joe@vixen.uucp (Joe Hitchens) (01/11/90)
All this talk about the "Black Belt Video" device and interpereting the signals differently to get better results just sounds like the biggest kludge ever. The 2000's have a video slot right? Why can't someone just make a new video board that does 256 color byte-per-pixel "VGA-like" graphics that plugs into the slot? If a new version of the OS is coming out soon, isn't the Intuition library all that would need to be changed software wise? The graphics library already supports 8 bitplanes, right? Amiga's biggest problem right now is that it is falling behind in display quality. The new VGA cards and the MacII display are getting way out in front. Non-Amiga people I have talked to always say that the thing that turned them away from the Amiga was the display looked real cheesy-toylike-C64 like. And it does. The standard WorkBench display is just not very nice by today's standards. I go down to work and see my co-workers with their NEC multisync VGA machines and they have these super sharp, crisp, high contrast, highly colorful displays, and it makes me sick. I make a living with my Amiga, so I need display modes that are supported by the system. I can't use something that is just a novelty mode that can't be used easily by normal productivity software. How am I going to draw a picture in DPaint with this Black Belt thing? I can't, unless a new version comes out that supports the kludge. And "supporting a kludge" seems kind of dumb to me. j.h. (Ok, go ahead, torch me. :-)) -- ___________________________________________________________________________ Joe Hitchens -- Artist, Sculptor, Animator of Sculpture, Iconographer Adept joe@vixen ...!uunet!iconsys!caeco!vixen!joe Phone: (801) 292-2190
lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca (Larry Phillips) (01/13/90)
In <343@vixen.uucp>, joe@vixen.uucp (Joe Hitchens) writes: >All this talk about the "Black Belt Video" device and interpereting >the signals differently to get better results just sounds like the biggest >kludge ever. > >The 2000's have a video slot right? Right. Ignore the A500 (and the A1000). Why not? To hell with them. If they wanted an Amiga, they should have bought the 2000. Right. -larry -- "Cavett Emptor - Let the talk show host beware!" - Evan Marcus +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | // Larry Phillips | | \X/ lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca -or- uunet!van-bc!lpami!lphillips | | COMPUSERVE: 76703,4322 -or- 76703.4322@compuserve.com | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
kudla@pawl.rpi.edu (Robert J. Kudla) (01/13/90)
In <343@vixen.uucp> joe@vixen.uucp (Joe Hitchens) writes:
-> All this talk about the "Black Belt Video" device and interpereting
-> the signals differently to get better results just sounds like the biggest
-> kludge ever.
I wonder why no one else has seen this..... It's a great box and I'm
sure it'll get at least some use in the community, but it's certainly
a kludge.
-> The 2000's have a video slot right? Why can't someone just make a
-> new video board that does 256 color byte-per-pixel "VGA-like"
-> graphics that plugs into the slot? Amiga's biggest problem right
-> now is that it is falling behind in display quality. The new VGA
-> cards and the MacII display are getting way out in front.
Amen. They still have to do some nasty stuff to get more than 256
colors on the screen or get interlace (I don't even know if they can
do the former) but 8-bit color is oh so nice. Our palette isn't the
cream of the crop anymore either.....
Note that most VGA and color Mac II applications rarely use more than
8 colors, which we can handle just fine and with a FlickerFixer we can
have the sharp high-contrast MultiSync look as well. In fact, I don't
understand why rather than a "productivity mode" the new Denise isn't
simply implementing a FlickerFixer sort of thing. Myself, I'm betting
that any new software which supports Productivity Mode will also
support interlace, so I'm gonna bag Denise and get something akin to
Flickerfixer.
-> Non-Amiga people I have talked to always say that the thing that turned
-> them away from the Amiga was the display looked real cheesy-toylike-C64
-> like. And it does. The standard WorkBench display is just not very
-> nice by today's standards.
In interlace, with nice colors, it's not bad. The titlebars etc are
kinda lame, and I wish the resizer would get done over, but
whatever.....
-> I make a living with my Amiga, so I need display modes that are supported
-> by the system. I can't use something that is just a novelty mode that
-> can't be used easily by normal productivity software.
8-bit video wouldn't be any more supported, though it might have an
edge were CBM to release such a card.
-> (Ok, go ahead, torch me. :-))
Someone's bound to get defensive, but aside from the usual boring "VGA
is beating us" argument, you've made some good points.
