Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!ira.uka.de!fauern!faui43.informatik.uni-erlangen.de!csbrod From: csbrod@immd4.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Claus Brod) Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st Subject: Re: Amiga is better then what??? Message-ID: <1991Jun27.200127.23004@informatik.uni-erlangen.de> Date: 27 Jun 91 20:01:27 GMT References: <677913506.0@therip.FidoNet> <17330@chopin.udel.edu> <1991Jun26.192356.26253@informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <1991Jun27.184631.2685@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> Organization: CSD., University of Erlangen, Germany Lines: 134 rjc@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) writes: > Why on earth would you run a word processor or shell in 24bits? EVen if >the Amiga had 24bit graphics built in I wouldn't run my Workbench on it >because it would slow down ALL screen rendering to a sluggish >halt without a something like a 34010 onboard. Instead, I'd have >the Word processor and GUI set to 8 or 16 colors (3d look) and the paint >program on another screen set to 24bit. All the current Amiga graphic >cards work with the OS because they are still using the custom chips >for their tricks. HAM-E and DCTV work with all paint programs and all >displayer programs. (even things like AmigaVision authorware) I was alluding to the fact that there is no real gfx standard for the Amiga right now. Much like the situation in the PC world. I think having a general scheme for implementing graphic card drivers is a definitive plus for an OS - the ST's VDI allows just this. > In the US FedEx will come to your house, pick up your computer, and >repair it quickly. For A3000's someone comes to your house (onsite >repair). What other countries do is different since each Commodore >sub-company has different policies. Does Atari even exist in the US? Admittedly, this is good service. No doubt about that. I'm impressed. > And the ST doesn't gain much from running at a _slightly_ faster >processor speed. I didn't claim that. But remember that it's not only the 10% clock difference that makes CPU-intensive jobs on the Amiga slower. You must take the video hardware into account which costs additional cycles. > Intuition is the GUI, workbench is the file/finder system (e.g. like >Finder on the Mac). I never used workbench before 2.0, but I haven't seen >many Atari users who used GEM either. GEM doesn't look too hot on that >lo-res screen. Who uses lo-res? Gamesters - but not me. > You do in 2.0. There are _numerous_ workbench replacements/enhancements >out there. But 2.0 beats the pants off all of them. (2.0 kicks the >stuffings out of GEM too) The new workbench is clearly better. But we were discussing the former version and the philosophy behind it. > That's because the poster probably has an A3000 with a 68030. CPUBlit >ONLY gives a speed increase on the maximum resolution screens and only >for things like text rendering. It would slow down massively trying to do what >the blitter does (like combine 3 DMA channels of data using one of the >256 logic operations, plus masking ans shifting, and filling the pattern.) I know, I've read the CpuBlit docs. >The key phrase here is "parallel processing". Letting the blitter >do something takes the load off the CPU. Right you are. I didn't like the fact that the original poster overemphasized the importance of a blitter in general. I don't question that it's useful - but it's not what makes or breaks a computer. > How about what I am doing now? Right now I have a terminal loaded, >in the background I have lharc unarcing some gif pictures I downloaded >earlier which are passing the output names to a script which runs them through >GIF->IFF. Meanwhile, I have 2 shells open and one of them is running >a corewars simulator which is battling two programs (mice vs mortar). >In addition to this, I am getting no visible slow down on my terminal >which is running at 19,200 baud on a USR HST. Likewise, I didn't say multitasking is a no-no. I would like to have it here (besides: I can have it on my machine, though not officially by Atari). The original poster just gave a bad example for its usage. > Amiga channels don't bleep. They have 4 DMA channels to themselves, >8 bit sound, 4khz to 28khz. You can change the sampling rate on demand >and can attach DMA channel to have one channel module the volume and >frequency of the other (allows you to get synthesis effects) I know all this. I've read the hardware manuals. The new STe/TT sound hardware is similar in may respects - but it still bleeps, just like the Amiga does. At least when you're talking about professional music! > Except when you run things like Amigavision or hypertext/authorware >applications where you want to combine animations with digitized sound. >For CDTV it's a nice addition, along with it's 16bit sound and it's MIDI >port. It's _nice_ to have it, I agree upon that. But I don't need it. That's why I bought the ST and the TT instead of an Amiga. > But does it have DMA for each channel? Can you change the DMA rate? >I heard the STe's DMA sound is fixed at one frequency/sampling rate and >can't change it. That's wrong. I didn't delve into the details yet, but I'm sure there is more than just one sampling rate. > The new HD drive on the A3000 has 3 modes. 880k, 1.44mb, and 1.76mb. >1.44mb mode was the main reason for making it. You can also buy >$200 SCSI floppy drives. Does it format standard MFM format so that every PC can read it? > The A3000 has 32-bit for it's harddrive , and it normally gets >xfer rates of up to 2mb/second (and this only eats 5% of the CPU time >while doing it.) The Amiga has over 25 DMA channels. The A3000 now has >8 integrated custom chips to handle them. We know all that. What do you want to prove by that? >(A2024) 1024x1024 PAL on the Amiga without a graphic card, just need a nice >monitor. (The 1024x1024 also has 4 grey colors for the 3d GUI look) From what I've heard, the 2024 is a monitor with special hardware integrated in it that buffers screen frames and displays them at quadruple the speed the Amiga sends it. This way, the Amiga sends a forth of the whole screen in every screen frame, and the monitor composes the complete picture. This means you have a real refresh rate of 50Hz/4 or 60Hz/4. Not exactly what I would call "without a graphic card". >With Commodore's A2410 you get up to 1024x1024 with 256 colors out of >16.7 million. Is it available? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Claus Brod, Am Felsenkeller 2, Things. Take. Time. D-8772 Marktheidenfeld, Germany (Piet Hein) csbrod@medusa.informatik.uni-erlangen.de Claus_Brod@wue.maus.de ----------------------------------------------------------------------