Re: [Ql-Users] What would you most like to see in a new version of QDOSMSQ?
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 5:51 AM, Norman Dunbar nor...@dunbar-it.co.ukwrote: I may regret starting this, but as the subject says, what would you like to see in QDOSMSQ given that we were starting from scratch with the intention of writing a completely new OS? I'd like to see: A block sound driver, so we can do interesting and useful things with standard sounds. A windowing system that isn't just easy and cosmetically pretty for application users to understand, but that's also easy to code with. A new OS-supported distribution/save format that permanently resolves the stripped headers issue. A HAL - Hardware Abstraction Layer - to make the OS less dependent on specific elements of the hardware that have held us back for some time. A new boot option to allow us to configure behavior of the system, eg: installed RAM without dropping to a host OS (if emulating) or on genuine Moto hardware so all functions pertaining to configuring hardware are consistent parts of the OS, not variable of assorted emulators. Proper networking. Treating sockets with device independence too, so OPEN #5,tcp_192,168,0,17p80 is valid. Font improvements. Start by calling them fonts - but also by having a choice of bitmapped or outlined fonts with anti-aliasing. Remote desktop. Standard encryption/decryption. Something modern. Unix-style users. It's a multi-tasking OS. If people can never log into it from elsewhere and have it recognize users and privileges, there's only so much it will ever be able to do in the future. Some IO functions. QDOS makes a good RTOS for IO function, data logging etc - everything is there in the OS except good IO and logging functions. It would make a great robotics OS. A group of people to come together to help write drivers for things. There are many hardware projects stalled simply for lack of drivers. People with those skills need to communicate, and take requests for help, then divide and conquer. There are, that I know of, at least two stalled projects now because of these types of issues. OS-driven speech. USB drivers and drivers for certain classes of standard devices like UVC webcams, TWAIN scanners, PCL5 printers, etc. In fact, a whole new printing system, like CUPS, would be nice. Dave ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] What would you most like to see in a new version of QDOSMSQ?
On 27 Jan 2011, at 16:07, Norman Dunbar wrote: Of course. but why at runtime? Code reuse and/or share-ability. If you have 10 applications running and each one needs the same library code, isn't it much better to have one copy used by all, rather than running the system with 10 copies of the same code? That way, the space hogged by the 9 duplicates can be used to run another application? It would normally seem better to have just one copy of a routine rather than several. I think I misunderstood what was meant by at runtime. Both QLIB and TURBO allow extensions to be included in a program. This can be useful when the program is to be run on many machines some of which will not have the required extensions loaded. This gives easier use of the program at the expense of duplication. Compilation by TURBO allows solution of another problem which how to use another routine if the one you want is not loaded on your machine. It seems dangerous to me to rely on a routine which might have changed since the last time you looked at it. How can you know that the next time your program runs it won't produce different or faulty results because the DLL now contains something different? Works fine for Linux, HP-UX, Windows etc! The usual (Unix) case is that when version 6 of a library comes out, a link to the new *.so file is created, and you get an *.so.6 created. This is what your program is looking for. Other programs may be looking for *.so.5 = so they find that their link, created when release 5 went in, is still pointing at the *.so file, even though it is now the *.so from release 6. The versions are backwards compatible in that features in .5 are still there in .6. The same is true, of course, if an extension used by a program is updated. This should be OK if backward compatibility holds. George ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] What would you most like to see in a new version of QDOSMSQ?
On 27 Jan 2011, at 17:23, Norman Dunbar wrote: One thing I would like to see in SMSQ is the correct MC680xx vector table at the start of the OS. Is this because some of the space is taken up with QDOS vectors thus covering up some of the Motorola exception vectors? The solution is to use the VBR to relocate the exception vectors (possible with 68020+). George ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] What would you most like to see in a new version of QDOSMSQ?
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 5:08 AM, gdgqler gdgq...@gmail.com wrote: Compilation by TURBO allows solution of another problem which how to use another routine if the one you want is not loaded on your machine. Apologies for the off-topicness, but one thing I'd like to see from Turbo or other compilers is a command maker that can take a PROCedure or FuNction, compile it, and package it up so it can be loaded to extend BASIC. I think this would result in a mini-renaissance of keyword development, which could act as a suggestion line for additions to SuperBASIC and, more broadly, QDOSMSQ. ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] What would you most like to see in a new version ofQDOSMSQ?
