Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ames!pacbell.com!tandem!zorch!xanthian From: xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: 24 bit board comparisons Message-ID: <1990Dec9.090206.14795@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> Date: 9 Dec 90 09:02:06 GMT References: <1990Dec7.194258.16221@uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu> Distribution: comp.sys.amiga, comp.sys.amiga.hardware, comp.sys.amiga.tech Organization: SF-Bay Public-Access Unix Lines: 14 Sigh. So close and yet so far...It would have been wonderful if you'd asked and reported the number of bits of picture information _stored_ for each pixel in the resolution, so we'd have some idea how much information could be stored per image, which is the only way to differentiate the "cheap trick" implementations from the real frame buffer implementations. Maybe next time. On a side issue, if the folks posting for (from?) Black Belt Systems keep up their bullying tactics in this group, they aren't going to _have_ a customer base, no matter how good their product might be. They seem to be taking the company name to heart a little too much. Kent, the man from xanth.