Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!sdd.hp.com!mips!pacbell.com!att!emory!gatech!taco!hobbes.catt.ncsu.edu!kdarling From: kdarling@hobbes.catt.ncsu.edu (Kevin Darling) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy Subject: Re: CDTV & CD-I The Whole Picture Message-ID: <1991Apr21.073256.22545@ncsu.edu> Date: 21 Apr 91 07:32:56 GMT References: <1991Apr18.161346.3409@ncsu.edu> <1991Apr18.174928.21079@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> <1991Apr20.130639.27962@ncsu.edu> <1991Apr20.195605.23496@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> Sender: news@ncsu.edu (USENET News System) Organization: North Carolina State University Lines: 49 In <1991Apr20.195605.23496@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) writes: >In article <1991Apr20.130639.27962@ncsu.edu> kdarling@hobbes.catt.ncsu.edu (Kevin Darling) writes: > As to the bear CD, in its defense there was probably over 20 minutes > worth of sound that it played back while the 16 color anims were playing. Bleah . I think a CDROM can hold 8,000 fullscreen 16-color images, _along_ with 4 hours of stereo AM quality sound. That's just to give you a really vague idea of what a disc is capable of storing. In a compressed anim format, an author should be able to do _amazingly_ long things. It just shows that very little work has gone into these titles so far. >>Still, we should note that HAM only has 16 grey levels, which can be a factor. >>And once again, if HAM is "satisfactory", then I guess all those video authors >>buying DCTV and other boards must be wasting their money? >> > Oh, come on Kevin, don't use arguments which you yourself > know are dumb. Many people are buying DCTV for video work. It > also costs $400 street price. Until there is more support for > DCTV from 3rd party people, DCTV is a video addon. Right, for VIDEO work... eg: what people normally expect to see on their TV :-) And the cost isn't a factor on the CD-I side: the equivalent of DCTV (or judging from a message over in .graphics, double DCTV) is built into its video output decoding chips (DYUV->RGB is cheap). >> In many ways, both systems will end up having similar studios. >> [description deleted] > You know, that sounds like a studio filled with Amigas. > 8-) I don't see WHAT you just mentioned that can't be done using > an Amiga studio. Your point is moot. There has been that kind of > software developing for the Amiga from many companies for years. WHAT point? Read again. I _said_ that the studios will be very similar :-). But if you want a point, then okay... note that the description we agreed on was a far cry from the common misconcept people have of somebody sitting around at home alone creating a _good_ title in no time using AV/etc. > The only reason that you keep pointing out that all these > programming tools have been created for CD-I is because CD-I had > no outside support as it wasn't selling. Bogus. Check message history. I didn't bring up programming tools at all, until others kept making all those naive assertions that CDTV somehow has some kind of sole claim on authoring tools... it's almost shameful that so many people would say something as silly as that. Obviously tools for I-TV CDROM creation have been worked on years longer for CD-I. No doubt they aren't as cute looking, tho . best - kev