--
Robert Jude Kudla <kudla@pawl.rpi.edu>
"Famous? I'm not famous. People come up to me after a show and say
'Hey, Steve!'"
-Jon Andersonlphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca (Larry Phillips) (01/13/90)
In <K6P$0=@rpi.edu>, kudla@pawl.rpi.edu (Robert J. Kudla) writes: >In <1010@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca> lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca (Larry Phillips) writes: > >-> Right. Ignore the A500 (and the A1000). Why not? To hell with them. If they >-> wanted an Amiga, they should have bought the 2000. Right. > >No. If they wanted to *expand* the box, they should have bought a >2000. I knew exactly what I was getting when I bought my 500, >including knowing full well that when I decided to get a new >processor, hard card, huge amounts of RAM or higher-res video I'd have >to upgrade to a 2000 or hope for a card cage compatible enough to suit >me. The 500 is marketed as an entry-level machine, not merely a >one-piece 2000! And now you are disappointed because you don't have to buy a 2000 to get the benefit of the Black Belt box? :-) It's interesting that you think it's A Bad Thing. You might try talking them (or someone else) into doing a product that will work on the 2000 only. Just pointing out that there _is_ a sound rationale for the way Bleack Belt did theirs. -larry -- "Cavett Emptor - Let the talk show host beware!" - Evan Marcus +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | // Larry Phillips | | \X/ lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca -or- uunet!van-bc!lpami!lphillips | | COMPUSERVE: 76703,4322 -or- 76703.4322@compuserve.com | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
bdb@becker.UUCP (Bruce Becker) (01/14/90)
In article <343@vixen.uucp> joe@vixen.uucp (Joe Hitchens) writes: |All this talk about the "Black Belt Video" device and interpereting |the signals differently to get better results just sounds like the biggest |kludge ever. | |The 2000's have a video slot right? Why can't someone just make |a new video board that does 256 color byte-per-pixel "VGA-like" graphics |that plugs into the slot? If a new version of the OS is coming out |soon, isn't the Intuition library all that would need to be changed |software wise? The graphics library already supports 8 bitplanes, right? C= is currently beta-testing a frame buffer designed at the University of Lowell which does something of what you want. It displays 8 bits deep, 1024 by 768 pixels, I believe. I saw Amix with X windows on it looking mighty nice... However the access to it is parallel to, not integrated with, the current display device, at least in AmigaDos. Hmmm. I know that integrating such things are a bear due to the current system definitions, but sooner or later C= must bite the bullet in some fashion, possibly breaking things in the process in terms of upwards compatibility. Maybe AmigaDos 2.0 will be bullet-biting time? Cheers, -- ,,,, Bruce Becker Toronto, Ont. w \$$/ Internet: bdb@becker.UUCP, bruce@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu `/c/-e BitNet: BECKER@HUMBER.BITNET _/ >_ "Money is the root of all money" - Adam
tron1@tronsbox.UUCP (HIM) (01/14/90)
>In <343@vixen.uucp> joe@vixen.uucp (Joe Hitchens) writes: > >-> All this talk about the "Black Belt Video" device and interpereting >-> the signals differently to get better results just sounds like the biggest >-> kludge ever. Really ??? Why ?? Because it is oustide the machine ??? Because it works on >ALL< Amiga's (not just the 2000) , or because it uses the monitor we already own ?? >-> Non-Amiga people I have talked to always say that the thing that turned >-> them away from the Amiga was the display looked real cheesy-toylike-C64 >-> like. And it does. The standard WorkBench display is just not very So they bought IBM's. >-> I make a living with my Amiga, so I need display modes that are supported >-> by the system. I can't use something that is just a novelty mode that >-> can't be used easily by normal productivity software. Now let me get this straight , you see I make a living on my Amiga as well. And I firmly beleive that a NICE looking inexpensive card like the BBS that works on ALL amigas is a better market vehicle than a VERY expensive card that only runs in 2000's .. but hey , that's just me. And BTW -- The BBS Device is >INCREDIBLY simple to write software for , without any funny tricks at all , further it doesnt need CA -to change one BYTE of code to support it. As opposed to some funny 8 bit card that needs a WB upgrade to run. >Someone's bound to get defensive, but aside from the usual boring "VGA >is beating us" argument, you've made some good points. >-- >Robert Jude Kudla <kudla@pawl.rpi.edu> Umm.. I am ... I like the box , and think that better video for the masses at 300$ is a VERY nice point. **************************************************************************** Everything I say is (c) 1990, except the stuff I stole from someone else and the stuff I don't want responsibility for. Kenneth J. Jamieson: Xanadu Enterprises Inc. "Professional Amiga Software" UUCP: tron1@tronsbox.UUCP BEST PATH ---> uunet!tronsbox!tron1 Sysop, Romantic Encounters BBS - (201)759-8450 / (201)759-8568 ****************************************************************************
kudla@pawl.rpi.edu (Robert J. Kudla) (01/14/90)
In <1010@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca> lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca (Larry Phillips) writes:
-> Right. Ignore the A500 (and the A1000). Why not? To hell with them. If they
-> wanted an Amiga, they should have bought the 2000. Right.
