Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!tronsbox!tron1 From: tron1@tronsbox.xei.com (HIM) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: 24 Bit Video .. Message-ID: <26f831b6-2c05.2comp.sys.amiga-1@tronsbox.xei.com> Date: 20 Sep 90 06:00:41 GMT References: <26f592d2-2c05comp.sys.amiga@tronsbox.xei.com> Resp: 1 of 1 About: Re: 24 Bit Video .. ><> [Mike (My Watch Has Windows] (*Masked*@raven.pa.dec.com) > >In article <26f592d2-2c05comp.sys.amiga@tronsbox.xei.com> >tron1@tronsbox.xei.com (HIM) writes: (a lot of my stuff deleted) > >None of them are trying to kill the Amiga in video. They're just tired >of MB's whining. He admits that he's been doing it for years. First, >he's screaming for video that can't be done. It's explained that it That doesn't mean tha the ISSUE is not valid. >Now, the solutions are starting to appear (just as predicted), and >he's screaming that they aren't good enough, and that he wants it >*NOW*, not whenever it's going to be available. It's explained that Just my point , NOW that the world has moved on , we are just starting to get the stuff that will be sub-stanbdard by the time it is available in any real quantity. >No, but most of us are far sighted enough to realize that NTSC is a >critical part of low-end Amigas, and that software compatability >across the line is critical to the Amiga. We also realize that giving But we HAVE NTSC -- so saying "yeah , but 24 bit won't help for NTSC is a mott pont . But lets look at that , NTSC (as far as I know) can handle a MUCH broader color range than we can generate , so for all but title style application we have less "punch" then a 24 bit card would. Case in point is the IBM VGA standard , sure , it's only 256 colors as opposed to the 4096 we can put out , but it covers a wider RANGE of colors, the result is that most "human" gif's look better -- despite the lower resolution. >critical part of low-end Amigas, and that software compatability >across the line is critical to the Amiga. We also realize that giving >up either of those would be a _bad_ thing. Far worse than than not >having an 800x600x8 mode. Some other time I would debate that , you say that NTSC is needed for "video production" ... but how many stock A500's are used for that ??? I would rather see the low end have a 8x6x8 mode (price shouldnt be THAT much of a problem) so that the low end folks can compare favorably with the other folks they know. My point is I guess that low end and NTSC dont have to go together. >But jumping to it as a base to soon requires sacrificing either >software compatability, or raising the price on the "low-end" Amiga. >I can produce 24-bit deep images on the Amiga. I just can't display So then we should never push for a better entry mode ?? C'mon , this argument didn't work with other upgrades and it shouldn't here. When A1000 users complained about not getting 2.0 folks said "hey man , that's life, the world moves on and you won't be compatible 100% forever" ... >them on it. You can't live with that - go buy one of the deep frame >buffers that are starting to appear. That's they best way it can be, >without seriously breaking something. And that's fine for the most part -- but I still would like to see a push for a STANDARD 24 bit card .. I don't care if it is just an add on ... extra $$$'s and all ... C= doesnt even have to build the card , just define a prefered software interface. > >You misquoted most of them. It's "why bother - it's good enough for >now, those who need better can buy it, and it'll be better later". But for the most part , we can't yet , and when we can , it's 2 years late. I love my Amiga , and I am getting a A3000 , and my HAM-E order is in .. but it is a real let down to be off the cutting edge. We didn't let the MAC and IBM'ers off with that "It's good enough for what we do" stuff , tand I don't buy it now. ========[ Xanadu Enterprises Inc. Amiga & Unix Software Development]======== = "And in the darkened offices, the terminals shine like stars." = ============= Ken Jamieson: uunet!tronsbox.xei.com!tron1 ================== = NONE of the opinions represented here are endorsed by either = = Xanadu Enterpises or its clients, AT&T Bell Labs or others. = ==== The Romantic Encounters BBS 201-759-8450(PEP) / 201-759-8568(2400) ====