[comp.sys.amiga] A2320 not sufficient

glmwc@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Matt Crowd) (12/21/90)

Why is it that MicroWay can produce a card which COMPLETELY removes
interlace flicker and C= can't ? Surely they pay you enough Scott Hood.


-- 
Matt Crowd       Amiga Man
Email Address    glmwc@marlin.jcu.edu.au

blgardne@javelin.es.com (Blaine Gardner) (12/22/90)

glmwc@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Matt Crowd) writes:

>Why is it that MicroWay can produce a card which COMPLETELY removes
>interlace flicker and C= can't ? Surely they pay you enough Scott Hood.

Geeze, the arrogance of this message has got to beat anything else I've
ever seen posted to Usenet in the last 5 years. Why the personal attack
on someone that's been kind enough to spend a lot of his own time to answer
questions here?
-- 
Blaine Gardner @ Evans & Sutherland  580 Arapeen Drive, SLC, Utah 84108
blgardne%javelin@dsd.es.com     ...dsd.es.com!javelin!blgardne  (I hope)
{decwrl, utah-cs}!esunix!blgardne
DoD #0046   My other motorcycle is a Quadracer.         BIX: blaine_g

glmwc@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Matt Crowd) (12/22/90)

In article <1990Dec21.172447.725@javelin.es.com> blgardne%javelin@dsd.es.com writes:
>glmwc@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Matt Crowd) writes:
>
>>Why is it that MicroWay can produce a card which COMPLETELY removes
>>interlace flicker and C= can't ? Surely they pay you enough Scott Hood.
>
>Geeze, the arrogance of this message has got to beat anything else I've
>ever seen posted to Usenet in the last 5 years. Why the personal attack
>on someone that's been kind enough to spend a lot of his own time to answer
>questions here?

He wouldn't have spend so much time explaining the "features" if it
worked 100%.  You can buy a super VGA card for less than the
A2320! 

It works 213/256000% of the time (NTSC, assuming the flicker is only
1/3 of a scan line). Now normally 99% is pretty good, but try telling
that to a Apollo/Sun user when demoing the 3000. 

So what can we run to impress them?
A Pysgonosis Demo in low res??? That way I won't have to put the
black tape at top of the screen...

It is not just the A2320 that will stop C= from being taken seriously.     

1)  Try telling people that the Amiga can only handle 640*400 with 16
colours on screen.  People buying UNIX boxes have already asked on the
net whether C= have improved the graphics on the Amiga when asking about
the 3000UX.  They haven't.  The only noticible difference in ECS is a
non-interlaced mode that is so slow it makes a Mac Plus look quick.

Now who is going to buy a 20MIP UNIX workstation that can only manage 
640*400 in 16 colours? (assuming the 3500 has an 040 in it!)  Atari?
They might clone it and call it a 3000TT.


A $150 US VGA card can do much better.  Now C= might
be working on some super 32 bit chip set, but why couldn't they
just stick some gate array (like a mac) to improve the graphics until
the new chip set was done?  I mean C= sell IBM clones with VGA cards,
so we shouldn't have to wait 2 years for the new chips.

Fine so there is some A2410 card coming out eventually.  But it
probably won't be compatible with any software and will cost extra. C=
should give the thing away and tell people it is standard Amiga
graphics.  Marc Barrett has been flamed for years after complaining about the
declining Amiga graphics, and he's right.  It was a leader when it
first came out, but it is way behind now. 

2)  The 2091 harddisk controller card is bug ridden.  I have just got
a brand new one, which is stuffed.  I told the dealer about it, and he
said they were all stuffed and that it would stop reading the drive
eventually! Just look at the about of noise on the net about it.  Other
C= hardware has been dodgy, such as the 1950 monitor.  Now why is it
that every person I know buying an Amiga lately is getting a NEC
monitor?  People ARE prepared to pay more for quality.

3)  Advertising!

This is C=.

Bob from Marketing : "Well lets plan our new ads."
Jim from Marketing : "Ok, so what market are we after?"
Bob : "Well you still can't get a decent spreadsheet so we had better 
	stick with the kids!"
Jim : "Ok, we'll emphasise the fact you can pirate lots of games and
we'll show some cool games and demos.  Wait, I've got it!  We have
these 2 kids fast forwarding this video tape, no adults will understand
it but their kids will want one for Christmas."
Bob : "Brilliant.  We'll put it on during teenage mutant ninja turtles."
Jim : "Exactly what I was thinking.  My kid will love it."
Bob : "We'll sell hundreds."

