Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cunixf.cc.columbia.edu!cunixb.cc.columbia.edu!es1
From: es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Cheesy Amiga Video
Message-ID: <1990Sep5.045144.14330@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu>
Date: 5 Sep 90 04:51:44 GMT
References: <29435@nigel.ee.udel.edu>
Sender: news@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (The Daily News)
Reply-To: es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita)
Organization: Columbia University
Lines: 66

In article <29435@nigel.ee.udel.edu> BARRETT@owl.ecil.iastate.edu (Marc Barrett) writes:
>
>   I had to echo this message.  I've been saying EXACTLY the same thing
>about the Amiga 3000, since before it was even available, and have been
>getting nothing but flames for it.

	Marc, I don't believe most people said that color was
useless. I in fact believe that the Amiga graphics have in a good
number of ways become inferior. However there are still
advantages (such as high-quality animation and a low-memory HAM
mode), but I am will to give the Copperman Dynasty the benefit of
the doubt and I believe they will come up with a solution, eventually.

>
>   The first time I pointed out that the Amiga 3000 had inferior color
>capability, people started saying "Color?  Who needs color?  Most
>applications don't need much color, anyway."  I swear, I will never
>let the Amiga community forget this, as what people said to me then
>was exactly what IBM and Apple owners said about color capability when
>the Amiga 1000 first came out.  My, how the tables have turned!!
>
>   IMHO, Commodore will NEVER recover from this rut.  It has been
>over four years since the ECS started being developed, and it isn't
>even fully available yet.  If the 32-bit chip set takes half as long
>to develop (and I doubt it will) then it will be at least two years
>before we see anything.
>
>    If so, then that chipset had better be incredibly powerful indeed!
>The state-of-the-art in computer video right now is 1024x768 with 8
>bitplanes (256 colors).  Apple is selling a video card RIGHT NOW for
>under $2000 that has the same resolution, with 24 bitplanes and a
>RISC graphics accelerator.  In two years, the state-of-the-art will
>probably be TIGA boards with a resolution of 1280x1024, 24-bitplanes,
>and a TMS34030 graphics accelerator.
>
>   So, even if Commodore comes up with a chipset with a resolution
>of 1024x768 and 24 bitplanes, they will be right back where they
>started, with inferior video.
>
>   Recovering from this rut will take a lot of time and a lot more
>money.  Unfortunately, Commodore has neither.
>
>
>                                 -MB-


Marc, does this quote sound familiar?

"   I should blame this on Commodore.  After all, if they didn't have
their act together so well, I would have more to legitemately complain
about, and I wouldn't be uselessly shooting myself so much.  I have been
REALLY scratching to find things to complain about at Commodore.  What
ever happened to the good old days when there was plenty to complain
about at Commodore?  I'm beginning to miss them...   

                                
                                -MB-  "

	Sometimes I wonder if you are two different people
sharing the same account!
	-- Ethan

Ethan Solomita: es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu

*Iraq += *Kuwait
NumCountries--