Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!cbmvax!hedley
From: hedley@cbmvax.UUCP (Hedley Davis)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech
Subject: Re: Fixing flicker, & future frame rate issues
Message-ID: <3655@cbmvax.UUCP>
Date: 19 Apr 88 15:39:40 GMT
Reply-To: hedley@cbmvax.UUCP (Hedley Davis)
Organization: Commodore Technology, West Chester, PA
Lines: 28
Keywords: Point- Counterpoint

In article <8929@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> doug@eris.UUCP (Doug Merritt) writes:
>Here's one that's short, sweet, and to the point:
>
> [ Various comments about intution pointer always breaking up deleted ]
>
>But note that you're still ignoring all of the *other* types of
>cases where Bryan's comments are still to the point. For *some*
>applications (both existing *and* written just for a flicker fixer),
>fF *could* be improved upon.
>

Yes this could have been done. It would have required twice the ram,
and  cmos static 32kx8 ram is not cheap. This seems like a classic
example of a loss occuring due to financial constraints.

I've developed the A2024 1008x800 monitor for Commodore. This also
has a deinterlacing feature allowing you to run it like a flicker
fixer. It reacts just like the existing flickerfixer and not in the way
you would like. Its a shame we didn't have this net-war/discussion about
eight months ago, because these aspects of the design are frozen. So,
you can see one motivation behind my pressing for accurate protrail of
the situtuation ( 'could be improved' as opposed to 'inherently
flawed').

We are working on newer better stuff. Your comments, however flamed,
will naturally enter into our list of considerations for futures.

Hedley