No. If they wanted to *expand* the box, they should have bought a
2000. I knew exactly what I was getting when I bought my 500,
including knowing full well that when I decided to get a new
processor, hard card, huge amounts of RAM or higher-res video I'd have
to upgrade to a 2000 or hope for a card cage compatible enough to suit
me. The 500 is marketed as an entry-level machine, not merely a
one-piece 2000!
--
Robert Jude Kudla <kudla@pawl.rpi.edu>
"Famous? I'm not famous. People come up to me after a show and say
'Hey, Steve!'"
-Jon Andersonlphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca (Larry Phillips) (01/14/90)
In <1990Jan15.061824.26293@athena.mit.edu>, reynaldo@athena.mit.edu (Rey Villarreal) writes: >In response to the moron who wrote to forget the A500 and the A1000 >(i.e. no smilely face to be seen). For your information the people who >bought the A1000 did buy the real article. Also I don't have actual >figures but I have a feeling that A2000's make up a small minority of >Machines out there. So elitist, idiot opinions like this will probably >not win out. > >I have an A500 and am damn proud of it. Wake up and READ the article dipshit. It was a response to someone who was proposing just that. I don't put smileys on heavy sarcasm, because I assume net.people have some brains. It's _usually_ justified. -- "Cavett Emptor - Let the talk show host beware!" - Evan Marcus +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | // Larry Phillips | | \X/ lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca -or- uunet!van-bc!lpami!lphillips | | COMPUSERVE: 76703,4322 -or- 76703.4322@compuserve.com | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
840445m@aucs.uucp (Alan McKay) (01/15/90)
In article <K6P$0=@rpi.edu> kudla@pawl.rpi.edu (Robert J. Kudla) writes: > >No. If they wanted to *expand* the box, they should have bought a >2000. I knew exactly what I was getting when I bought my 500, >including knowing full well that when I decided to get a new >processor, hard card, huge amounts of RAM or higher-res video I'd have >to upgrade to a 2000 or hope for a card cage compatible enough to suit >me. The 500 is marketed as an entry-level machine, not merely a >one-piece 2000! >-- >Robert Jude Kudla <kudla@pawl.rpi.edu> But look at in from the point of view of the guy designing the thing. Would you sooner have a market of (just guessing but you get the point) 200 000 Amiga 2000s, or of 200 000 Amiga 2000s PLUS 300 000 Amiga 1000s PLUS 600 000 Amiga 500s. To me, it makes much more sense to do it this way, since you can sell more product and thus possibly offer it at a lower price. IMHO. -- + Alan W. McKay + VOICE: (902) 542-1565 + + Acadia University + "Courage my friend, it is not yet too late + + WOLFVILLE, N.S. + to make the world a better place." + + 840445m@AcadiaU.CA + - Tommy Douglas +
nsw@cbnewsm.ATT.COM (Neil Weinstock) (01/15/90)
In article <343@vixen.uucp> joe@vixen.uucp (Joe Hitchens) writes: [ ... ] >Non-Amiga people I have talked to always say that the thing that turned >them away from the Amiga was the display looked real cheesy-toylike-C64 >like. And it does. The standard WorkBench display is just not very >nice by today's standards. I go down to work and see my co-workers with >their NEC multisync VGA machines and they have these super sharp, crisp, >high contrast, highly colorful displays, and it makes me sick. Just thought I'd put one word in here. While I agree 100% that the Workbench appearance needs serious improvement, it's absolutely amazing what a Flicker Fixer can do in the meantime. A 400 line Workbench screen through a Flicker Fixer and Multisync monitor is really quite nice. Admittedly not as good as a full-color Mac II screen, but pretty darn good nonetheless. Add your favorite screen utilities (Dropcloth, Dropshadow, etc.) and you're doing OK. If the Flicker Fixer was a bit cheaper I'd have one for sure... ________________ __________________ _________________________ //// \\// \\// \\\\ \\\\ Neil Weinstock //\\ att!cord!nsw or //\\ "Your hair is so... //// //// AT&T Bell Labs \\// nsw@cord.att.com \\// lustre-laden." - Moss \\\\ \\\\________________//\\__________________//\\_________________________////
tron1@tronsbox.UUCP (HIM) (01/15/90)
