Why do we use RISC OS 5 and not SIX? What happened to RISC OS SIX?

better adjusted

Blimey again. You must be bouncing off the walls if so! 8~)

28/10/2013 Martin Bazley posted on this forum a summary of RISC OS SIX features people wanted in RISC OS 5

I wonder how many have made it into RO5 in the last 18 months?

Martin wrote:
This seems to be more or less all I’m getting, so I’ll work it up into a
page on the ROOL wiki (with far more detail than the short summaries
given here) RSN.

Internal:
– Firewall.
– EDID.
– ImageFileConvert clone.
– BootLog, and SysLog enhancements.
– Startup menu.
Wimp:
– Selectable text in writable icons.
– Rearrangeable window furniture.
– Shutdown confirmation.
– Move opened menus to the left at right edge of screen.
– Adjust click on switcher opens Configure.
– PC Delete.
– Change desktop font size.
– Put !Configure back in Apps.
– Faster opening of very long menus.
– Shaded icons take background colour into account
Filer:
– Double-click renaming.
– Thumbnail display.
– True numerical sort order.
– Display sort order in title bar.
– Filetype menus (customisable) for ‘Set type’.
– Toolbars.
– Per-directory and inherited sort orders.
– New keyboard shortcuts for copy, change display, new dir, run.
Applications:
– Image viewer.
– Clipboard support in Edit, Paint, Draw, etc.
– Configure Boot Look at/Run to Disable as well as Remove items.
– Improve Network configure, remove manual file editing.
– Pinboard: graded/HSV backgrounds, extra display settings, cacheing.
– Logarithmic task display, improve list order, add detail.
– Paint: reorder sprites in multiple-sprite file
Built in support for:
– Waste bin.
– SysLog.
  

– Firewall.

I think I’d rather have no firewall and instead a networking stack that understands IPv6, for when this actually gains traction.
BTW, why the big deal with RISC OS having a firewall? It’s inherent vulnerabilities surely make such a thing rather pointless? Besides, it isn’t as if RISC OS opens a dozen ports… (I’ve just run a port scan and only my server is visible, nothing else (I don’t run ShareFS; but stuff like that ought to be behind a NAT and not world visible)).

– EDID

Done, I think. I have heard that ROLtd’s implementation has difficulties with bonzo gibberish returned by some monitors.

– Adjust click on switcher opens Configure.

Was suggested, was vetoed despite several people wanting it. I roll my own OS so I added it (details on my blog someplace, or here…it’s Switcher that needs to be tweaked).

– Change desktop font size.

Yeah, I was quite surprised to find Wimp$FontSize didn’t do anything. It used to. When was this changed?

– Put !Configure back in Apps.

So long as it is turn-offable. Only needs a stub to go run !Boot… ;-)

– Faster opening of very long menus.

Explanation please? I’ve seen this mentioned before, but I’ve made menus with 50-80 items on them that opened reasonably quickly. In timing, most of the time was taken by my code generating the menu block.

Filer: Much of this was provided my Thomas Olssen’s FilerPro (sold by WSS for a while?). Might be worth getting in touch with him regarding these things?

– Image viewer.

The Pi SD image comes with SwiftJPEG and another viewer with a name like Private Eye? (I’m wiring this on my phone) Plus, every RISC OS setup includes ChangeFSI which is painfully slow but handles fruitcake formats that other software won’t touch.

– Logarithmic task display, improve list order, add detail.

In Switcher? It is logarithmic isn’t it? How would you like the list order to be improved, and what detail do you think is missing?

The only thing I would want to add is a secret menu option to allow you to remove Dynamic Areas; however given the possibility of catastrophic screw up (your filing system maps, anyone?), I can quite understand if ROOL replies “hell NO”. ;-)

Explanation please? I’ve seen this mentioned before, but I’ve made menus with 50-80 items on them that opened reasonably quickly. In timing, most of the time was taken by my code generating the menu block.

http://gerph.org/riscos/ramble/desktop-2.html#WindowManager_Menucreation probably explains it better than I would…

– EDID

Done, I think.