This is Apple.

Bill : "Well I think we should emphasise the Mac is easy to use in
business and show some productivity software."
John : "Commendable, we'll give it more credibiltiy by showing it during the 
news at 6."
Bill : "We should achieve substantial market penetration." 

Ok. Flame me all you like, just look at the sales figures guys.
I'm piping all the hate mail to /dev/null and wearing fire proof
underwear and only reading comp.sys.next for 2 weeks as well...

>Blaine Gardner @ Evans & Sutherland  580 Arapeen Drive, SLC, Utah 84108
>blgardne%javelin@dsd.es.com     ...dsd.es.com!javelin!blgardne  (I hope)
>{decwrl, utah-cs}!esunix!blgardne
>DoD #0046   My other motorcycle is a Quadracer.         BIX: blaine_g

Matt Crowd. 

Configuration : 
A2000 (14 Mhz 68881 CMI)
2091 + 50 Meg Quantum.
ECS + 2320
RAM : 3 MEGS
NEC 3D 
Proffessional Page.... and heaps of GAMES!  

blgardne@javelin.es.com (Blaine Gardner) (12/23/90)

glmwc@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Matt Crowd) writes:

>In article <1990Dec21.172447.725@javelin.es.com> blgardne%javelin@dsd.es.com writes:
>>glmwc@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Matt Crowd) writes:
>>
>>>Why is it that MicroWay can produce a card which COMPLETELY removes
>>>interlace flicker and C= can't ? Surely they pay you enough Scott Hood.
>>
>>Geeze, the arrogance of this message has got to beat anything else I've
>>ever seen posted to Usenet in the last 5 years. Why the personal attack
>>on someone that's been kind enough to spend a lot of his own time to answer
>>questions here?

[A great impression of Marc Bradley deleted]

>Ok. Flame me all you like, just look at the sales figures guys.
>I'm piping all the hate mail to /dev/null and wearing fire proof
>underwear and only reading comp.sys.next for 2 weeks as well...

Maybe this is an exercise in futility, but what the heck, I've got
nothing better to do while recovering from a lousy cold.

First, have you seen either the A2320/A3000 or the flickerFixer? I've
owned a flickerFixer for about three years, and an A3000 for six months.
Other than the flicker in the first 1/2 line of video, the A2320 is
superior in every respect. Here's a short list:

A2320:
Supports both PAL and NTSC resolutions with a single board.
Transparent pass through of ECS de-interlaced video modes.
Larger overscan support (724x480 vs 704x470).
Far better handling of motion on 200 line screens.
Disable switch for dropping back to 15 KHz video.
Considerably less expensive.

flickerFixer:
First 1/2 line of video does not flicker.

It would be nice if the A2320 did not have the flickering 1/2 line, but
when compared to all the advantages it has over the flickerFixer, I
would not hesitate a second before buying the A2320 over the flickerFixer.

On the other hand, most Amiga owners seem to prefer having the active
video extend behind the bezel of the display. And if your display is
adjusted this way, then the first 1/2 line of video is not visible, and
the problem does not exist. Personally, I prefer to use all the pixels I
can get my hands on, so I've got my Sony CPD-1302 adjusted for a small
black border, and I've dropped the Workbench 2.0 background gray a
couple of notches, and the 1/2 line flicker is not noticable.