Plastic wrote: Apologies for the off-topicness, but one thing I'd like to see from Turbo or other compilers is a command maker that can take a PROCedure or FuNction, compile it, and package it up so it can be loaded to extend BASIC. Works with QLib (and also Turbo, I think). With QLib, if you start such a resident extension, it results in creating a JOB (even if without windows), so I think, not quite what you want. Cheers...Ralf ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] What would you most like to see in a new version ofQDOSMSQ?
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 5:33 AM, Ralf Reköndt ralf.rekoe...@t-online.dewrote: Plastic wrote: Apologies for the off-topicness, but one thing I'd like to see from Turbo or other compilers is a command maker that can take a PROCedure or FuNction, compile it, and package it up so it can be loaded to extend BASIC. Works with QLib (and also Turbo, I think). With QLib, if you start such a resident extension, it results in creating a JOB (even if without windows), so I think, not quite what you want. Cheers...Ralf ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm Yes, not. I was thinking specifically of it creating superbasic extensions deliberately for that purpose, to be LRESPR'd and linked into the keyword list. It would make for an interesting website to host, where people could submit keywords with manual entries, and release updated versions, etc. The commands could be coded in native assembly, or in BASIC, with sources or not. Where sources were offered, people could check for errors, or offer enhancements/patches. By extending this to existing keywords, skilled people could make functionality or performance enhancements that could then feed back into the OS. I would be happy to code and host such a site, if there was interest. Dave ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] What would you most like to see in a new versionofQDOSMSQ?
Plastic wrote: Apologies for the off-topicness, but one thing I'd like to see from Turbo or other compilers is a command maker that can take a PROCedure or FuNction, compile it, and package it up so it can be loaded to extend BASIC. Works with QLib (and also Turbo, I think). With QLib, if you start such a resident extension, it results in creating a JOB (even if without windows), so I think, not quite what you want. Cheers...Ralf For Turbo, there is a utility called Task Commander which takes an executable program and repackages it to make it into a keyword. As Ralf says, the file can be LRESPR'ed but becomes a job when the keyword is called (like an EX or EW depending on whether a comma is added to the command name). Task Commander is among the Turbo Extras package on the Turbo page of my website or from the Scottish QL Users Group site at http://www.jms1.supanet.com/SQLUG/gwilt/gwiltturbo.htm It's a long time since I last used Task Commander, so I don't know if it works with current versions of Turbo. Maybe George can confirm this (as he updates Turbo nowadays). An interesting feature of SMSQ/E you don't often see mentioned is the facility to link in modules - in this way you can have extensions like Turbo Toolkit linked to SMSQ/E as a module, making it a semi-permanent (if there's such a word) addition to SMSQ/E). This might be a way for those who would prefer SMSQ/E to be totally free to add software which could become part of SMSQ/E without being hampered by licensing and free distribution issues. From memory, I think there is an issue with self-modifying code when you do this, but I think there was a way around even that IIRC. I've never really used the facility, but there is some documentation about this on my website, which includes how to set it up, header formats etc at http://www.dilwyn.me.uk/docs/smsqegd2/index.html Dilwyn Jones ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] What would you most like to see in a new version of QDOSMSQ?
Hi George, Is this because some of the space is taken up with QDOS vectors thus covering up some of the Motorola exception vectors? The solution is to use the VBR to relocate the exception vectors (possible with 68020+). Yes indeed, this is why. However, the solution still doesn't allow everything to be used. Only a number of the exception handlers and the traps from 5 to 15. I was meaning I'd like the standard features of the processor to be completely available in the ideal 680xx OS. Cheers, Norman. -- Norman Dunbar Dunbar IT Consultants Ltd Registered address: Thorpe House 61 Richardshaw Lane Pudsey West Yorkshire United Kingdom LS28 7EL Company Number: 05132767 ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] What would you most like to see in a newversionofQDOSMSQ?
Dilwyn Jones wrote: For Turbo, there is a utility called Task Commander which takes an executable program and repackages it to make it into a keyword. As Ralf says, the file can be LRESPR'ed but becomes a job when the keyword is called (like an EX or EW depending on whether a comma is added to the command name). Yes, for QLib put an ! behind the keyword (which of coure is found in the Nametable after LRESPRing) and it behaves like EW (as far as I remember) otherwise as EX. QLib itself can be LRESPRed and there is a new keyword in the Nametable (QLIB, I think, and parameter can be passed to it). Cheers...Ralf ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] What would you most like to see in a new version ofQDOSMSQ?
