The collected works of theinonen - Page 2

After a long wait I finally managed to get TopModel to my RISC OS software collection.

TopModel is one of the few 3d-apps for the RISC OS, and maybe the only proper 3d-modelling software that was ever made for the platform. It is only intended for modelling, but can also render the finished result to a 24bpp high-res image. Finished models can be converted and raytraced on another app if needed.

Too bad there never was a 32-bit version, and the software disappeared sometime after TopModel 2. In my screenshot it is barely running with the help of Aemulator and it will crash when you try to do almost anything. That is why the image is not very exciting.

I have only done a quick test with the help of my old Acorn A4000, and found the program is actually pretty good for what it was made to do. It runs suprisingly well with an ARM250 processor (ARM2, 12.5 MHz) and 4MB RAM. Program comes with 4 disks, but the actual app fits in only 1 disk. Other 3 disks are for utilities/resources. TopModel uses Gemini (Similar to software OpenGL) to render a "realtime" shaded preview of the models/scene when working with the program.

Those are nice looking machines, but are only useful as a table. They are too fragile for normal use, and it is almost impossible to find any spares when they fail as they are so rare.

I picked one with my brother that was in excellent condition and it worked for 1 whole day. We only managed to install the AIX to that hellmachine, before it started to randomly reboot itself. At first it could sometimes run for hours without a reboot, but currently it is in endless reboot loop.

But if you are really desperate with it, I should still have the original AIX medias that came with the machine somewhere.

Problem with AutoCAD and DWG fileformat it uses, is that there is just too many versions of it. It seems like they are changing it on every release of their software just to force people to upgrade, because otherwise they would not be able to properly open drawings saved with the latest version.

I personally save my AutoCAD files to AutoCAD 2000 format, so they can be opened on most CAD software. DXF is a good fileformat for compatibility as almost all programs can open it. Only downside is that all formatting is lost and on bigger drawings there is a lot of extra work to get all the linetypes and widths right.

I have never used Autocad for 3D-stuff or really done any 3D-CAD work, so can not comment on that. I would use 2D-CAD (or drafting app, as dc_v01 would say) for drawing something like that.

Here is an (bad)example to demonstrate that even if it is 2D-drawing, it does not have to look boring...

Windows NT for PowerPC is not very useful as there is virtually no applications for it.

There is not much to do with it, other than to play a couple games of patience. It is also impossible to use it for web browsing, as the version of Internet (s)Explorer is so ancient it renders all pages wrong. Personally I would not bother installing it.

Heh, made me laugh.

I currently have at least these:

AS2100
AS4100
XP1000
ES40

I have unfinished vector image, that I started when I was trying to learn vector graphics but got bored working with it. It is mostly done, colour needs to be changed darker blue and needs some more shading for lighting effects.

If someone wants to finish it and do better job than me, I could share it. Right colours would be easy to borrow from Jan Jaaps hinv thread.

Daytime driving lights are required at least here in Finland. Driving with only parking lights is not sufficient.

Junk yards are pretty common here but it has gone pretty much to what you described and parts for newer cars are generally not that cheap.

Overclocking and playing with modern hardware is pretty expensive hobby for average kids or younger people, and modern hardware is so complicated there is actually not much to learn from it really. To really be able to understand how something works one must start from the basics and some old 8-bit systems are much better for that purpose.

I would also argue that hardware side is not very interesting these days, but on the software side there is still much to do that will benefit the user much more than some extra MHz from the processor.


Some days ago I diggged my old MSX2/MSX2+ system out from the closet and must confess spent couple hours just playing Bubble Bobble and Space Manbow. It really brought good memories from my younger days, and some of these days must go through those cardboxes with unbelievable amount of disks and find out what treasures are hidden there.

Here is typical example of raytraced image of that era. Took couple hours with Iyonix running Render Bender 2 under Aemulator. (Early Archimedes raytracer.)

Another one. This time with SolidsRENDER and this one only took 2h 59 minutes to finish.

Is there even good 2D-CAD software for Linux nowdays? Last time I used Linux there was only Dia and not much else.

I mainly use RISC OS now, and use ProCad+ and Artworks 2 for drawing. Most things are much easier to draw in CAD software and then drop into vector drawing software for colouring and finishing.

I have no real need for 3D myself, as when in paper you only get 2D anyway.

I may have to check that FreeCAD when I get some Linux box running at some point.


I have never done proper 3D-CAD work, but used to do some 3D-modelling when I was younger. (Well, loaded Solidworks 1 times at school when was studying, but compared to some 3D-modellers the actual modelling tools felt poor.) I had sports injury some years ago and after that more precision work with mouse produced stress on the arm very quickly, so gave up on the 3D-modelling. Most 2D programs have very good drawing aids like snaps and configurable grids, so precision is achieved with very little extra work with mouse.