If you have objections to the hardware, that's fine. But your personal
attack on Scott Hood was out of line. 
-- 
Blaine Gardner @ Evans & Sutherland  580 Arapeen Drive, SLC, Utah 84108
blgardne%javelin@dsd.es.com     ...dsd.es.com!javelin!blgardne  (I hope)
{decwrl, utah-cs}!esunix!blgardne
DoD #0046   My other motorcycle is a Quadracer.         BIX: blaine_g

davewt@NCoast.ORG (David Wright) (12/23/90)

In article <1990Dec22.125326.18870@marlin.jcu.edu.au> glmwc@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Matt Crowd) writes:
>He wouldn't have spend so much time explaining the "features" if it
>worked 100%.  You can buy a super VGA card for less than the
	It DOES work 100% of the time.
>A Pysgonosis Demo in low res??? That way I won't have to put the
>black tape at top of the screen...
	The 2320 is made for people who want a good display. NOT one of those
ugly VGA-type displays with a black boarder around your graphics. You will see
NO flicker if you have your monitor adjusted right. You CAN adjust your
monitor can't you? Or idd you buy one of those cheap VGA monitors the clone
mfgrs make that leave 2 inches (at least) all the way around the video.
>1)  Try telling people that the Amiga can only handle 640*400 with 16
>colours on screen.  People buying UNIX boxes have already asked on the
>net whether C= have improved the graphics on the Amiga when asking about
>the 3000UX.  They haven't.  The only noticible difference in ECS is a
>non-interlaced mode that is so slow it makes a Mac Plus look quick.
	First of all, the Amiga CAN handle more than 640x400 with 16 colors.
I use a 700+x500+ workbench all the time, much better than a normal VGA
display. And under Unix you can get as part of your package the Lowell board
which does much better graphics. Why compare the video used under AmigaDOS
(which has to be compatible), with what can be done under Unix (which
doesn't)? Have you ever SEEN how the display looks under Amiga Unix?
I didn't think so.
>Now who is going to buy a 20MIP UNIX workstation that can only manage 
>640*400 in 16 colours? (assuming the 3500 has an 040 in it!)  Atari?
>They might clone it and call it a 3000TT.
	I don't know, but as the Amiga isn't limited to that resolution or
screen depth, I don't see that that matters.
>A $150 US VGA card can do much better.  Now C= might
>be working on some super 32 bit chip set, but why couldn't they
>just stick some gate array (like a mac) to improve the graphics until
>the new chip set was done?  I mean C= sell IBM clones with VGA cards,
>so we shouldn't have to wait 2 years for the new chips.
	If you like the SLOW VGA cards so much, why didn't you buy a PC, and
wait for the mouse pointer to catch up to where you moved it under Windows.
>graphics.  Marc Barrett has been flamed for years after complaining about the
>declining Amiga graphics, and he's right.  It was a leader when it
	Are you sure you didn't have a brain transplant with MB?
>2)  The 2091 harddisk controller card is bug ridden.  I have just got
>a brand new one, which is stuffed.  I told the dealer about it, and he
>said they were all stuffed and that it would stop reading the drive
>eventually! Just look at the about of noise on the net about it.  Other
	He lied. I haven't seen any FACTS on the net about it at all. I used
one for years and had NO problems at all. What bugs are you talking about
anyway?
>C= hardware has been dodgy, such as the 1950 monitor.  Now why is it
>that every person I know buying an Amiga lately is getting a NEC
>monitor?  People ARE prepared to pay more for quality.
	Maybe they are just stupid. There is nothing wrong with the 1950.
If people got bad ones, that is certainly a shame, but is probobly due more
to handling during shipment the a screw-up at C=. I have not had ANY problems
with my 1950, It has a better display than the Nec 3D I use at work every day,
and it doesn't have those ugly black borders. I also know several other people
who have gotten 1950 and have not had any problems with them either.
>This is Apple.
>
>Bill : "Well I think we should emphasise the Mac is easy to use in
>business and show some productivity software."
>John : "Commendable, we'll give it more credibiltiy by showing it during the 
>news at 6."
>Bill : "We should achieve substantial market penetration." 
	More like,
Bill: We have this outdated piece of ****, which only displays monochrome
video, and has a GUI slower than a dog on a hot day. Any idea how to
unload the things?
John: Well, if we buy huge amounts of advertising, and tell people they
dont NEED color or multitasking, they might believe it and buy them.
Bill: Great. Some people actually bought the Lisa, so this might work.
John: Oh, and if we call it the "Classic", we might even sell a few more.


