Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!hobbes.physics.uiowa.edu!news.iastate.edu!vaxf.iastate.edu!TAAB5
From: taab5@isuvax.iastate.edu (Marc Barrett)
Subject: Re: (Video) Hardware Idiots ?
Message-ID: <1991Jun9.012550.19228@news.iastate.edu>
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
Reply-To: taab5@isuvax.iastate.edu
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, IA.
References: <1991Jun3.202114.4029@newserve.cc.binghamton.edu> <1991Jun3.225024.13052@marlin.jcu.edu.au> <1991Jun4.210724.1246@newserve.cc.binghamton.edu> <1991Jun7.091455.10355@rulway.LeidenUniv.nl> <1991Jun8.085839.3556@news.iastate.edu>,<1991Jun8.191231.18699@leland.Stanford.EDU>
Date: Sun, 9 Jun 1991 01:25:50 GMT
Lines: 99

In article <1991Jun8.191231.18699@leland.Stanford.EDU>, bard@jessica.stanford.edu (David Hopper) writes:
>Please note the followup.
>
>In article <1991Jun8.085839.3556@news.iastate.edu> taab5@isuvax.iastate.edu writes:
>
>Question:  [can I use 24-bit graphics modes for the workbench under 2.0]
>>
>>   Unfortunately, you will have to wait a while (probably a very LONG while)
>>for that.  This is NOT supported in AmigaDOS 2.0, and will not be supported
>>on the Amiga for several years.  
>
>Is there a certain futility in replying to this without any kind of
>sarcasm or character judgement?  I dunno.  Let's give it a shot:
>
>Marc, where do you get your information?  Who has told you that DIG will
>not be supported on the Amiga for several years, when all the evidence
>suggests that it is a priority at Commodore?
>
>A goddamn little bird? (Sorry, couldn't manage civility) ;-)

   Who has told you that DIG will NOT take several years?  The fact is,
nobody knows how long DIG will take.  However, I do not think DIG will
be available in less than three years, simply because 2.0 itself has 
taken three years to develop, and doesn't have anywhere near the radical
changes that DIG will most certainly require.

   Just think before flaming next time.  Do you honestly believe that the
version of the operating system that contains DIG will go through early
research, development, and beta testing in less than three years?  The
beta testing alone will probably take the better part of two years, as
it has with 2.0. 

>
>>   Right now, you don't have any choices at all as to what kind of display
>>you use for your Workbench.  You either put up with the idiosyncracies of
>>the Amiga's inadequate chipset, or get another system.  It's as simple as
>>that.
>
>Other systems that have more display options than the Amiga?  Start
>naming names, Marc.  Last I counted there were around 20 graphics modes 
>you can use with workbench.  Why is the chipset inadequate?  Compared to
>what?  What other personal system in the whole known universe downloads 
>graphics to a coprocessor straight out of the box?  What other system
>offers the display flexibility of the Amiga?  What other system has had
>any kind of parallel processing to *any* degree, even today?

   There are a hell of a lot more than 20 resolution modes on the Amiga.
With the ECS, I think the total number of possible resolution modes is
now in the hundreds.  However, all of these are limited in resolution,
color capability, or both.

   The fact is, it is right now impossible to have a Workbench with more
than 16 colors and a non-interlaced resolution higher than 640x480.  This
is inadequate compared to the very nice 256-color display you can get on
the MAC LC, for instance.

   I would like to take a poll sometime.  I am willing to bet that a 
very sharp display with lots of colors at a high resolution is a lot
more usable to most people than being able to 'download to a coprocessor
straight out of the box'.  

   A good example of how inadequate the current chipset has become is
the absurd number of bizarre hacks that have become available from third-
party companies enhance the chipset.  Such hacks include the A2024
monitor, all display-enhancer and flicker-fixer devices, the HAM-E,
colorburst, DCTV, etc.  If the chipset was more adequate for video tasks,
such hacks would not be needed.

   One final thought: if the current chipset is so adequate, why are
so many people bypassing parts of it entirely?  I am talking about programs
like CPUBlit, which basically throws the slow blitter out of the window 
and lets the faster CPU do its work.  If the blitter was adequate, CPUBlit
would not be needed or wanted.

>
>Unless you back up your dysfunctional statements, Marc, you're just here
>to piss people off.
>
>And no, I don't expect you'll reply to this.

   I guess this comes as a surprise to you, then.  BTW, I started replying
to your message before I read that last line.

>
>> / Marc Barrett  -MB- | BITNET:   XGR39@ISUVAX.BITNET        /   
>
>Dammit, I like .advocacy.
>Sum, sum, sum, sum, sum, sum, sum-mertime...
>Dave Hopper      |MUYOM!/// Anthro Creep | NeXT Campus Consultant at Stanford
>                 | __  ///    .   .      | Smackintosh/UNIX Consultant - AIR
>bard@jessica.    | \\\///    Ia! Ia!     | Independent Amiga Developer
>   Stanford.EDU  |  \XX/ Shub-Niggurath! | & (Mosh) Pit Fiend from Acheron
  -------------------------------------------------------------
 / Marc Barrett  -MB- | BITNET:   XGR39@ISUVAX.BITNET        /   
/  ISU COM S Student  | Internet: XGR39@CCVAX.IASTATE.EDU   /      
------------------------------------------------------------    
\        The great thing about standards is that          /
 \       there are so many of them to choose from.       /
  -------------------------------------------------------
