Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!cbmvax!daveh From: daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy Subject: Re: The Amiga's Future Message-ID: <22755@cbmvax.commodore.com> Date: 28 Jun 91 02:57:45 GMT References: <1991Jun20.075145.22785@m.cs.uiuc.edu> Reply-To: daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) Organization: Commodore, West Chester, PA Lines: 56 storch@m.cs.uiuc.edu (Matthew Storch) writes: >The engineers at CBM probably thought of this at some point (am I right, >Dave?) but for whatever reason CBM just doen't seem to want to improve >the basic graphics hardware. You don't understand the issues involved. >Instead they have wasted engineering effort on kluges like the (also >infinitely delayed) A2024 "Hedly HiRes" monitor, and the A2091. First of all, if you have ever used an A2024 or Moniterm, you'll realize that, regardless of whether you consider the hardware mechanism involved a hack, the final result is an excellent display system. I like it better than the 1280x1024x1 display on our Apollo systems here at C=. >There is nothing wrong with the 2091, but there was almost no reason for >Commodore to waste precious engineering effort on it; by the time it came >out, third party manufacturers had comparable boards. The only comparable board on the market anywhere near the time the A2091 was out was the Microbotics Hardframe. But you're confused. The "engineering effort" spent on the A2024 and A2091 have nothing to do with new graphics hardware. Hedley Dave and Jeff Boyer, the folks who, respectively, designed these devices, are systems engineers. True, both devices have custom chips in them, but those are gate arrays, not full custom chips. New graphics chips are full custom, and can only be designed by chip designers. The difference between a the complexity and development time of a gate array versus a full custom design is an order or two of magnitude. >Why waste time designing something GVP, etc. already had? Several reasons. Technically, the original GVP controller was far too primitive, especially when you have to consider that C= was planning for UNIX to run on the thing. C= has to have various pieces of hardware to call their own, OEMed or self-designed, since at many times they end up selling whole systems. They can't very well say "oh, a hard disk. Go out see these GVP folks". Especially in countries were GVP doesn't exist. Not only that, they can't adequately support a product that someone else fully controls. >As for the 2024 I think that it's RIDICULOUS to invest in a proprietary >display with no future like the 2024, in light of the excellent and >reasonably priced range of COLOR multisync monitors available. Who cares about the future when the present is at stake. I've been using a 1000x800x2 display now for nearly two years, both at home and work. There is no way I would be willing to wait longer. There's no problem with the A2024, it's sharp and it works good. The only thing proprietary about the display is the controller card (built-in the A2024, external to the Moniterm). -- Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Amiga 3000) "The Crew That Never Rests" {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh PLINK: hazy BIX: hazy "This is my mistake. Let me make it good." -R.E.M.