			Dave

glmwc@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Matt Crowd) (12/23/90)

In article <1990Dec23.040355.20001@NCoast.ORG> davewt@NCoast.ORG (David Wright) writes:
>In article <1990Dec22.125326.18870@marlin.jcu.edu.au> glmwc@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Matt Crowd) writes:
>>He wouldn't have spend so much time explaining the "features" if it
>>worked 100%.  You can buy a super VGA card for less than the
>	It DOES work 100% of the time.
>>A Pysgonosis Demo in low res??? That way I won't have to put the
>>black tape at top of the screen...
>	The 2320 is made for people who want a good display. NOT one of those
>ugly VGA-type displays with a black boarder around your graphics. You will see
>NO flicker if you have your monitor adjusted right. You CAN adjust your
>monitor can't you? Or idd you buy one of those cheap VGA monitors the clone
>mfgrs make that leave 2 inches (at least) all the way around the video.

Lets see......I go to the store to buy a video card that supposably
removes flicker, i get home put it in the computer ans *STILL* have to
adjust the colours and screen size/position to get rid of the flicker.

>>1)  Try telling people that the Amiga can only handle 640*400 with 16
>>colours on screen.  People buying UNIX boxes have already asked on the
>>net whether C= have improved the graphics on the Amiga when asking about
>>the 3000UX.  They haven't.  The only noticible difference in ECS is a
>>non-interlaced mode that is so slow it makes a Mac Plus look quick.
>	First of all, the Amiga CAN handle more than 640x400 with 16 colors.
>I use a 700+x500+ workbench all the time, much better than a normal VGA
         ^^^^^^^^^
                   This is in 16 colours or less.

>display. And under Unix you can get as part of your package the Lowell board
>which does much better graphics. Why compare the video used under AmigaDOS
>(which has to be compatible), with what can be done under Unix (which
>doesn't)? Have you ever SEEN how the display looks under Amiga Unix?
>I didn't think so.
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^  As a matter of fact I have seen it.

>>Now who is going to buy a 20MIP UNIX workstation that can only manage 
>>640*400 in 16 colours? (assuming the 3500 has an 040 in it!)  Atari?
>>They might clone it and call it a 3000TT.
>	I don't know, but as the Amiga isn't limited to that resolution or
>screen depth, I don't see that that matters.

Can't see that screen resolution or depth matters???
Ever heard of Image Processing??? A common use for UNIX workstations.

>>A $150 US VGA card can do much better.  Now C= might
>>be working on some super 32 bit chip set, but why couldn't they
>>just stick some gate array (like a mac) to improve the graphics until
>>the new chip set was done?  I mean C= sell IBM clones with VGA cards,
>>so we shouldn't have to wait 2 years for the new chips.
>	If you like the SLOW VGA cards so much, why didn't you buy a PC, and

If you like SLOW ECS then use it.

>>C= hardware has been dodgy, such as the 1950 monitor.  Now why is it
>>that every person I know buying an Amiga lately is getting a NEC
>>monitor?  People ARE prepared to pay more for quality.
>	Maybe they are just stupid. There is nothing wrong with the 1950.
>If people got bad ones, that is certainly a shame, but is probobly due more
>to handling during shipment the a screw-up at C=. I have not had ANY problems
>with my 1950, It has a better display than the Nec 3D I use at work every day,
>and it doesn't have those ugly black borders. I also know several other people
>who have gotten 1950 and have not had any problems with them either.

Do you have a seeing eye dog??? There have been at least 100 complaints
about the 1950 in the last 3 months, so don't try to shrug it off like
it's o.k or something

>>Bill : "Well I think we should emphasise the Mac is easy to use in
>>business and show some productivity software."
>>John : "Commendable, we'll give it more credibiltiy by showing it during the 
>>news at 6."
>>Bill : "We should achieve substantial market penetration." 
>	More like,
>Bill: We have this outdated piece of ****, which only displays monochrome
>video, and has a GUI slower than a dog on a hot day. Any idea how to
>unload the things?
>John: Well, if we buy huge amounts of advertising, and tell people they
>dont NEED color or multitasking, they might believe it and buy them.
>Bill: Great. Some people actually bought the Lisa, so this might work.
>John: Oh, and if we call it the "Classic", we might even sell a few more.
>
>			Dave

They do believe it AND buy them, maybe because it's got something to do
with having good business software........

