Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!apple!well!farren
From: farren@well.UUCP (Mike Farren)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: My Opinions on Amiga Graphics Enhancements
Message-ID: <15215@well.UUCP>
Date: 26 Dec 89 00:46:03 GMT
References: <825@orange9.qtp.ufl.edu> <259203fb:3317.1comp.sys.amiga;1@tronsbox.UUCP>
Reply-To: farren@well.UUCP (Mike Farren)
Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link, Sausalito, CA
Lines: 47

akcs.dfrancis@tronsbox.UUCP (Dennis Francis Heffernan) writes:
>
>     I can't agree with the "standard graphic modes only" approach.
> [...] Ultimately, if we have to swap our machines to
>improve the graphics, we'll never be able to keep up with everyone else. 
>They'll just slot in a new card that outdoes whatever the next Amiga has.

But this wasn't the point of the discussion, I believe.  Of _course_ there
have to be provisions for more capable graphics hardware - and the Amiga
OS, as it stands, has many of those provisions.  Pop in a new card, add
a new graphics.library, and there you are...  (Not as simple as that, I
know, but _possible_: look at the Hedley monitor)

There are really two questions being posed at the same time here.  The 
first one is simply one of maximizing your market (or audience) share.
If you use the graphics modes which are available to every Amiga, 
regardless of hardware configuration, then you are going to have the
largest number of possible users.  Any dependence on special hardware 
_will_ reduce your base - as was the case with EGA graphics on the IBM.
Still is, too, although the differential is smaller.  This isn't to say
that you should _never_ use non-standard stuff, simply that you'd better
think carefully about the tradeoff between what your application needs in
order to perform correctly versus what capabilities are readily available
to the average Amiga user.

The second question is whether or not "software-driven" graphics modes,
such as "Dynamic HAM", are appropriate for general use.  This one can
go either way, but my personal feeling is that, except for very specific
uses, they are not.  The major thing which distinguishes the Amiga from
the rest of the computer pack is its ability, via the custom chips, to
to quite sophisticated graphic and sound manipulation without requiring
processor intervention beyond a minimum.  The ultimate end, if you switch
to software-driven graphics, is a system no better in concept than the
Macintosh, where all graphics operations require the CPU.  The effects
of this on the Amiga would be rather disastrous.  Personally, I'm quite
pleased with the fact that the game I ported to the Amy (Crystal Quest)
runs nearly as fast on a stock Amiga with 68000 as it does on the Mac II
with 68020.  If I had had to do the graphics "Mac-style", drawing each
figure with the processor, that game would have crawled.

In short - do what you will to make the Amiga more capable.  But be very
thoughtful about it.  Don't do things which increase one set of 
capabilities at the expense of others; remember what it is that makes
the Amiga great.

-- 
Mike Farren 				     farren@well.sf.ca.usa