>2000. I knew exactly what I was getting when I bought my 500, >including knowing full well that when I decided to get a new >processor, hard card, huge amounts of RAM or higher-res video I'd have >to upgrade to a 2000 or hope for a card cage compatible enough to suit >me. The 500 is marketed as an entry-level machine, not merely a So lets not support a product that will work so that we can keep the 500 in it's place? I hate to open this can of worms but your evaluation is wrong. With the exception of the video slot and bridge slots, there is no car that will run on a 200 that COULDNT be build to run on a 500. The connector on the side has ALL the signale the 2000 slots have. (Boy , I hope I am right about that! ) (grin) **************************************************************************** Everything I say is Copr. 1990, except the stuff I stole from someone else and the stuff I don't want responsibility for. Kenneth J. Jamieson: Xanadu Enterprises Inc. "Professional Amiga Software" UUCP: tron1@tronsbox.UUCP BEST PATH ---> uunet!tronsbox!tron1 Sysop, Romantic Encounters BBS - (201)759-8450 / (201)759-8568 ****************************************************************************
reynaldo@athena.mit.edu (Rey Villarreal) (01/15/90)
In response to the moron who wrote to forget the A500 and the A1000 (i.e. no smilely face to be seen). For your information the people who bought the A1000 did buy the real article. Also I don't have actual figures but I have a feeling that A2000's make up a small minority of Machines out there. So elitist, idiot opinions like this will probably not win out. I have an A500 and am damn proud of it. Rey (Quayle) Villarreal ---Worlds most ardent Oiler fan
kudla@pawl.rpi.edu (Robert J. Kudla) (01/16/90)
In <1017@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca> lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca (Larry Phillips) writes: (quoting me) >No. If they wanted to *expand* the box, they should have bought a >2000. I knew exactly what I was getting when I bought my 500, >including knowing full well that when I decided to get a new >processor, hard card, huge amounts of RAM or higher-res video I'd have >to upgrade to a 2000 or hope for a card cage compatible enough to suit >me. The 500 is marketed as an entry-level machine, not merely a >one-piece 2000! -> And now you are disappointed because you don't have to buy a 2000 -> to get the benefit of the Black Belt box? :-) It's interesting that -> you think it's A Bad Thing. You might try talking them (or someone -> else) into doing a product that will work on the 2000 only. Just -> pointing out that there _is_ a sound rationale for the way Bleack -> Belt did theirs. Of course there is. There's a much greater installed userbase of 500/1000/2000 owners than there is of 500's alone. I wasn't saying there shouldn't be such neat toys for the 500... I was saying that 500 owners really don't have a right to complain when it's not supported for expansion stuff. -- Robert Jude Kudla <kudla@pawl.rpi.edu> "Famous? I'm not famous. People come up to me after a show and say 'Hey, Steve!'" -Jon Anderson
kudla@pawl.rpi.edu (Robert J. Kudla) (01/16/90)
In <25b165c8:3887.2comp.sys.amiga;1@tronsbox.UUCP> tron1@tronsbox.UUCP (HIM) writes: (quoting me) >2000. I knew exactly what I was getting when I bought my 500, >including knowing full well that when I decided to get a new >processor, hard card, huge amounts of RAM or higher-res video I'd have >to upgrade to a 2000 or hope for a card cage compatible enough to suit >me. The 500 is marketed as an entry-level machine, not merely a -> So lets not support a product that will work so that we can keep -> the 500 in it's place? I hate to open this can of worms but your -> evaluation is wrong. With the exception of the video slot and -> bridge slots, there is no car that will run on a 200 that COULDNT -> be build to run on a 500. The connector on the side has ALL the -> signale the 2000 slots have. This is true. But I have a 500 and I'm certainly always happy to see new expansion stuff for it. I don't recall (and don't see anywhere in the passage you quoted) where I said that we shouldn't support this box. I was replying only to Larry's assertion that building stuff specifically for the machine that's made to be expanded (the 2000) is wrong. Sorry, but Commodore's said that the only machine they'd specifically be supporting completely in the future is the 2000. You can expand your 500 or 1000 with cardcages and all that, but you don't have any inherent reason to complain when the new snazzy PGA's and hardcards and such don't come out with full 500/1000 compatibility. Sometimes they do, like the new Trumpcard, but there's no reason to expect them to. -- Robert Jude Kudla <kudla@pawl.rpi.edu> "Famous? I'm not famous. People come up to me after a show and say 'Hey, Steve!'" -Jon Anderson