Matt Crowd         Amiga Man.

davewt@NCoast.ORG (David Wright) (12/24/90)

In article <1990Dec23.061633.29185@marlin.jcu.edu.au> glmwc@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Matt Crowd) writes:
>
>Lets see......I go to the store to buy a video card that supposably
>removes flicker, i get home put it in the computer ans *STILL* have to
>adjust the colours and screen size/position to get rid of the flicker.
	I didn't say anything about adjusting color. Only that you must tune
your monitor properly for the best picture. You wouldn't expect to buy a TV
set and have the color and tint controls set the way you want them. Why would
you expect that the monitor mfgr. will know how big you want your image?
Especially in a time when most people put up with huge black borders. If they
sent the units with the video pre-adjested to the edges, some people would
complain about it, expecting the border.
>>I use a 700+x500+ workbench all the time, much better than a normal VGA
>         ^^^^^^^^^
>                   This is in 16 colours or less.
	Only an idiot would want their main display for windows in more than
16 colors. Any more and you are starting to waste CPU time on stupid
things like bitplanes that are usually blank. And besides, you comment was
that the Amiga only did 640x400. I just stated that it wasn't true, not that I
was using more colors. I use X under Unix all the time, and even though I am
using a 33 Mhz '386 (a real one, not an SX), X is far too slow in deep color
mode for any serious use. I have yet to see anyone who uses more than 4 or 8
color screens, because the response is too slow.
>
>>display. And under Unix you can get as part of your package the Lowell board
>>which does much better graphics. Why compare the video used under AmigaDOS
>>(which has to be compatible), with what can be done under Unix (which
>>doesn't)? Have you ever SEEN how the display looks under Amiga Unix?
>>I didn't think so.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^  As a matter of fact I have seen it.
	If you have, you must not have been paying attention, or it was a
long time ago. If you saw it with the Lowell board, the resolution was certainly
higher than VGA, and with a faster response too.
>>	I don't know, but as the Amiga isn't limited to that resolution or
>>screen depth, I don't see that that matters.
>Can't see that screen resolution or depth matters???
	There you go missquoting again. Read what I said again.
>Ever heard of Image Processing??? A common use for UNIX workstations.
And for Amiga's too. But I would hardly say that is a "common" use. Easily
over half the Unix stations do not even run X yet, and probobly more than
half the terminals are Wyse-60's or VT-100 type systems, with no real
graphics at all.
>
>If you like SLOW ECS then use it.
	Tell me ONE area where the ECS is slower (or even as slow) as VGA.
1) It has much faster access to RAM than VGA
2) It does not require interaction with the main CPU like VGA does
3) It uses real "deep" screens, rather than an 8 bits side by side
method, so it is much easier to scale displays and write portable graphics.
What will you do with VGA when you need more than 8 bits? And why do you think
VGA is limited to only 256 colors at a time?
>Do you have a seeing eye dog??? There have been at least 100 complaints
>about the 1950 in the last 3 months, so don't try to shrug it off like
>it's o.k or something
	I saw more like 5-10 complaints, and most of them were from one or
two people. There is nothing wrong with the 1950 design-wise. If there is
some problem during shipment, or with QA at the factory (you know C= doesn't
make them don't you), then that should be corrected. But that is not due to
a faulty design. I would take a 1950 over a Nec-3D anyday.
>
>They do believe it AND buy them, maybe because it's got something to do
>with having good business software........
	I won't argue about that, as the Amiga just doesn't have the
same amount of quality business software available for it *yet*. If any
company other than Apple had tried to introduce the Mac, it would have
flopped. The Amiga has done well *despite* C= (although they are doing
fantastic now), so the current level of work and support being put out by
C= can only help things. What else is there new for Apple to try?

		Dave

(Hey, has anyone seen MB since he showed up?)

lshaw@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (logan shaw) (12/24/90)

Well, I know we're all tired of people griping, so I'll make this short...

In article <1990Dec23.061633.29185@marlin.jcu.edu.au> glmwc@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Matt Crowd) writes:
>Lets see......I go to the store to buy a video card that supposably
>removes flicker, i get home put it in the computer ans *STILL* have to
>adjust the colours and screen size/position to get rid of the flicker.

Let's see, you mean that even though I bought a new carburetor for my
car I *still* have to adjust the choke for it to run right?  Just because
it has to be adjusted doesn't mean it doesn't work.  It just means it
requires adjustment to make it work.