- Original Message - From: Norman Dunbar nor...@dunbar-it.co.uk To: ql-us...@q-v-d.com Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2011 11:51 AM Subject: [Ql-Users] What would you most like to see in a new version ofQDOSMSQ? I may regret starting this, but as the subject says, what would you like to see in QDOSMSQ given that we were starting from scratch with the intention of writing a completely new OS? Disclaimer: No, I'm NOT thinking of writing one! For me, the following: * Ability to hook into the OS from any language, Basic, Assembler, C, whatever. * A windowing system that is simple to use. From any language. * Libraries that applications can link to at run time, as opposed to static linking at compile time. * Multitasking, obviously! * A file system that is not restricted to 36 characters. See http://qdosmsq.dunbar-it.co.uk/blog/2009/05/whats-wrong-with-this-file-system/ for a pseudo-rant on the matter. * Industry standard floating point format. * Industry standard graphics format(s) - PNG, for example. JPG if we must! SVG would be nice. * Speed and efficiency! ;-) Cheers, Norman. -- Norman Dunbar Dunbar IT Consultants Ltd Registered address: Thorpe House 61 Richardshaw Lane Pudsey West Yorkshire United Kingdom LS28 7EL Company Number: 05132767 ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm I would like to be able to do something like: LET a=PI PRINT #3,HEX$(a) which would write an ASCII string of the form $ which would be the internal representation of the floating point value. In reverse, something like: INPUT #3,a$ LET a=REAL(a$,0) would recover the original value. The second argument is the value to be returned if the first argument is garbage or NAN. Omitting the second argument would return an error instead. Why do I want this? PUT writes in binary. An ASCII representation would allow the full internal precision to be preserved in an easily viewed/edited format. I know this could be done in S*BASICusing PEEK/POKE but an efficient built-in would be useful. Ian. ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] What would you most like to see in a new versionofQDOSMSQ?
On 28 Jan 2011, at 12:10, Dilwyn Jones wrote: Plastic wrote: Apologies for the off-topicness, but one thing I'd like to see from Turbo or other compilers is a command maker that can take a PROCedure or FuNction, compile it, and package it up so it can be loaded to extend BASIC. Works with QLib (and also Turbo, I think). With QLib, if you start such a resident extension, it results in creating a JOB (even if without windows), so I think, not quite what you want. Cheers...Ralf For Turbo, there is a utility called Task Commander which takes an executable program and repackages it to make it into a keyword. As Ralf says, the file can be LRESPR'ed but becomes a job when the keyword is called (like an EX or EW depending on whether a comma is added to the command name). Task Commander is among the Turbo Extras package on the Turbo page of my website or from the Scottish QL Users Group site athttp://www.jms1.supanet.com/SQLUG/gwilt/gwiltturbo.htm It's a long time since I last used Task Commander, so I don't know if it works with current versions of Turbo. Maybe George can confirm this (as he updates Turbo nowadays). In the file TRBOX_ZIP there are four files tascom3_xx where xx is one of 00, 01, 10, 11. These take an executable program and turn it into a file which can be LRESPRd to give the keyword you have chosen. The four values of xx set defaults. The first value is 0 for not reentrant and 1 for reentrant. The second value is 0 for not default #1 and 1 for default #1. Any of these four tascom files can be configured to one of the others. I have in fact altered PHOTON to the keyword PHOT. I find this very useful. The TASCOM set do not need TURBO for their operation. The keywords to which they give rise can, of course, be used in programs compiled by TURBO. George ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] What would you most like to see in a new version ofQDOSMSQ?
On 28 Jan 2011, at 13:28, Ian Pine wrote: I would like to be able to do something like: LET a=PI PRINT #3,HEX$(a) which would write an ASCII string of the form $ which would be the internal representation of the floating point value. In reverse, something like: INPUT #3,a$ LET a=REAL(a$,0) would recover the original value. The second argument is the value to be returned if the first argument is garbage or NAN. Omitting the second argument would return an error instead. This is something I would like too. In my BOOT i have a procedure which prints a given a$, but the format of the fp number is QDOS. For example a$ could be $080004000. Of course in QDOS there are no NANs. I'm pretty sure that my BOOT also has the reverse procedure, but either I never use it or I have not used it for along time. George ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] What would you most like to see in a new version ofQDOSMSQ?