The bounty is still in progress, so I think it’s fair to say that this isn’t done yet. I think the main outstanding task is that there’s no way of configuring it (no CMOS setting, no options in Configure, etc.)

– Put !Configure back in Apps.

So long as it is turn-offable. Only needs a stub to go run !Boot… ;-)

On the surface it sounds like a silly suggestion (“click on Apps, double-click !Configure” is the same number of clicks as “click on boot drive, double-click !Boot”), but there are actually a few use cases where I think it would be useful.

If we wanted to hide !Boot from appearing in $ (e.g. to protect against accidental modification/deletion) then having Configure in Apps would be a useful way to get at it.

Having Configure in Apps would also be useful if you were using network boot, where the real configure app would be on some obscure network drive somewhere.

Although the fact that you can get to Configure via the task manager makes this a bit moot (and getting to it that way is <= as many clicks as needed to launch it as an app)

Although the fact that you can get to Configure via the task manager makes this a bit moot (and getting to it that way is <= as many clicks as needed to launch it as an app)

And the winner for fewest clicks is if Adjust click on Switcher did it. :-P

Adjust click/Switcher for the ‘TaskWindow’

On the surface it sounds like a silly suggestion (“click on Apps, double-click !Configure” is the same number of clicks as “click on boot drive, double-click !Boot”), but there are actually a few use cases where I think it would be useful.

Number of clicks is one issue, but there’s the more general point about where the most logical place to find the Configure app is. A new user might well expect to find a configuration tool in the main Apps window, but not think to double-click on the !Boot folder. I’ve always thought it was a odd choice, from a UI point of view.

Then you have an app with 2 names !configure and !boot and new users won’t know that they are the same when they are talked about. I would have like to have seen !boot renamed to !configure – but thats not going to happen.

Guys – just make a shim Configure in Apps. New users can use that, us old hands can think pffft and delete it. Then everybody is happy. Documentation points to Boot to configure? That works too… ;-)

I have to comment about “Firewall”, can we please, please, please NOT have a firewall in RISC OS.
If you want a firewall PFSense or another commercial grade one, or two of different brands if you are really paranoid! Otherwise do with the firewall on your router.
Which reminds me, this is a fun page

can we please, please, please NOT have a firewall in RISC OS.

It does seem a bit pointless, doesn’t it?

Otherwise do with the firewall on your router.

That’s what I’m doing – the server ports on the Pi are exposed to the world, nothing else is, and the server does not perform any destructive actions (no file modification, system shutdown, or anything like that).
The router acts as the gateway between my machines and “world”; but since I’m paranoid, internal services have passwords and drives/directories are only shared when specifically I need them…

A firewall in a machine in a home or small office situation loooks to me like it’s no help at all, and possibly a liability.

It’s no help because the modem/router is the single device that’s firewalling the entire LAN, and you’re running WPA2 on wifi, so there’s no reasonable likelihood of intrusion.

It’s possibly a liability because it can cause communication to fail between pieces of equipment on the LAN.

It’s possibly a liability because it can cause communication to fail between pieces of equipment on the LAN.

Indeed. I had to disable the Windows 10 built-in firewall to get something to work (I can’t remember what) and was then constantly hounded with “notifications” to the effect of “the firewall is off; tap here to turn it back on”. Because after just spending five minutes poking around menus to try to turn it off, obviously the first thing I want to do is turn it back on.

Of course, you can set up a rule in the firewaĺl to handle the protocol. But when you’re within a secure perimeter, it seems pointless effort. Not to mention that setting up a firewall rule is OK for us techies, but challenging for non-techies.

Not to mention that setting up a firewall rule is OK for us techies, but challenging for non-techies

Yup. There have been a few instances of nearby ex-pats locking themselves out of their Liveboxes by fiddling with the firewall and essentially telling it to ignore all traffic; to the point where they can’t even log into it any more to change the settings.