>>>Now who is going to buy a 20MIP UNIX workstation that can only manage 
>>>640*400 in 16 colours? (assuming the 3500 has an 040 in it!)  Atari?
>>>They might clone it and call it a 3000TT.
>>	I don't know, but as the Amiga isn't limited to that resolution or
>>screen depth, I don't see that that matters.
>
>Can't see that screen resolution or depth matters???
>Ever heard of Image Processing??? A common use for UNIX workstations.

Pay attention to what he said.  He didn't say resolution/colors doesn't
matter.  He said it wasn't limited to that.  By your definition of
'limited' most PCs are limited to text only since they don't have VGA 
built in.

>If you like SLOW ECS then use it.

Sorry to break it to you, but ECS is _not_ slow compared to VGA.  ESPECIALLY
if you compare fairly.  The graphics on my 8Mhz 68000 based Amiga are a
hell of alot faster than on my friends 8Mhz 8086 VGA machine.

>>>C= hardware has been dodgy, such as the 1950 monitor.  Now why is it
>>>that every person I know buying an Amiga lately is getting a NEC
>>>monitor?  People ARE prepared to pay more for quality.

Last time I checked, the 1950 was (mostly) made FOR C= by another
manufacturer.  So, how does this reflect on C=?  I don't understand.

glmwc@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Matt Crowd) (12/27/90)

In article <1990Dec24.034031.18252@NCoast.ORG> davewt@NCoast.ORG (David Wright) writes:
>In article <1990Dec23.061633.29185@marlin.jcu.edu.au> glmwc@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Matt Crowd) writes:
>>
>>Lets see......I go to the store to buy a video card that supposably
>>removes flicker, i get home put it in the computer ans *STILL* have to
>>adjust the colours and screen size/position to get rid of the flicker.
>	I didn't say anything about adjusting color. Only that you must tune
>your monitor properly for the best picture. You wouldn't expect to buy a TV
>set and have the color and tint controls set the way you want them. Why would

If your car had a problem, say it stalled all the time, and to took it
to the garage to get fixed, and got it back and it only stalled 1% of
the time, would you be happy??

This leads back to my original comment of why the 2320 isn't as good as the
Flicker Fixer.

>>>I use a 700+x500+ workbench all the time, much better than a normal VGA
>>         ^^^^^^^^^
>>                   This is in 16 colours or less.
>	Only an idiot would want their main display for windows in more than
>16 colors. Any more and you are starting to waste CPU time on stupid

O.K then, name any Amiga Graphics Mode that can do 640x400 in GREATER
than 16 colors, and HAM doesn't count.

>>If you like SLOW ECS then use it.
>	Tell me ONE area where the ECS is slower (or even as slow) as VGA.

I wasn't comparing it to VGA ! The only benefit VGA has is more colors
on screen. I was comparing it to normal hi-res.

>make them don't you), then that should be corrected. But that is not due to
>a faulty design. I would take a 1950 over a Nec-3D anyday.

My NEC 4D is on its way............

>(Hey, has anyone seen MB since he showed up?)

Matthew Crowd.

clemon@lemsys.UUCP (Craig Lemon) (12/28/90)

In a message posted on 27 Dec 90 05:55:37 GMT,
glmwc@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Matt Crowd) wrote:
MC>In article <1990Dec24.034031.18252@NCoast.ORG> davewt@NCoast.ORG (David Wright) writes:
MC>>In article <1990Dec23.061633.29185@marlin.jcu.edu.au> glmwc@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Matt Crowd) writes:
MC>>>
MC>>>Lets see......I go to the store to buy a video card that supposably
MC>>>removes flicker, i get home put it in the computer ans *STILL* have to
MC>>>adjust the colours and screen size/position to get rid of the flicker.
MC>>	I didn't say anything about adjusting color. Only that you must tune
MC>>your monitor properly for the best picture. You wouldn't expect to buy a TV
MC>>set and have the color and tint controls set the way you want them. Why would
MC>
MC>If your car had a problem, say it stalled all the time, and to took it
MC>to the garage to get fixed, and got it back and it only stalled 1% of
MC>the time, would you be happy??
MC>
MC>This leads back to my original comment of why the 2320 isn't as good as the
MC>Flicker Fixer.

