Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!aplcen!haven!adm!smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple
Subject: Re: //gs screen resolutions...
Message-ID: <12113@smoke.BRL.MIL>
Date: 10 Feb 90 08:40:24 GMT
References: <10078.infoapple.net@pro-generic> <12109@smoke.BRL.MIL> <21930@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn)
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 18

In article <21930@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> fadden@cory.Berkeley.EDU.UUCP (Andy McFadden) writes:
>Anyway.  While it certainly isn't beyond the //gs (present or future), I'd
>have to wonder of 640*400*8 bits is really necessary for anything other than
>static pictures

640x400x8 is the minimum I would consider acceptable for use as a "poor
man's frame buffer".  Static displays are quite important, certainly more
so for most purposes than animation.  Just look at the thousands of GIF
images on BBSes if you don't belive this.  Try displaying those images
with only 16 colors and see how awful they look.  Then try 256 colors and
see how much better it is, even without optimization of the palette.
With 256 colors, there is virtually no need to play complicated games
with individual SCBs, the way you pretty much have to on the current IIGS.

8 bits per pixel has one other attractive advantage:  It makes pixel
operations very easy to program, and consequently relatively fast.  Thus
dynamic images (menus, scrolling, etc.) are reasonable with a modest CPU
(even a fast 65816) doing the byte shuffling.