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 9:09 AM, gdgqler gdgq...@gmail.com wrote: This is something I would like too. In my BOOT i have a procedure which prints a given a$, but the format of the fp number is QDOS. For example a$ could be $080004000. Of course in QDOS there are no NANs. I'm pretty sure that my BOOT also has the reverse procedure, but either I never use it or I have not used it for along time. George ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm Hmmm. a$ = CONVERT$(number, from_base, to_base) from_base and to_base could be eg: 2, 10, 16, FP (for floating point) If the conversion was invalid, simply leave a$ unset or to an impossible value. a$ could be commuted to a if the value was decimal - which would be explicit to the programmer. Dave ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
[Ql-Users] Verify after copy
Can files be verified after copying? I have just laboriously copied a lot of files on to FLP1_. When I tried to copy them onto another disk in FLP1_ from FLP2_, it said bad or corrupted. BryanH ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] Verify after copy
Can files be verified after copying? I have just laboriously copied a lot of files on to FLP1_. When I tried to copy them onto another disk in FLP1_ from FLP2_, it said bad or corrupted. BryanH I don't know about verifying, but if the disk was originally copied onto FLP1_ it stands maximum chance of reading correctly from the same drive. Failing that, a higher density drive MIGHT manage to read a lower density disk sometimes. Sorry, not much help I'm afraid. Dilwyn Jones ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
[Ql-Users] QL On A Stick
I have been asked about the possibilities of a QL On A Stick version for Linux, or even a version which could be used on both Linux and Windows. The current version of QL On A Stick is for Windows only. Unfotunately, I have no knowledge whatsoever of Linux and wouldn't know where to start. I presume that what was asked for would involve the CD or pen drive having: (1) QLay for Linux (2) uQLx (3) QPC2 demo version with WINE (4) Any other emulators or utilities considered appropriate Would anyone be willing and able to help us with this? I'll gladly send a CD copy of the Windows version to anyone willing to help. Dilwyn Jones ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] QL On A Stick
I am looking at uQLx on linux... Just because it can be so small that any box that can boot from the stick can be that. However, I'm also looking at it from the POV that architecture matters a little and weighing up Intel vs. ARM performance. It'll be a slow project due to zero finances, but if I can contribute anything back, I will, happily. Dave On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 10:36 AM, Dilwyn Jones dil...@evans1511.fsnet.co.uk wrote: I have been asked about the possibilities of a QL On A Stick version for Linux, or even a version which could be used on both Linux and Windows. The current version of QL On A Stick is for Windows only. Unfotunately, I have no knowledge whatsoever of Linux and wouldn't know where to start. I presume that what was asked for would involve the CD or pen drive having: (1) QLay for Linux (2) uQLx (3) QPC2 demo version with WINE (4) Any other emulators or utilities considered appropriate Would anyone be willing and able to help us with this? I'll gladly send a CD copy of the Windows version to anyone willing to help. Dilwyn Jones ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] What would you most like to see in a new version ofQDOSMSQ?
Know what? Call me outdated, but I'm just about fine with what I have. I'm particulary fine with size, overhead and speed of both the OS and Basic. I'm fine that our OS (and windowing system) is ASM-centric, and that's the only reason I still use it. (Have you ever tried to do Windows or X11/Gnome/KDE/Cocoa/whatever-Programming in assembler? B. I'm fine that the OS is open for extension and (somewhat) well documented, sources are available. And I might be quite a back number, but I still like the streamlined M68k assembler most. I never really got down to using another language (except the odd S*Basic Program) on my QLs, even if I do the very same on other systems for a living.) Summing up all what you guys describe, boils down near a decent Windows/Linux/MacOS (with all the overhead and hardware requirements they've got plus a huge implementation task - And - you'd be ending up with just another clone of those, thank you). QDOSSMSQ's shine stands and falls with the slim design without any overheads in my opinion. I can very well trade in some functionality and ease of use for that. Ahhm, yes, there's one thing I'm missing every now and then - portable BitBlt functionality to do fast raster graphics using bitmaps. You can to some extent use huge sprites, but you cannot portably read them back from screen. And every other now and then I seem to be missing symbolic debugging tools with what they used to call source line debugging back then. Tobias ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] What would you most like to see in a new version of QDOSMSQ?