Drawing isometric pictures with 2D is not that different to working with 3D really. If you know the angle then its is just the matter of drawing some helper lines for the depth and then removing the hidden lines manually. If intention is to give object some colour and shading to make it look like solid, then it goes little differently.

Seems that 3D is the word of the day though, and even traditional 2D work, where linetype and width give most the information needed are switching to 3D and you can rotate the 2D view to get a view in 3D.

Dimensions can be entered from keyboard, but for example if I wanted to copy some line or other object and align it perfectly with something. In ProCAD+ I could just use F4 to set snap point for the object, and then with correct snap settings could just drag it with right mouse button to get it copied and snap points correctly aligned.



I studied building services and the things I had to draw were things like pipes, drains, ducts, etc. Pretty simple stuff and remember using software like CADS where everything was 2D only with possibility to generate simple isometric view with correct settings. Later there were some programs that looked like you were drawing in 2D, but could rotate the viewpoint to get 3D-view.

That can be done with ProCAD+ also, but I find mouse+keyboard combination more natural than having to visualize everything in my mind. Also with isometric grid and angular constraints to isometric angles it is very easy just to draw some lines directly at right places. I am more of a mouse generation myself than a oldskool hardcore user.

I remember testing older AutoCAD R13, or something and it had that awful rectangle around the cursor where you could define the snap area and it would only snap to things inside that area. No need to say it always snapped to wrong places and was very tedious to constantly change the settings for the thing. At the place I studied there was AutoCAD 2000 and it was so much better in every way possible.

Always good to learn new english words. (Most of my english comes from the movies and computer magazines.)

There actually is an example drawing that came with the program and was drawn by someone who makes those in real life, so I knew mine was not very accurate. But as always I went where the fence was the lowest and skipped the filleting, as it was only meant to give an illusion of something that could work instead of working in reality.

Is this one any better?

Maybe in a more detailed objects, but for simpler objects not really a big deal.

You can always cheat and use combination of several programs to make things easier to visualize. Below an example, where early Archimedes 3D-program was used to export as vector image and then dropped to ProCAD+ for finishing, and from there to Compo for final image. I quite like that retro look, and when I have more time will make complex scene using graphics like that.

Actually the screen is running on the native resolution of 2880x1800. Resolution only appears to be 1440x900 as physical screen resolution does not change, only the size of the pixel that is plotted to screen.

Something similar can be demonstrated with RISC OS.

If I am not mistaken all the raster elements needs to be redone for the retina, or they will be scaled. So essentially if there are higher resolution graphics available for the application, then they can be rendered with higher detail.


If you look the lower picture from my earlier post, you can see that some icons are much sharper than others. That is because there are higher resolution icons provided for some applications and the blurry ones are just scaled to double size. I would assume Apple is doing something similar, but differently.

All those things could easily be done with 15-year old computer, but the thing is that people always want new stuff even if there is no real need for it. You could buy some cheap netbook from the local supermarket that would do all those things equally well with only fraction of the cost.

From the hardware point of view I believe we are allready there and most of the extra power available today is just wasted on the stuff most people use it for. Things are more interesting on the software side and there are still lot to do to really harness all that power in real life use. Even the most powerful engine still needs a gearbox to be really useful.

Sad truth is, that modern computers are just too damn complicated and the step needed to get people into programming has been raised too high. You almost need a ladder or lift to get there.

In good old times every computer came with some sort of BASIC to get people started at programming. Computers were simpler, so functionality was not hidden behind unnecessary layers and it was much easier to get some understanding how things worked.

I never had Commodore 64 myself, but many of my friends had and spent lots of time playing games with the machine.

Some rounded corners...

Not accurate copy as I have no iPhone myself and was mostly made as fun exercise.

Could have been made to look more realistic, but somehow I like this style more than the photorealistic one. Everything is kept more or less the way it came out from the CAD program.

There are couple more much bigger reasons also to hate Apple.

But then again you could get XP1000 that is just like PWS 500au, but faster with 667 MHz EV67 processor.

Microcomputer is proper term as you could do lot more than only play games.

True most people only played games, but there was also lots of other kind of software available and foundations of modern computers and software were laid with systems like that.

When the word "micro" disappeared and everything became simply computers, we also lost variety and big part of fun in computing.

No experience with Raspberry Pi, but I do 95% of things on RISC OS nowdays so can recommend it to everyone.

Lack of javascript in NetSurf is not really a problem to me as the pages I visit rarely need it. There is one advantage when using Gmail with NetSurf, as can quickly open messages in new window with right mouse button.

I can not say much about the programming side of things, as have only done little BASIC programming and mostly with WimpBasic. At least there is lots of good documentation freely available to programmers.