Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!csd4.csd.uwm.edu!gblock
From: gblock@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Gregory R Block)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: CDTV News
Message-ID: <13646@uwm.edu>
Date: 30 Jun 91 22:33:27 GMT
References: <1991Jun30.205059.4196@news.iastate.edu>
Sender: news@uwm.edu
Reply-To: gblock@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Lines: 28
Originator: gblock@csd4.csd.uwm.edu

From article <1991Jun30.205059.4196@news.iastate.edu>, by barrett@iastate.edu (Barrett Marc N):
>    You said you are comfortable with inferior technology.  By saying that
> you feel that a chipset with 24-bit color is a bad idea, you are, in effect,
> saying that you are comfortable with the CDTV having inferior technology.

That's the biggest crock of shit I've heard today. Don't put words into my
mouth, and DON'T excuse the language.

Think.  Think of a ham using 8 bits instead of 6, and you'll have more
than enough of what you need for NTSC.  Simulated 24bit is all that's
necessary for NTSC.  More is nice, but Simulated is enough.

> DIG will *NEVER* benefit the CDTV.  For the CDTV to succeed against CD-I
> in the long run, it needs a totally new chipset with 24-bit color.  

Then again, CDTV's and Amigas are different things.  A 24bit chipset
will be expensive.  That should be painfully obvious.  So obviously,
it isn't going to go into something that's meant to reach low-end
consumers eventually.  8bit with 15/16bit ham would be fine & dandy
for ntsc.  I wouldn't settle for less than 24bit as RGB goes, but that
wouldn't be CDTV, would it?

Greg
-- 
Socrates:  "I drank WHAT????"
LMFAP:  "Next time you see me, it won't be me."
Wubba:  "A dream is nothing more than a wish dipped in chocolate and sprinkled
with a little imagination." (From my poem, "A Dream")			-Wubba