krag@cup.portal.com (Kevin Ray Grotjohn) (01/16/90)
Why commodore couldn't have modified the graphics chips to do what the HAME BOX is doing. Then you wouldn't need the cookie in an IFF file. Just read in a 24 bit IFF HAM file and send a signal to the chips to go into HAM-E mode. I'd rather have this sorta "kludge" than productivity mode. Plus it cost about the same $300 for the black belt box, or the 1.4 ROM +Fat Augnus and Superdenise and labor.
FelineGrace@cup.portal.com (Dana B Bourgeois) (01/17/90)
Too much heat on this subject and not enough light.
I unsubscribe you - I unsubscribe you - I unsubscribe you.
There...it is done.
Danajoe@vixen.uucp (Joe Hitchens) (01/18/90)
> >The 2000's have a video slot right? > > Right. Ignore the A500 (and the A1000). Why not? To hell with them. If they > wanted an Amiga, they should have bought the 2000. Right. > > -larry Relax pal, I happen to own an A1000 and an A2000 both and spend 95% of my time using my A1000. I was just asking a question. To the "Black Belt" guy who speaks mysteriously from the void, sorry, I haven't stopped to catch your name. I read that you didn't understand why I and others were referring to your device as a KLUDGE. To me, the device is a "theoretical" kludge, though if it works, and becomes standard and everybody ends up loving it, that may not matter. A KLUDGE is a "patch" or "band-aid" that gets the results you want, but does not really correct the underlying problem. The problem being the limitations of the Amiga hardware and OS. (You experts can correct me if I haven't defined "KLUDGE" properly) Here is my situation. I earn my living by doing "GRAPHICS" on an Amiga. Notice I didn't say "programming", I said "GRAPHICS". I DRAW pictures, I don't write neat programs to generate them or manipulate them. I am getting to the point where I need 8 bitplanes. As of now, the only way I can do this is with a MACII, SUN or VGA-PC. I abhor getting a VGA PC for graphics as I think I would fall merrily to pieces if I couldn't multi-task. Sun is way too expensive for me right now. MacII has both problems. I want to use an Amiga. I want to use DPaint. I want to do EXACTLY what I do now, but do it with 8 bitplanes. I don't want to have to have magic cookies in my pictures, and I don't want an in-compatible IFF format that PC's and other systems that read IFF ILBM's would choke on. I want a standard 8-plane ILBM. The black belt thing is really tempting, but I just don't think it can quite do what I need it to. I really want it to badly though. j.h. -- ___________________________________________________________________________ Joe Hitchens -- Artist, Sculptor, Animator of Sculpture, Iconographer Adept joe@vixen ...!uunet!iconsys!caeco!vixen!joe Phone: (801) 292-2190
tron1@tronsbox.UUCP (HIM) (01/21/90)
> Resp: 5 of 5 by *Masked* at vixen.uucp >Author: [Joe Hitchens] > Date: Sat Jan 20 1990 05:57 > Lines: 45 > >not matter. A KLUDGE is a "patch" or "band-aid" that gets the results >you want, but does not really correct the underlying problem. >The problem being the limitations of the Amiga hardware and OS. >(You experts can correct me if I haven't defined "KLUDGE" properly) But the PC VGA card is a "kludge" by that defibition. It is a harware PERIPHERIAL that overcomes the limitation of PC's (no built in video). By that definition, any video system that is an add on is a kludge right? This includes the "FlickerFixer" BTW. >Amiga. Notice I didn't say "programming", I said "GRAPHICS". I >DRAW pictures, I don't write neat programs to generate them or manipulate >them. Then please don't presume to know how the BB will affect software developers. >I want to use an Amiga. I want to use DPaint. I want to >do EXACTLY what I do now, but do it with 8 bitplanes. Now , the wuestion is , HOW do you expect to upgrade the harware in ANY way at all without getting new software ??? Any new video mode will require a re- write of