003 21:44:14
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

    Anders Carlsson wrote:
    I'd dread to think how an average perl script'd torture a
    text->speech synth. Now that'd be painful on the ears.
    [script] will read aloud any text passed to standard input
    I believe Spike was referring to feeding a Perl script through
    the speech synth rather than driving the speech synth with a
    Perl script. But of course, the synth could begin with reading

    It seems you are right :) It must have been my creative quoting that
    made my follow-ups on topic :).

    ytm

    --
    Najlepsza sygnatura to brak sygnatury.
    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From Duncan Snowden@dss@ukonline.co.uk to comp.sys.sinclair,comp.sys.cbm,comp.sys.amstrad.8bit on Thursday, July 10, 2003 23:55:41
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

    Program: Darren Salt

    Bytes: Thursday

    I demand that Frodo Morris may or may not have written...

    Well, if you ignore the implicit "PC Compatible" requirement, then I
    suppose so. But catch up man, even Amiga have GHz systems on sale
    these days... :-P

    But that's CISC. We only need 600MHz... ;-)

    No it ain't. PPC G4.

    --
    Duncan Snowden.

    d Too many brackets, 1230:3
    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From JamesW@news@weatherley.net to comp.sys.sinclair,comp.sys.cbm,comp.sys.amstrad.8bit on Friday, July 11, 2003 10:16:21
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.cbm

    In article <Yam2NN.AmigaOS.2BEABDEC.4AA9E6BF@tnt-6-20.easynet.co.uk>, dss@ukonline.co.uk says...
    Program: Darren Salt

    Bytes: Thursday

    I demand that Frodo Morris may or may not have written...

    Well, if you ignore the implicit "PC Compatible" requirement, then I
    suppose so. But catch up man, even Amiga have GHz systems on sale
    these days... :-P

    But that's CISC. We only need 600MHz... ;-)

    No it ain't. PPC G4.


    Everything is CISC compared to an ARM! I think it's only got a few dozen instructions?
    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113