Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!spool.mu.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!bloom-beacon!eru!hagbard!sunic!mcsun!unido!mcshh!abqhh!tpki!kris From: kris@tpki.toppoint.de (Kristian Koehntopp) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy Subject: Why no 320*200*8? (was: Wake up, Commodore!) Message-ID: <2984@tpki.toppoint.de> Date: 22 Mar 91 09:18:00 GMT Article-I.D.: tpki.2984 References: Organization: Toppoint Mailbox e.V., Kiel, BRD Lines: 24 lcs@remus.rutgers.edu (Lyle C. Seplowitz) writes: > What about 8-bitplanes of color? Looking at the time-slot allocation diagram in my old Hardware Reference Manual, I can see two unused video time slots per pixel in low-resolution mode. I don't know, if this has been asked before, but why are there no bitplanes 7 and 8 in low-resolution mode? Has it to do with 8 bit register bus adresses (only 256 16-bit custom chip registers?) or are there difficulties allocating space for the extra circuitry on the custom chips? I consider adding bitplanes 7 and 8 the cheapest way to expand the custom chips. By doing this, one would get 320*200 (320*256) and 320*400 (320*512) in 256 colors and (provided you expand the color registers to 6 or 8 bit per r, g and b) a 256K color HAM-mode. This are also spcifications of cheap 256KB VGA cards. Kristian Kristian Koehntopp, Harmsstrasse 98, 2300 Kiel, +49 431 676689 .sig (Heute ohne Sepp)