Xref: utzoo comp.sys.amiga:74849 comp.sys.amiga.tech:17129 comp.sys.amiga.hardware:5185 Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!think.com!mintaka!wookumz.ai.mit.edu!rjc From: rjc@wookumz.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga,comp.sys.amiga.tech,comp.sys.amiga.hardware Subject: Re: Retargetable graphics. Temporary Stop-gaps. Keywords: rtg,iff,24bit,video hardware Message-ID: <1990Dec19.174338.18920@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> Date: 19 Dec 90 17:43:38 GMT References: <12437@life.ai.mit.edu> <16612@cbmvax.commodore.com> Sender: daemon@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu (Lucifer Maleficius) Organization: None Lines: 82 In article <16612@cbmvax.commodore.com> daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) writes: >In article <12437@life.ai.mit.edu> rjc@wookumz.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) writes: >>[cross posted since it deals with hardware and software vendors/developers] > >> The reason I'm writing this is because it will be atleast another year before >>Commodore releases any retargetable specs/libraries, but we need them now. I >>suggest that the Amiga hardware and software vendors should get together and >>work towards a temporary stop-gap for video independence. > >At least a few folks have already suggested adopting an existing standard, >such as X Windows, Postscript, TIGA, etc. Although C= should set a standard, >it would be far better to have two high level imaging standards, one now and >one later, that have a chance of being cross translated, than 10 or 15 hardware >level "standards" like they have on the IBM PC, which can only be painfully >emulated at the register level. Right. Register level hardware bashing is ugly and restricts board manufacturers in the design of the board. >If the PC world can do it (EISA?), so can we. > >EISA is certainly a standard, though a bus standard. The PC world is still >confused about graphics. They just have lots of different standards, with >non-standard subvariations. What I mean by EISA, was a rumor I heard that EISA was drawn up by third party vendors instead of IBM. What I meant, is that Impulse,ASDG,Newtek, etc should be able to get together and agree upon a temporary stop-gap. >>Now I'm not suggesting running Intuition screens on video boards/frame buffers. >>What I'm suggesting in a simple set of graphic primitives to dump IFF24 bit >>files to framebuffers. Perhaps, a rtg.library which Commodore can replace at >>a later date with their own. What this library might contain is calls to plot >>a pixel, plot a line, do a pattern fill, and dump a scanline. (also routines >>to read pixels/scanlines, and request screen dimensions). > >What you're really suggesting is far more than a way to dump IFF24 bit files >into framebuffers, but rather some form of retargetable imaging model. All you >need to dump IFF files of any kind to any new board is an IFF loader for that >particular board. A simple, retargetable imaging model is something far more >powerful, since it can be driven interactively by a program, rather than just >used to display a canned image. Yes your right. Basically I wanted ray-tracers,paint-programs,etc to be able to display scanline based images on a video board. >>So now the Amiga is getting a myriad of video boards. I feel one way or >>another this is going to FORCE an rtg standard. > >One would hope so. Unfortunately, its just as possible for software people to >drive Amiga display boards individually at the register level, just as they >do on the PC. This would not be a good trend, and a little harder on the >Amiga than the IBM. IBM itself established most of the register conventions >that are emulated by the clones. So, while they changed things around at >various levels (MDA, CGA, EGA, MCGA, VGA, etc), it wasn't until VGA (except >for Hercules) where lots of different large variations of the basic register >model existed. C= isn't promoting this, so everyone on the Amiga is pretty >much on their own with register models for display boards. Yes, this is the very thing I'm trying to avoid. Its ugly, and limits your software in the amount of hardware configurations it can run on. >>The Amiga is not an IBM, we just can't go poking registers on hardware boards, >>and making drivers for each board.(like IBM programmers have to do with all >>those cga/ega/vga/super vga/foobar enhanced vga). > >It CAN be done that way on the Amiga, but it SHOULDN'T. Because every basic >Amiga has Graphics and Intuition libraries, and only a few have other display >cards, this hasn't happened yet except for the bundled paint, etc. programs >that come with alternate display cards. That doesn't mean it never will... I realize that. I'm hoping most of the Amiga vendors realize this and work together toward a solution. > >-- >Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Amiga 3000) "The Crew That Never Rests" > {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh PLINK: hazy BIX: hazy > "I can't drive 55" -Sammy Hagar Sorry for the long message (not cutting much out) I'm fairly sick right now, and stuck at 1200 baud.