Draft 2015 RISC OS awards page

I’ve spent today putting together the voting form for the 2015 RISC OS Awards poll.

The form itself isn’t live yet (i.e. you can’t vote) but the page itself is online if anyone wishes to take a peek.

I intend to make it live in a couple of days time (and to actually announce it on RISCOSitory this time).

In the meantime… Comments? Observations? Really stupid mistakes?

What I’ve done this year for the awards part of the form is combine the freeform text entry of last year with the options of the previous year – so people can choose one of my suggestions, or they can offer up something else.

(I’ll try to take a look through the votes every couple of weeks and highlight any noteworthy alternative suggestions on RISCOSitory, so others can vote for the same things if they like.)

For the survey, I’ve changed the wording slightly on a question that seems to cause some confuzzlement – emphasising things like ‘choice’ in the hope of making what I mean a little clearer.

I’ve also added two new questions relating to user groups: Whether people attend their local group, and (if not) whether they even know if there is one.

Langiage?

I spotted that when re-reading the page on my phone in bed this morning.

Along with the incomplete sentence under ‘best overall contributor’ – “There are no suggestions for this category – it is entirely upon”

I’ll fix those when I’m home from the day job later.

Also (note to self, but comments also welcome):

Perhaps a couple more survey questions:

• Do you use RISC OS in a professional capacity?
• Would you say your overall use of RISC OS has increased or decreased over the last year?

Multiple responses? E.g. A9home with RISC OS 4 and ARMX6 with RISC OS 5. RISC OS, LINUX, WIN business and private…

Best foreign language resource: www.arcsite.de

Best overall contributor: German Archimedes Group

At the risk of shooting myself in the foot: Pi Zero!
But does it go under commercial on non?

Raik: Yes, I’ll add arcsite.de to that category – and you are, of course, free to vote for GAG in the best overall contributor category: that one’s entirely open.

I’m not sure I understand the first part of your comment, though. If you mean the one(s) about your main platform, just before them there’s some text starting “For the next few questions…” – suggesting just to refer to the one you use most or, if it’s more than one used about the same, pick one of them.

Chris: I considered including Pi Zero, but in the end decided not to – if people want to vote for it, though, they can, via the alternative option field.

As to whether it’s commercial or non-commercial: it has a price tag of £4.00 – that’s commercial.

There is somewhat of an irony that the Pi Zero which is commercially available isn’t on there, but the Titanium, which is not commercially available is.

Umm… “yet”?

And I’d dispute the Pi Zero being commercially available – I’ve just looked in a few places, and they’re still saying “Out of stock” – just like Elesar says for the Titanium board.

How to get your Pi Zero https://www.raspberrypi.org/magpi/how-to-get-magpi-40/

Wouter: I’m aware of that – I was more talking about ordering the Pi Zero itself, not having to buy something else to get it ‘free’.

I suspect this may be why Chris questioned whether it’s commercial or non-commercial, because its initial release was as a ‘free gift’ with a magazine.

As I said above, if people wish to vote for it, they can: That’s what the “alternative option” and text field is for.

However, having said that, the point of ambiguity Chris brought up makes me think that perhaps I should include it as a suggestion in the ‘Best commercial product’ category – but if so, which of the existing items do I take out, to keep the initial suggestions to a maximum of 6?

As a slight aside: An updated version of the form is online; the misspelling and incomplete sentence are fixed, I’ve added new questions to the survey part – and I’ve numbered the survey questions so that I can refer to them in the text (or in an answer) where needed.

For example, q10; if you tick the ‘No’ option, it specifically says next to it to move on to q14. (And the N/A options are now gone from 11-13; the default MYOB answer will be treated as N/A if q10 is answered with ‘No’)

And I’d dispute the Pi Zero being commercially available

I have a Pi Zero in hand which was purchased in a shop. Unless there’s been an announcement that I missed, the last Titanium update was that it is still in testing and will ship at some point in the future.

Speaking with my pedantic hat on, you didn’t buy the Pi Zero in a shop – you bought a copy of the MagPi in a shop.

But as I said in my last comment, one good reason for including it as a suggestion is to clear up the ambiguity of its status as commercial or non-commercial.

But what comes off the list of options to keep the number at a maximum of six? Or – pedantic hat still on – eight if you count the default (no opinion) and the alternative option.

PiZero was available on its own from the swag store until it sold out!

I am missing ADFFS and the JASPP project/especially Jon. Only featuring the forum seems to be…strange. While it is indeed a great online resource, ADFFS is surely much more interesting/useful/great.

Another suggestion: the Archimedes core for the MiST FPGA board by Stephen Leary.

ADFFS is definitively the big thing :)

to keep the initial suggestions to a maximum of 6?

Why a limit? If there are options to choose from, and a free-form entry field, why not present the options to make it easier for us, given that we could just write ’em in as the alternative?

Looking at it now…

Best commercial product. Sorry, it’s a bit messy. Wouldn’t this be better split between hardware and software? For instance, two DTP products are listed and…that’s it. Shouldn’t ArtWorks get a nod here? What about something like whatsit for making the system discs (my crappy memory is suffering tea depletion).

Likewise, it is nice that Ignatius and MX6 and such get a mention, as well as a new keyboard, but I wonder if the Pi 2 ought to be mentioned. I mean, hell, the Pi family is likely to be something that has given RISC OS a heap of purpose, and a quad core device for silly money on the non-kerching end of the scale? Come on, that’s got to be worth a vote.