In message 4d415c3e.2020...@dunbar-it.co.uk, Norman Dunbar nor...@dunbar-it.co.uk writes Hi Norman, Something for everyone ... :-) All of the things that you list are quite technical considerations. Most users you want something that does something very well without them having to bother too much about it. Hence the embedded capabilities being shown by mobile phones and ipads, etc. The new way or working is moving towards being a more intuitive interaction between human and machine - hence hand movement and touch, etc. So, a new OS would have to be a new paradigm, in the first place. I may regret starting this, but as the subject says, what would you like to see in QDOSMSQ given that we were starting from scratch with the intention of writing a completely new OS? Disclaimer: No, I'm NOT thinking of writing one! For me, the following: * Ability to hook into the OS from any language, Basic, Assembler, C, whatever. * A windowing system that is simple to use. From any language. * Libraries that applications can link to at run time, as opposed to static linking at compile time. * Multitasking, obviously! * A file system that is not restricted to 36 characters. See http://qdosmsq.dunbar-it.co.uk/blog/2009/05/whats-wrong-with-this-file-system/ for a pseudo-rant on the matter. * Industry standard floating point format. * Industry standard graphics format(s) - PNG, for example. JPG if we must! SVG would be nice. * Speed and efficiency! ;-) Cheers, Norman. -- Malcolm Cadman ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] Finally a reply
-- From: Dilwyn Jones dil...@evans1511.fsnet.co.uk Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2010 3:09 PM To: ql-us...@q-v-d.com Subject: Re: [Ql-Users] [QL-Users] Sandy Futura (PDF from Urs) Snip John Gilpin will be standing down from his numerous committee roles at the AGM and the new post holders should quickly find that his emails suddenly arrive in their inbox, provided we (or Geoff, any ideas???) don't invent devious ways to force him to stay against his wishes ;o)) Dilwyn asked me a question just before Christmas which I deliberately did not answer as I did not wish to interfere with the democratic election process. I know nothing about the current state of nominations, but as the deadline is Monday it is time to reply. I don't know why I am bothering. About a year ago I posted a detailed clause by clause interpretation of the Quanta Constitution arguing that the committee had misunderstood the constitution and that John Gilpin did not have to step down from the committee until 2012. I invited people to dispute my interpretation on legal grounds and no one, but no one, has done so. Not even Quanta who cannot justify their own interpretation in the same detail. Instead of taking my advice the committee stuck two fingers up at me - or more correctly as there were 6 committee members at the time - 12 fingers. What the committee did last year was absolute crass stupidity. It was not their intention, of course, but they have almost certainly placed Quanta on the wrong side of British law. And not just civil law. Should anyone doubt my qualifications for expressing such a firm opinion may I remind you that for a quarter of my working life I was an officer of the British law courts. Somewhat perversely Quanta's breach of the constitution and of British law could be its salvation this year. John Gilpin was appointed treasurer in two clear breaches of the constitution. As he voluntarily resigned from the committee at the 2010 AGM he lost his status as an officer and the full rigours of clause 5.2 applied to him. Under the constitution he became not just ineligible but, more strongly, forbidden to be treasurer. The co-option was also irregular as the committee have no powers to co-opt an officer. Clause 5.8 only permits the co-option of ordinary committee members. In other words neither the constitution nor British law recognised John as a valid committee member or a valid treasurer. Legally he did not sit on the committee last year. By the next AGM he will not have been a committee member for a year and thus can stand again for office. However this has to be by the nomination of two members before 1st February. As he was not legally on the committee last year, he will also have to pay his £14 subscription before the nomination paper is signed. Having written all this let me be the first person to state in public that the time has come for Quanta to be wound up. When an organisation is reduced to breaching its constitution to survive it has become a gigantic farce. If we needed Quanta we would be using it. In practice the active members of Quanta represent under 10% of the UK QL community and under 5% of the international QL community. The demise of Quanta is something the QL community can survive, Best Wishes, Geoff ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] Finally a reply
