gwyn@smoke.ARPA (Doug Gwyn ) (09/04/88)
In article <8040@srcsip.UUCP> shankar@ely.UUCP (Subash Shankar) writes: >Current (substantiated) rumors say that the GS+ will have a 640X400 4 color >and 320X400 16 color mode. ... they are probably interlaced. Unless Apple is willing to require extremely expensive monitors, they would have to use interlacing. It will be nice to get those ugly dark scan line gaps filled in. >Then again, I can't think of a use of these modes ... Excuse me, but the main reason I haven't been spending much time programming my IIGS is that all my interesting applications need much better resolution than 200 vertical. If you can't think of uses for a frame buffer then you're not very imaginative..
shankar@srcsip.UUCP (Subash Shankar) (09/06/88)
In article <8428@smoke.ARPA> gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) <gwyn>) writes: >In article <8040@srcsip.UUCP> shankar@ely.UUCP (Subash Shankar) writes: >>Then again, I can't think of a use of these modes ... ^^^ > >Excuse me, but the main reason I haven't been spending much time >programming my IIGS is that all my interesting applications need >much better resolution than 200 vertical. If you can't think of >uses for a frame buffer then you're not very imaginative.. If the whole original sentence had been quoted, it would have been clear that what I was saying was that an interlaced mode with high vertical resolution is of limited uses except when doing paint-program type graphics and for games. With interlaced screens, unless you get a high persistence monitor (read $$$), the resulting flicker makes it hard for prolonged uses of applications involving text and business graphics, which probably have heavy use of fine lines. I wish that the GS had more vertical resolution, but I would rather have something between 200 and 400 in a noninterlaced mode rather then 400 in interlaced mode. Off course, if your intention is to do graphics and art work, the interlacing doesn't matter that much.