Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.sys.acorn.misc > #5329

Re: Wakefield (second attempt)

From Chris Hughes <news@noonehere.co.uk>
Newsgroups comp.sys.acorn.misc
Subject Re: Wakefield (second attempt)
Date 2012-05-03 18:57 +0100
Organization A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID <b72c2f8a52.chris@o2.co.uk> (permalink)
References <5289868527richtnews@uwclub.net> <109c238a52.thebears@sarno.freeserve.co.uk>

Show all headers | View raw


In message <109c238a52.thebears@sarno.freeserve.co.uk>
          Geoffrey Baxendale <thebears@sarno.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:

> In message <5289868527richtnews@uwclub.net>
>           Richard Travers <richtnews@uwclub.net> wrote:

>> Can I just confirm that nobody other than Charles had any contact with the
>> new R-Comp tablet? I'm really looking for more details on the thing.
>>
>> R.
>>
> I bought the last one from Andrew at Wakefield and very good it is too.
> Bit of a culture shock after RISC OS but there is lots of info on the
> web.

> So far have managed to contact other machines on my network, have fitted
> an extra SD card and have transferred some videos to it from SWMBO's
> laptop. It does video very well. The browser is pretty good. I think it
> will do SKYPE as well. I downloaded an "App" and then reaslised that
> nowhere had it mentioned a microphone, but it turns out it does have
> one.

Yes it had Skype on it, I remember that now.

It also used Andriod v4 "Ice Cream Sandwich" for the OS.

> I would say "go for it" particularly at the on-line price! You will
> probably have to download some apps yourself if you go this route as
> Andrew had put some useful ones on there on his version, including the
> "Google Play" store app..

I am also very tempted. The price is sensible as well. and R-Comp do 
ensure you get the cables etc.

> BTW the display is stunning, well upto iPad standard IMHO, and it feels
> a robust piece of kit. Only thing missing for me is a GPS chip.

Not sure about being up to iPad standard (certainly not the latest one 
anyway), but it was pretty good.

Battery life seems pretty good as well, it was on from about 9am on 
show day and had 30% left at 4 pm when I was playing with it just 
before the show finished.

Re the GPS point, when I tried Google maps it opened at the current 
location of where we were. so seems to have someway of working the 
location out.



-- 
Chris Hughes
Sorry you have missed the Wakefield Show now.
http://www.wakefieldshow.org.uk

Back to comp.sys.acorn.misc | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Wakefield (second attempt) Richard Travers <richtnews@uwclub.net> - 2012-05-02 12:15 +0100
  Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Chris Hughes <news@noonehere.co.uk> - 2012-05-02 13:19 +0100
    Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Richard Travers <richtnews@uwclub.net> - 2012-05-02 14:08 +0100
      Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-05-04 23:20 +0100
        Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 05:23 +0200
          Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-05-05 21:13 +0100
        Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Richard Travers <richtnews@uwclub.net> - 2012-05-05 10:26 +0100
          Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Chris Hughes <news@noonehere.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 12:10 +0100
        Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Bryn Evans <d@a.invalid> - 2012-05-05 12:31 +0100
          Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Chris Hughes <news@noonehere.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 13:03 +0100
    Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Alan Wrigley <spamhater@keepyourfilthyspamtoyourself.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 13:14 +0100
  Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Geoffrey Baxendale <thebears@sarno.freeserve.co.uk> - 2012-05-03 16:51 +0100
    Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Chris Hughes <news@noonehere.co.uk> - 2012-05-03 18:57 +0100
      Re: Wakefield (second attempt) M Harding <riscos@mdharding.org.uk> - 2012-05-03 20:08 +0100
        Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Thomas Milius <Thomas-Milius@t-online.de> - 2012-05-03 21:46 +0200
          Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Thomas Milius <Thomas-Milius@t-online.de> - 2012-05-03 22:04 +0200
        Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Chris Evans <chris@cjemicros.co.uk> - 2012-05-04 16:48 +0100
      Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Martin Wuerthner <spamtrap@mw-software.com> - 2012-05-03 21:22 +0200
    Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Richard Travers <richtnews@uwclub.net> - 2012-05-04 09:20 +0100
    Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Brian <brferris@orpheusmail.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 12:11 +0100
      Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Doug Webb <doug.j.webb@btinternet.com> - 2012-05-05 12:39 +0100
        Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Chris Hughes <news@noonehere.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 13:01 +0100
          Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Doug Webb <doug.j.webb@btinternet.com> - 2012-05-05 13:18 +0100
            Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-05-12 11:34 +0100
      Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Chris Hughes <news@noonehere.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 12:31 +0100
        Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Brian <brferris@orpheusmail.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 13:32 +0100
          Re: Wakefield (second attempt) charles <charles@charleshope.demon.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 13:43 +0100
            Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Brian <brferris@orpheusmail.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 15:06 +0100
              Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Doug Webb <doug.j.webb@btinternet.com> - 2012-05-05 15:23 +0100
              Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Chris Hughes <news@noonehere.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 16:41 +0100
                Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 18:59 +0200
                Re: Wakefield (second attempt) druck <news@druck.org.uk> - 2012-05-06 11:28 +0100
                Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Fred Bambrough <fred@[127.0.0.1]> - 2012-05-06 14:58 +0100
                Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Dev <spam-addy@no.spam.invalid> - 2012-05-06 15:04 +0100
                Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-05-06 20:00 +0200
              Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 18:50 +0200
              Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Dave Symes <dave@triffid.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 19:43 +0100
            Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Alan Wrigley <spamhater@keepyourfilthyspamtoyourself.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 15:18 +0100
              Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Brian <brferris@orpheusmail.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 15:48 +0100
                Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Alan Wrigley <spamhater@keepyourfilthyspamtoyourself.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 17:54 +0100
                Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-05-12 12:12 +0100
                Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Matthew Phillips <spam2011m@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-05-12 22:05 +0100
                Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Dave Symes <dave@triffid.co.uk> - 2012-05-13 06:53 +0100
                Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-05-13 13:14 +0200
                Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-05-15 11:40 +0100
          Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Chris Hughes <news@noonehere.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 16:36 +0100
            Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-05-12 11:54 +0100
        Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 18:28 +0200
  Re: Wakefield (second attempt) charles <charles@charleshope.demon.co.uk> - 2012-05-03 17:36 +0100

csiph-web