My usual suggestion would be to force a factory reset, then just set it up again. However I got stung with this once. Having explained that I’d need their ADSL identity and password (which is different to the email name and password), we proceeded to reinitialise the device, only for them to suddenly decide that they don’t have the information they said they had, and since I was the last person to do something with the box, clearly I “broke it”. They were without Internet for the two and a half weeks it took to contact Orange, explain the problem, then get a new letter sent out with the information in it. This, obviously, was entirely my fault, and they told anybody who’d listen. And then they thought I’d come out and set it all up for them. Ha ha like hell I was going near that again…

So now if someone nearby is having technical problems, sorry, ask somebody else. I think mom has got the message as well, stop volunteering me too fix other people’s broken computers.
</rant>

Sounds about right. Fortunately in this part of the world a number of ISPs are now using DHCP so a username/password isn’t required, but I’ve had my fair share of trying to configure everything in the “bad old days”. Now that I’m thinking about it, my current ISP still uses PPPoE…

Thinking about it even more, the downside of DHCP is that anyone can take the “raw” feed coming into the house and pipe it straight into a single computer without having a router anywhere. And once you’ve done that, well, it reverses the “no firewall” argument!

A firewall in a machine in a home or small office situation loooks to me like it’s no help at all, and possibly a liability.

Where it is useful is situations where you regularly have guests joining your network (or for that matter if you’re the guest).

Decent routers often have the option of two separate WiFi networks, and the ability to isolate one from the other – but that’s certainly not all, and the routers I’ve seen in the many places I’ve visited over (say) the last month have more often than not been the crappier, cheaper sort that don’t.

A firewall in the computer itself is therefore not a bad thing – though it needs to be as simple and unobtrusive as possible for ‘ordinary’ users (perhaps even off by default). Whether you agree or not – and some clearly don’t – possibly depends on how and where you use your computers and the networks you need to connect to. One thing I know: I wouldn’t want to have to carry around a second machine running PFSense to act as a physical firewall between me and other people on the same network.

I would say it’s more important to be able to lock a machine down easily.
You don’t need a firewall at all if your machine is setup sanely, if you are talking about “simple” firewalls.
Firewalls became the fashion because Windows was completely insecure at every level.
There are so many other issues with being on public networks that are far more worrying.
Having an easy way to see what crazy things are open on your system is the best way.

Where it is useful is situations where you regularly have guests joining your network (or for that matter if you’re the guest).

Why? Don’t you password shares, VNC, and such? I’m not worried about other people being physically on the network and able to ‘see’ my machines as they’ll be able to access nothing that isn’t intentionally left open; though I am worried about what they might bring with them (think Confiker) where antivirus would be more beneficial than a firewall, perhaps?

Decent routers often have the option of two separate WiFi networks, and the ability to isolate one from the other

Most ISP-provided routers over here support this. Only the ISP prefers to use such functionality to crowd-source their WiFi hotspot coverage. Hey – you even get a completely separate IP address too…

A firewall in the computer itself is therefore not a bad thing

…in a system that you can’t pwn with a line of code written in BASIC, perhaps…but in RISC OS?

to act as a physical firewall between me and other people on the same network.

On my own network, I use passwords and I control who gets access (it’s a long gibberish WPA2 password, and you need to physically press a button to get it to ‘stick’).
On public APs (such as McDonalds), I switch to a VPN. If the provider (KFC!) does not support VPN and is known to try spamming fake certificates to distrupt https (KFC, again!), then I switch my phone to tethered and use its AP and not the public one. Goes without saying that my phone is not open access…

For a small personal network, a firewall is a useful tool to help control who can get in from outside; but other methods of control should be used to deal with those who are already in the local side of the network.

Firewalls became the fashion because Windows was completely insecure at every level.

Sadly, it could block incoming data and programs attempting to open listen ports, but it did exactly diddly-squat about outgoing data, thus making it about as useful as using a puréed lemon to clean a windscreen.