Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!apple!well!farren
From: farren@well.sf.ca.us (Mike Farren)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.games
Subject: Re: FAUG demo of Powermonger by E.A. -- long review
Keywords: simply incredible
Message-ID: <22018@well.sf.ca.us>
Date: 7 Dec 90 12:56:15 GMT
References: <1950@unlisys.in-berlin.de> <1990Dec5.110344.6364@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG>
Lines: 40

xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) writes:
>	And that's 5/6ths of the game market, A500's with 512K of memory.
>	To put a game like this in that box, you haven't got any choice;
>	you have to nuke the operating system and take over the machine.
>	Make it HD installable or multitasking, and it won't run in 512K,
>	and you just threw away 5/6ths of the Amiga market.
>Sigh.  You can't argue very hard with that logic.  They have to pay the
>bills.


*I* can argue with that logic very easily:

 - the unrecoverable use of system resources by the full system is minimal,
   in comparison with the resources available.  Almost all of the system's
   memory, for example, can be reclaimed by the application, if needed.

 - it is easy to determine if you are running on a 512K machine.  If so,
   and if, in spite of the previous, you still need more resources than
   are available to you, you can selectively take over - in other words,
   only the 512K 500s would be taken over, the higher level machines would
   be left alone.

 - it is possible to actually save resources by NOT taking over the machine.
   For example, if you use the standard I/O resources or graphics resources
   supplied by the OS, you are using ROM code - not taking up valuable RAM
   with redundant routines.

 - in extremis, it is always possible to split a program such that only
   those portions of it actually in use are resident in memory at any given
   time.  Careful design will result in a program which runs nearly as
   efficiently as one which remains fully in memory.  In the case of Populous,
   for example, there is no reason not to load the "control panel" routines
   at the time they are used - the delay will be negligible, and game play
   will be affected not at all.

My translation of EA's statement would go more like this: "They were too
lazy to do it right, and we let them get away with it, 'cause we don't
particularly care."
-- 
Mike Farren 				     farren@well.sf.ca.us