I don't think that's it. I imagine op would be willing to pay to upgrade to Goodnotes 6, at which point he would own that for ever, just like Goodnotes 5. But there is no option to do that.
This reminds me of the turnpike property in optimization: for some optimization problems, no matter what the initial and final conditions are, the optimal path passes through the same section. Then you can exploit this to simplify the problem as getting onto this highway and getting off at the right times.
You basically have to take a trip through Rogan's studio if you're trying to connect, say, a WCW midcarder and Roger Penrose, which is the exact curiosity this site exists to fulfill.
That would also be an incorrect phrasing. This entire thread is a good illustration of the difficulty of speaking precisely about probabilistic concepts.
(The number of successes has zero uncertainty. If you flip a coin 10 times and get 5 heads, there is no uncertainty on the number of heads. In general, for any statistical model the uncertainty is only with respect to an underlying model parameter - in this example, while your number of successes is perfectly known, it can be used to infer a probability of success, p, of 0.5, and there is uncertainty associated with that inferred probability.)
I always loved Acorn computers. My schoolfriend and I released a commercial game on the Archimedes, and in 1994 I wrote a 3D demo suite for Acorn's new RiscPC machine (powered by ARM, of course). The good old days of hacking around!
That reminds me of arcade games of the early 90s. So that is a decent job making an arcade quality game on a microcomputer (expensive one sure... but still not a dedicated console).
Haha. Thanks man. I dimly remember it took some messing with the arm assembly to get the scrolling fast enough to make the v-sync. And also that we used the hardware mouse pointer sprite to draw the player's spaceship, to get an extra couple of colours. Good times!
The Archimedes was called a "BBC Micro" because it was part of the BBC's home computing initiative, but architecturally, it had nothing to do with the original BBC Micro.
I don't recall the Archimedes ever getting called a "BBC Micro". I remember the introduction of the Archimedes. We had an Acorn Electron, and we'd seen the introduction of various "BBC Masters"; BBCs with more memory, more powerful hardware, but still a BBC. The Archimedes, was always marketed as something completely new, as far as I recall.
My brother had one. Really cool machine, and as far as I remember, on a completely different level than anything that had existed before it. Soon succeeded by the Risc PC, which I mostly remember for being able to accept various configurations of additional processors (it could get either an x86 as co-processor, or several additional ARMs).
It was something entirely new, of course. In fact it wasn't called a BBC Micro - however it was "endorsed" by the BBC - had the owl logo on it etc. Was indeed a cool machine, and streets ahead of anything else at the time. Typical UK tech story...
Hardware architecture not, for very obvious reasons. But if you wrote BBC Basic you'd have felt right at home and this continuity was one of the reasons they sold quite well, lots of people that were using the BBC Micro in ways that it wasn't intended for had run into the limitations of the platform and wanted something similar but bigger and faster. The Archimedes was that - and more. To get maximum performance (still very anemic by today's standards) out of a 6502 based BBC you'd have been programming in assembly and that of course did not port at all to the ARM based machines.
As I wrote in another comment I was pretty close to the fire and had very early access to the ARM architecture based beebs courtesy of a friendly contact but I realized soon enough that the future for home computing and SMB business computing did not lie with either Acorn, Atari, Commodore or any of the other contenders. In '88 or so (my memory is a bit hazy about the dates, there was a lot going on in my life back then) I moved to x86 professionally with a side of Atari ST (using the fantastic Mark Williams C compiler + documentation) for more fun stuff and with the advent of the availability of the internet for the masses I ran SGI Irix for a couple of years until I settled on Linux which has been my daily driver for decades now. Hardware architecture used to be a super important factor for me, now the only thing that matters is whether or not I can run Ubuntu and whether the hardware is sufficiently powerful to get me through my working day. The fact that my daily driver is a 12 year old laptop is a nice indication of how far we've come, it is pretty rare that I put together machines where performance really matters.
But regardless of all of that I have a fond spot in my heart for the BBC, regardless of processor used, it was the machine that allowed me to finally do some more structured programming and explore other languages without breaking the bank.
> architecturally, it had nothing to do with the original BBC Micro.
This is not true. It had lots to do with it.
* The Archimedes used a CPU whose designers (Sophie Wilson and Steve Furber) have specifically said they built it to be conceptually similar to the 6502. Source: I have met both and seen them say this in person.
* The Archimedes ran RISC OS which is a rewrite of the BBC MOS. Source: I have interviewed the project leader, Paul Fellows.
I agree. I think when something is at the cutting edge, and you're creating effects no-one has ever seen before - (the first Jurassic Park, say) - people really go the extra mile to make it look as great as possible. Fast forward to today, when CG is pretty much a commodity - and it's often a lot more about getting it done on time and within budget.