	I'm waiting....

MC>
MC>>>>I use a 700+x500+ workbench all the time, much better than a normal VGA
MC>>>         ^^^^^^^^^
MC>>>                   This is in 16 colours or less.
MC>>	Only an idiot would want their main display for windows in more than
MC>>16 colors. Any more and you are starting to waste CPU time on stupid
MC>
MC>O.K then, name any Amiga Graphics Mode that can do 640x400 in GREATER
MC>than 16 colors, and HAM doesn't count.
MC>

	Why?  What's this got to do with the 2320 OR the FlickerFixer?

MC>>>If you like SLOW ECS then use it.
MC>>	Tell me ONE area where the ECS is slower (or even as slow) as VGA.
MC>
MC>I wasn't comparing it to VGA ! The only benefit VGA has is more colors
MC>on screen. I was comparing it to normal hi-res.

	I say again... Where is the part about the 2320?

MC>
MC>>make them don't you), then that should be corrected. But that is not due to
MC>>a faulty design. I would take a 1950 over a Nec-3D anyday.
MC>
MC>My NEC 4D is on its way............
MC>
MC>>(Hey, has anyone seen MB since he showed up?)
MC>
MC>Matthew Crowd.

	I still haven't seen any leading back to your argument...  Is it
possible that you are mistaking the functions of these boards?  Probably
not but I don't see what ECS, VGA and more than 16 colours in Hi-res have
to do with increased scan speed.  From reading about both products I feel
that while the 2320 is not PERFECT it is still better than the
FlickerFixer.  Do you have a solid argument why it isn't?

--
 Craig Lemon - Kitchener, Ontario. Amiga B2000/10--2400 bps--AmigaUUCP 1.03D
 clemon@lemsys.UUCP   or   lemsys!clemon@xenitec.on.ca
 ....!{uunet}!watmath!xenitec!lemsys!clemon

davewt@NCoast.ORG (David Wright) (12/28/90)

In article <1990Dec27.055537.2509@marlin.jcu.edu.au> glmwc@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Matt Crowd) writes:
>If your car had a problem, say it stalled all the time, and to took it
>to the garage to get fixed, and got it back and it only stalled 1% of
>the time, would you be happy??
	Of course not (unless it was a Vector, in which case I would be happy
if it only STARTED 1% of the time). But the 2320 doesn't "stall" at all.
The reason for the flicker in the first 1/4-1/3 scan line has been explained,
and it has also been mentioned that there is no reason it could not be
eliminated at all. C= rightly sets equipment and peripherals they sell to
work properly togather. If you use a 3rd part product, while they SHOULD
work in most cases, C= can not be expected to support every piece of hardware
someone might stick on a system. If you have your monitor adjusted (a one-time
procedure) properly, you will not see the 1/3rd line flicker at all. And I
don't mean something dumb like adjusting the colors. I mean adjusting the
display size, which is provided for on the 1950 monitor. If yours does not,
or does not provide sufficient adjustment, that is either your fault for
choosing a monitor that does not work as reccomended, or the monitor
mfgrs problem for not providing enough user-flexibility in the size of the
display.
	The 2320 has many more advanced features than the FlickerFixer
(which is a fine product anyway, and by an outstanding company), and for
most people the 2320 will be a better buy than the FlickerFixer. If you
are one of the people who has an interest in only using the higher speed
(scan doubled) modes that both the FlickerFixer and the 2320 provide, then
both boards would work for you, and yes, the FF would not have the 1/3rd
flickering line. But if you want to be able to use any of the "Productivity"
modes without having to remove and switch cables, or use 2 monitors, then
the 2320 is a better (and cheaper) board to buy.
>>	Tell me ONE area where the ECS is slower (or even as slow) as VGA.
>
>I wasn't comparing it to VGA ! The only benefit VGA has is more colors
>on screen. I was comparing it to normal hi-res.
	Normal hi-res on what?
>My NEC 4D is on its way............
	Great. I hope you like it, and enjoy spending money on things like
monitors. I would personally prefer to spend my money on more usefull items
like more RAM, more/larger HD's, or a tape backup system. To each his own.


			Dave