On 28/01/2011 20:29, Geoff Wicks wrote: -- From: Dilwyn Jones dil...@evans1511.fsnet.co.uk Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2010 3:09 PM To: ql-us...@q-v-d.com Subject: Re: [Ql-Users] [QL-Users] Sandy Futura (PDF from Urs) Snip John Gilpin will be standing down from his numerous committee roles at the AGM and the new post holders should quickly find that his emails suddenly arrive in their inbox, provided we (or Geoff, any ideas???) don't invent devious ways to force him to stay against his wishes ;o)) Dilwyn asked me a question just before Christmas which I deliberately did not answer as I did not wish to interfere with the democratic election process. I know nothing about the current state of nominations, but as the deadline is Monday it is time to reply. I don't know why I am bothering. About a year ago I posted a detailed clause by clause interpretation of the Quanta Constitution arguing that the committee had misunderstood the constitution and that John Gilpin did not have to step down from the committee until 2012. I invited people to dispute my interpretation on legal grounds and no one, but no one, has done so. Not even Quanta who cannot justify their own interpretation in the same detail. Instead of taking my advice the committee stuck two fingers up at me - or more correctly as there were 6 committee members at the time - 12 fingers. What the committee did last year was absolute crass stupidity. It was not their intention, of course, but they have almost certainly placed Quanta on the wrong side of British law. And not just civil law. Should anyone doubt my qualifications for expressing such a firm opinion may I remind you that for a quarter of my working life I was an officer of the British law courts. Somewhat perversely Quanta's breach of the constitution and of British law could be its salvation this year. John Gilpin was appointed treasurer in two clear breaches of the constitution. As he voluntarily resigned from the committee at the 2010 AGM he lost his status as an officer and the full rigours of clause 5.2 applied to him. Under the constitution he became not just ineligible but, more strongly, forbidden to be treasurer. The co-option was also irregular as the committee have no powers to co-opt an officer. Clause 5.8 only permits the co-option of ordinary committee members. In other words neither the constitution nor British law recognised John as a valid committee member or a valid treasurer. Legally he did not sit on the committee last year. By the next AGM he will not have been a committee member for a year and thus can stand again for office. However this has to be by the nomination of two members before 1st February. As he was not legally on the committee last year, he will also have to pay his £14 subscription before the nomination paper is signed. Having written all this let me be the first person to state in public that the time has come for Quanta to be wound up. When an organisation is reduced to breaching its constitution to survive it has become a gigantic farce. If we needed Quanta we would be using it. In practice the active members of Quanta represent under 10% of the UK QL community and under 5% of the international QL community. The demise of Quanta is something the QL community can survive, Best Wishes, Geoff ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm I don't want to become embroiled in the discussions over the constitution of Quanta and without seeing the minutes of the meeting at the end of the AGM, I presume that the committee co-opted John under article 5.8 which says that The Committee shall have power to fill vacancies by co-opting ordinary members to the Committee. Such members shall have a vote in committee and shall serve until the next Annual General Meeting. It does not say anywhere that the co-opted members cannot serve as officers and vacancies is wide enough to be interpreted as meaning three officers and not more than 6 other committee members, unless I am missing something, but I agree that the constitution is badly worded. At the end of the day, if members were really bothered about John Gilpin being co-opted back on as Treasurer, they would need to take action - but then, what has been the loss to Quanta or its members as a result? As it stands I wonder just how nominations will be received for people willing to stand as a committee member, let alone officer. I disagree that Quanta should be wound up - yes, it needs dragging into the 21st century, and perhaps this year, more so than any other year, is a real opportunity for people to put themselves forward to have a say in how Quanta is run and to make a real difference. Before suggesting that Quanta should be wound up, it has to be borne in mind, that they still hold quite a considerable war
Re: [Ql-Users] Finally a reply
On 28 Jan 2011, at 22:05, Rich Mellor r...@rwapservices.co.uk wrote: snip I did start a thread on the QL Forums about how to improve Quanta, but even the QL community seems divided here - some people will stick steadfast to the ql-users mailing list, whereas others prefer the forum, where it is easier to find and follow previous threads. Thunderbird mimics forums and newsgroups as it can format mailing lists with a threaded view. I don't like forums as the postings do not arrive in my inbox. My view is that Quanta is still needed and rightly so - plenty of people are still returning to the QL and need a source of knowledge and hand-holding, it is just that Quanta needs more members and particularly committee members to help drive it forward. I see no point in winding up Quanta. Tony -- QBBS (QL fido BBS 2:257/67) +44(1442)-828255 t...@firshman.co.uk http://firshman.co.uk Voice: +44(0)1442-828254 Fax: +44(0)1442-828255 Skype: tonyfirshman TF Services, 29 Longfield Road, Tring, Herts, HP23 4DG ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] Finally a reply
