CC004049%BROWNVM.BITNET@WISCVM.WISC.EDU (01/21/86)
From: George S. Musser Jr. Mike Farren writes: > The necessary fix would be fairly expensive. The biggest reason for the >640 X 200 limitation on each field is to reduce the bandwidth requirements >of the coprocessor and the memory, and to allow the CPU more cycles. >Maintaining the current hardware capabilities and adding the extra capability >you describe isn't an easy job. (Before I hear anything about the Atari ST >and its 640X400, 70Hz screen, let me remind you that that is a one-bit-per- >pixel monochrome screen. It's ONLY color option is 320X200. If you are >willing to accept THAT limitation, then the problem isn't too hard. If you >want a color screen such as the Amiga's, at a reasonable cost, compromises >have to be made.) Why couldn't the custom chips be modified to accept a 640x400 non-interlaced display with a maximum of one or two bit planes? The machine is already limited to 4 bit planes when the horizontal resolution is 640 pixels. The interlacing of 640x400 is my biggest complaint about the machine. In its ads, CBM-Amiga stresses that the 640x400 resolution outdoes IBM and Mac, yet the interlacing makes this mode all but useless. I live for the day when the beautiful characters shown by SetLace won't leave me with a headache after 30 seconds. George