Frankly, I’d say the Pi Zero should be on next year’s list. It is too new and too doesn’t-exist-except-on-eBay to think about it right now. Maybe as “best new development”, but that’s about it.

Best hardware? Isn’t this mostly duping Best commercial product? Refer to previous comment re hard/soft split.

Broken cog of the year. Ouch! Multiple times. Ouch.

I am missing ADFFS and the JASPP project/especially Jon. Only featuring the forum seems to be…strange.

Less strange, more didn’t think to include it in another category. Which one(s) were you thinking it should be in – and if there’s already six options¹, which one should come off to make room?

Another suggestion: the Archimedes core for the MiST FPGA board by Stephen Leary.

Never heard of it, but just sought it out. I don’t have time to read up on it properly right now, but at first glance that looks like it would fit neatly in the innovative/interesting project category (for which there are currently only four items).

¹ Six is just an arbitrary limit I’ve set – in fact it was the limit I decided on two years ago – but I am sticking to it.

PiZero was available on its own from the swag store until it sold out!

I didn’t know that – I thought the initial release was purely on the magazine.

I would suggest ADFFS in the “Most innovative or interesting project” category. Or do a “Backwards compatibility solution” category with RPCEmu, ArchiEmu, Aemulor and ADFFS. The JASPP project would be in the “Best show of initiative” category.

Why a limit?

I don’t have any references to hand, but I’ve read countless times that in surveys and voting forms, it’s best not to present too many options. So I decided on six for the vote part.

IIRC, the reasoning is something along the lines of the more options there are, the harder it is for people to select one – and it gets to a point where people will just get bored and move on (possibly selecting one randomly just to do so if it’s a multi-page form).

If I don’t stick to my guns about a limit of six, and add “just one more” here, then where does that end? When we have a list of every conceivable product in every category?

If there are options to choose from, and a free-form entry field, why not present the options to make it easier for us, given that we could just write ’em in as the alternative?

The results are received for each category as [letter],[text field] – where the options are returned as a letter; A for the first option, B for the second, etc. My code discards any that are returned as no opinion, and counts up the votes for each letter.

Only if the letter representing the alternative option gets the most votes do I need to parse that text to work out the individual items suggested and count them.

That – if it’s necessary – is a manual process. And having done that last year for the whole thing, it’s not something I fancy doing again for the whole thing.

Best commercial product. Sorry, it’s a bit messy. Wouldn’t this be better split between hardware and software?

Perhaps, yes – though there’s already a best hardware category; so probably just change Best commercial product into Best commercial software?

For instance, two DTP products are listed and…that’s it.

I know this isn’t the point you’re making, but to clarify: Both have been mentioned on RISCOSitory over the last year – that’s always going to be my starting point, and puts them in mind so to speak. So when I was trying to decide, it seemed reasonable to include the two, rather than one or t’other.

Shouldn’t ArtWorks get a nod here?

Didn’t even spring to mind – probably because it doesn’t seem to have been mentioned on RISCOSitory over the course of the year. If I split the category (which is a good idea, so I will) perhaps I’ll include it – unless anyone has any better suggestions. (As it stands, I’ll need a few more.)

What about something like whatsit for making the system discs (my crappy memory is suffering tea depletion).

That’s not much worse than a few of the entries I saw last year, when it was a text box only – you can’t automate counting votes like that! Which is why selectable options are the only sane way to go!

And I think you mean SystemDisc by Piccolo?

Likewise, it is nice that Ignatius and MX6 and such get a mention, as well as a new keyboard, but I wonder if the Pi 2 ought to be mentioned.

Yes – and looking at the hardware category, I see there’s only four options at the moment anyway. I agree the 2 would be sensible.

Frankly, I’d say the Pi Zero should be on next year’s list. It is too new and too doesn’t-exist-except-on-eBay to think about it right now. Maybe as “best new development”, but that’s about it.

Good shout – only four options for that category as well; I’ll add the Zero there.

Best hardware? Isn’t this mostly duping Best commercial product? Refer to previous comment re hard/soft split.

See above :)

I’ll make the changes mentioned above tomorrow.

Broken cog of the year. Ouch! Multiple times. Ouch.

Huh? Oh, you mean the reasons to vote for RISCOSitory? :)

I could add Soft Rock Software as well – for example, for forgetting to take the actual products I sell to a show. To, you know, sell. Twice – Southwest, and Recursion. :)

I would suggest ADFFS in the “Most innovative or interesting project” category.

Okay.

Or do a “Backwards compatibility solution” category with RPCEmu, ArchiEmu, Aemulor and ADFFS.

Ooh, good idea!

The JASPP project would be in the “Best show of initiative” category.

Okay.

I’ll add those to tomorrow evening’s changes, then we’ll see what it looks like.

I’ve just looked in a few places, and they’re still saying “Out of stock” – just like Elesar says for the Titanium board.

Despite the Titanium boards being in stock since July (albeit subject to a NDA until mid October) and fully tested since mid October. Now still awaiting ADFS licensing issues to be resolved. Meanwhile there is an incomplete review and benchmarks of the Titanium board here under the ‘Titanium’ tab.

Edit: I think there may be more to it than just licensing issues.

Best commercial product. … Shouldn’t ArtWorks get a nod here?

I believe the last release was in 2012.

ADFS licensing issues?