I agree, but to get new blood you need to reach out to new blood first, I dont see that happening at the moment :( Lee Privett - Sent from my Laptop running XP but emulating the QL using QPC2 Snip My view is that Quanta is still needed and rightly so - plenty of people are still returning to the QL and need a source of knowledge and hand-holding, it is just that Quanta needs more members and particularly committee members to help drive it forward -- Rich Mellor RWAP Services http://www.rwapsoftware.co.uk http://www.rwapservices.co.uk -- Try out our new site: http://sellmyretro.com ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] Finally a reply
--- On Fri, 28/1/11, Lee Privett lee.priv...@gmail.com wrote: From: Lee Privett lee.priv...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [Ql-Users] Finally a reply To: ql-us...@q-v-d.com Date: Friday, 28 January, 2011, 22:22 I agree, but to get new blood you need to reach out to new blood first, I dont see that happening at the moment :( Lee Privett - Sent from my Laptop running XP but emulating the QL using QPC2 Snip I think what is needed is some kind of QL PR group to bombard retro computing and retrogaming websites and magazines etc with articles and information about the QL. With permissions they could update old articles with screenshots etc and use those as a staring point along with new material later on. Anything to get the word out onto the street. Peter. ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] Finally a reply
At the last count there were around 177 Quanta members, if each one took the trouble to send one email/write one letter to a website/magazine about the QL and the vast range of free software available for new people to experence retro computing/programing and having fun in the process, then there would be 176 more people doing that than I am aware of, and I dont see what harm it would do. Lee Privett - Sent from my Laptop running XP but emulating the QL using QPC2 - Original Message - From: peet vanpeebles peetvanpeeb...@yahoo.co.uk To: ql-us...@q-v-d.com Sent: Friday, January 28, 2011 10:39 PM Subject: Re: [Ql-Users] Finally a reply --- On Fri, 28/1/11, Lee Privett lee.priv...@gmail.com wrote: From: Lee Privett lee.priv...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [Ql-Users] Finally a reply To: ql-us...@q-v-d.com Date: Friday, 28 January, 2011, 22:22 I agree, but to get new blood you need to reach out to new blood first, I dont see that happening at the moment :( Lee Privett - Sent from my Laptop running XP but emulating the QL using QPC2 Snip I think what is needed is some kind of QL PR group to bombard retro computing and retrogaming websites and magazines etc with articles and information about the QL. With permissions they could update old articles with screenshots etc and use those as a staring point along with new material later on. Anything to get the word out onto the street. Peter. ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
[Ql-Users] Sinclair Picture
I have two pics from the recent article in Metro about Sir Clives C5 and tried to send them on here but restricted by a file size and I cannot make them any smalle without loss of detail. Any idea where could put them for the benefit of others? Lee Privett - Sent from my Laptop running XP but emulating the QL using QPC2 ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] Sinclair Picture
On 28/01/2011 22:55, Lee Privett wrote: I have two pics from the recent article in Metro about Sir Clives C5 and tried to send them on here but restricted by a file size and I cannot make them any smalle without loss of detail. Any idea where could put them for the benefit of others? Lee Privett - Sent from my Laptop running XP but emulating the QL using QPC2 ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm Upload them to the QL forums :-) -- Rich Mellor RWAP Services http://www.rwapsoftware.co.uk http://www.rwapservices.co.uk -- Try out our new site: http://sellmyretro.com ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] Finally a reply
Geoff Wicks wrote: If we needed Quanta we would be using it. In practice the active members of Quanta represent under 10% of the UK QL community and under 5% of the international QL community. The demise of Quanta is something the QL community can survive I'd be glad if QUANTA can survive. Not only that I read and collect the printed magazine. It's still nice to know I _could_ use QUANTA, for example if I have a new QL hardware someday or in case future circumstances allow more time for the QL hobby. Somehow, QUANTA helps keeping up positive emotions by the simple fact that it is still there! Without QUANTA tradition and a last remaining classic anchor point in the QL scene, a piece of motivation for QL work would be lost. It feels very sad... Peter ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] Sinclair Picture
