Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!rutgers!princeton!allegra!ulysses!sfmag!sfsup!shap
From: shap@sfsup.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: Blitters again
Message-ID: <1218@sfsup.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 17-Mar-87 16:46:12 EST
Article-I.D.: sfsup.1218
Posted: Tue Mar 17 16:46:12 1987
Date-Received: Fri, 20-Mar-87 03:13:30 EST
References: <8703110056.AA23131@cory.Berkeley.EDU> <828@vaxb.calgary.UUCP> <188@rocky.STANFORD.EDU>
Organization: AT&T-IS, Summit N.J. USA
Lines: 32
Summary: blitters necessary => blitters desirable

In article <188@rocky.STANFORD.EDU>, ali@rocky.STANFORD.EDU (Ali Ozer) writes:
> In article <828@vaxb.calgary.UUCP> radford@calgary.UUCP (Radford Neal) writes:
> >The real question is whether the blitter is worth its cost.
> 
> That's true only if you're not multitasking...
> ... But, a blitter will be
> necessary when running multiple Mac applications under A/UX (if such a thing
> will ever be possible).
> 
> Ali

My preference is to put certain carefully chosen graphics operations in
hardware. It is worth pointing out, however, that so long as the main
processor doesn't need to worry about actually doing the screen output
(i.e. some dedicated hardware takes on the job of pumping the dots), one
does not *need* a blitter. Ever. In lower display densities one doesn't
even need dedicated dot-pumper.

A blitter is desirable for many applications. Some will view it as a
necessity. But it is a matter of cost, and many people will deem the cost
unjustifiable. I want a blitter. I don't want everyone else to have to buy
my choice.

Please, instead of talking religion (e.g. "This machine MUST have a
blitter), can we talk about the merits/demerits of one choice or the other?

I think that Apple's decision not to put a blitter on the main board
was sound. It means that graphics hardware vendors can build there hardware
according to their needs, and different kinds of hardware have different
needs.

Jonathan S. Shapiro