Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!munnari.oz.au!murdu!ucsvc.ucs.unimelb.edu.au!u3364521
From: U3364521@ucsvc.ucs.unimelb.edu.au (Lou Cavallo)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Amiga Video Mess (was RE: More Marc...) {LONG}
Message-ID: <1046@ucsvc.ucs.unimelb.edu.au>
Date: 17 Sep 90 15:08:33 GMT
References: <30684@nigel.ee.udel.edu>
Organization: I.A.E.S.R., Melbourne University
Lines: 71

G'day,

BW> In article <30684@nigel.ee.udel.edu>,
BW> S36666WB%ETSUACAD.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu (Brian Wright) writes: 

BW> As far as the future enhanced graphics and sound chips, Commodore has
BW> already responded to that.  They said that are developing systems for both
BW> the short term and long term demands.  As far as what that means we'll
BW> have to wait and see.  I also doubt that we'll have to wait as long as MB
BW> says. 

Mark, I'd like to emphasize Brian's point here.  Commodore will not announce
what they are developing beyond the small statements they've made.  This may
be a point of religious conviction with you that they must tell us what they
will develop. Is this so? Personally I am happy for them not to announce the
products/standards they are working on. {There was a time when we flamed the
announcements Commodore made as vapourware I think. Anyone remember this?}

However there have been informal discussions with various Commodore personnel
that have alluded to CBM's difficulties with doing the type of things you are
asking about.  Here I am thinking of net talk in c.s.a.t regarding the device
independent graphics mods approach to the OS, chipset enhancements etc.

I can recall,

 o a statement of an IFF standard for 24 bit graphics (yeah, I know, a small
   thing but it was a needed standard).  For that matter this standard arose
   from a development by Amiga developers that Commodore ratified no? ASDG I
   think.

 o they do have VLSI employees that have posted to this group. I'm sure they
   would be finding it hard to resist the temptation to post to the group to
   dispel all the rumours regarding the future of Amiga graphics hardware.

 o with respect to graphics based OS developments I believe that this problem
   is being dealt with in tandem with other resource management problems.

   Commodore has to move _very_ carefully to be able to provide a _stable_
   development path for its faithful group of developers.

Finally for those others that may be disquieted by the type of doom saying in
progress in this thread I'd like to make an observation... standards for Hard
Disk systems for the Amiga are way beyond the pitiful state they began at.

This took a few years but the standards for compatibility for hard disks are,
I believe, among the best in the PC industry.

I have faith this could happen again for Amiga graphics.

And those will be advanced upon by the "enemy" (the pervading perspective in
this group at times (of the other PC types), not mine) once again.

This is called the "Leap Frogging Principle" ...

BW> ||---Brian Wright                    |     / /                         ||
BW> ||---s36666wb@etsuacad.etsu.edu      | \ \/ /  Only Amiga              ||
BW> ||---Commercial Artist and Amigaphile|  \/\/      Makes It Possible!!  ||

yours truly,
Lou Cavallo.

PS: I think that someone else in this thread remarked that graphics s/w for
the Macintosh systems has some sort of problem because of the different Mac
graphic h/w capabilities (specifically b/w vs colour).

How so?  Doesn't QuickDraw make the graphics s/w device independent?  {I am
not knowledgeable about these Mac facts ... and I am not worried here about
the speed of QuickDraw which I also don't know about.}

A gentle reminder:
I may disagree with what a writer may write but not their right to write it.