Will do and also there are now here temporarilly http://tinypic.com/r/euhixv/7 http://tinypic.com/r/2rd8ebo/7 and on the forum here http://www.qlforum.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=12t=80 Lee Privett - Sent from my Laptop running XP but emulating the QL using QPC2 - Original Message - From: Rich Mellor r...@rwapservices.co.uk To: ql-us...@q-v-d.com Sent: Friday, January 28, 2011 10:59 PM Subject: Re: [Ql-Users] Sinclair Picture On 28/01/2011 22:55, Lee Privett wrote: I have two pics from the recent article in Metro about Sir Clives C5 and tried to send them on here but restricted by a file size and I cannot make them any smalle without loss of detail. Any idea where could put them for the benefit of others? Lee Privett - Sent from my Laptop running XP but emulating the QL using QPC2 ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm Upload them to the QL forums :-) -- Rich Mellor RWAP Services http://www.rwapsoftware.co.uk http://www.rwapservices.co.uk -- Try out our new site: http://sellmyretro.com ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] QL On A Stick
Given the nature of installing programs on Windows to run them, I can imagine creating a QL-on-a-stick for Linux would be fairly easy. The device would just need to be mounted (automount might do this with a USB Drive) and then apps would be directly from the USB drive. The USB drive can be formated for Windows (MS-DOS) and be mountable, so the whole thing could be created from a Windows box and then tested with Linux. With DosBox, QPC1 could be made to run. Wasn't there a version of QLAY for MS-DOS? Tim Swenson ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] What would you most like to see in a new versionof QDOSMSQ?
Part of the charm of the QL is the distinctive black box look so lets keep it as is (although I do like the 'pimp my QLs' seen here and there), if Quanta or others are looking for new projects to keep the QL alive then emulating everything that the current PC/MAC world has, is hardly exciting if the existing QL hardware doesn't meet even the most of todays basic computer standards (how will that attract new blood to the QL hive?). So shouldn't the expansion slot be revisited with a small harddrive + memory, the display output replaced by an HDMI port, the tv modulator output replaced by USB2 or USB3 connector, the microdrive with an SD card slot, net1 and net1 3.5 sockets replaced by audio in and out and QDOSMSQ is a plugin flashrom, I dont see what the problem is :-) Lee Privett - Sent from my Laptop running XP but emulating the QL using QPC2 - Original Message - From: Malcolm Cadman q...@mcad.demon.co.uk To: ql-us...@q-v-d.com Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2011 10:58 PM Subject: Re: [Ql-Users] What would you most like to see in a new versionof QDOSMSQ? In message 4d415c3e.2020...@dunbar-it.co.uk, Norman Dunbar nor...@dunbar-it.co.uk writes Hi Norman, Something for everyone ... :-) All of the things that you list are quite technical considerations. Most users you want something that does something very well without them having to bother too much about it. Hence the embedded capabilities being shown by mobile phones and ipads, etc. The new way or working is moving towards being a more intuitive interaction between human and machine - hence hand movement and touch, etc. So, a new OS would have to be a new paradigm, in the first place. I may regret starting this, but as the subject says, what would you like to see in QDOSMSQ given that we were starting from scratch with the intention of writing a completely new OS? Disclaimer: No, I'm NOT thinking of writing one! For me, the following: * Ability to hook into the OS from any language, Basic, Assembler, C, whatever. * A windowing system that is simple to use. From any language. * Libraries that applications can link to at run time, as opposed to static linking at compile time. * Multitasking, obviously! * A file system that is not restricted to 36 characters. See http://qdosmsq.dunbar-it.co.uk/blog/2009/05/whats-wrong-with-this-file-system/ for a pseudo-rant on the matter. * Industry standard floating point format. * Industry standard graphics format(s) - PNG, for example. JPG if we must! SVG would be nice. * Speed and efficiency! ;-) Cheers, Norman. -- Malcolm Cadman ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] QL On A Stick
Yep Dilwyn's site has the links for QLAY http://www.dilwyn.me.uk/emu/index.html and I used QLAY in a DOSBOX being emulated on the iPad but very slowly :-( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzK5xU1BbBw Lee Privett - Sent from my Laptop running XP but emulating the QL using QPC2 - Original Message - From: Timothy Swenson swenso...@sbcglobal.net To: ql-us...@q-v-d.com Sent: Saturday, January 29, 2011 12:58 AM Subject: Re: [Ql-Users] QL On A Stick snip With DosBox, QPC1 could be made to run. Wasn't there a version of QLAY for MS-DOS? Tim Swenson /snip ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