DPAINT , and a re-write for the BB device is no harder than any other. >I don't want to have to have magic cookies in my pictures, and I YOU dont. You will never draw them , you will never SEE them. >don't want an in-compatible IFF format that PC's and other systems >that read IFF ILBM's would choke on. I want a standard 8-plane ILBM. ANY new mode will require PC programs to re-evaluate the way they handle IFF. In REALITY , the BB iff should be mapped AS a > 8 bit IFF file. It will be up to the machine reading the IFF to show that. (In fact , that is the way IFF is written now.) >The black belt thing is really tempting, but I just don't think it >can quite do what I need it to. I really want it to badly though. You are presuming something you admit to not having experience with (how the BB will affect the people that write the software you use). Trust me, you will get a paint program that can do the job. >j.h. **************************************************************************** Everything I say is Copr. 1990, except the stuff I stole from someone else and the stuff I don't want responsibility for. Kenneth J. Jamieson: Xanadu Enterprises Inc. "Professional Amiga Software" UUCP: tron1@tronsbox.UUCP BEST PATH ---> uunet!tronsbox!tron1 Sysop, Romantic Encounters BBS - (201)759-8450 / (201)759-8568 ****************************************************************************
joe@vixen.uucp (Joe Hitchens) (02/02/90)
> > Resp: 5 of 5 by *Masked* at vixen.uucp > >Author: [Joe Hitchens] > > > > ........... A KLUDGE is .... (my definition of KLUDGE) > > But the PC VGA card is a "kludge" by that defibition. It is a harware > PERIPHERIAL that overcomes the limitation of PC's (no built in video). By > that definition, any video system that is an add on is a kludge right? This > includes the "FlickerFixer" BTW. Please, I specifically pointed out that I was not saying a KLUDGE was necessarily "bad". I was just trying to explain why I used the word. > >Amiga. Notice I didn't say "programming", I said "GRAPHICS". I > >DRAW pictures, I don't write neat programs to generate them or manipulate > >them. > > Then please don't presume to know how the BB will affect software > developers. Actually I am not presuming. I DO in fact do those things. I said that I don't do programming so as not to confuse the issue. I "DO" program quite a bit and have made a fair amount of money doing it, but my main source of income is "DRAWING" graphics on computers. I am not presuming as much as it might appear. Sorry for that. > >I want to use an Amiga. I want to use DPaint. I want to > >do EXACTLY what I do now, but do it with 8 bitplanes. > > Now , the wuestion is , HOW do you expect to upgrade the harware in ANY way > at all without getting new software ??? I don't. I was wrong. I spoke without thinking that one through. Forgive my imperfections. But my statement still stands about "what I want". > >I don't want to have to have magic cookies in my pictures, and I > > YOU dont. You will never draw them , you will never SEE them. OK, if all of the special BB stuff is ENTIRELY transparent to me as an artist, ok. But what about this, is the IFF file going to be stored as a standard 8-bitplane IFF ILBM that can be displayed on a SUN or PC with absolutely no change on their part? Can I go to the store, buy a BB "thing", take it home plug it into my amiga, sit down, load DPaint 7 (BB compatible DPaint), select 256 color mode, edit a picture EXACTLY as I used to only with 256 color registers, never have ANY contact in ANY way on the amiga (paint program, screen dragging, ILBM reading into my animation program, etc). with magic cookies and such, save the picture, dnet the file to a sun which reads standard 8-plane IFF ILBMS, and say "show picture" on the sun and see the SAME picture as a perfectly normal 8-bitplane ILBM exactly like any other that may have come from another non-amiga source? If all of that holds, I have absolutely no complaint about the BB system, and I would very probably buy it. BUT!!!!! I would STILL call it a KLUDGE. If the mode could be completely transparent, and the pictures stored as standard 8-plane ILBMS, then I may consider it an acceptable KLUDGE. j.h. -- ___________________________________________________________________________ Joe Hitchens -- Artist, Sculptor, Animator of Sculpture, Iconographer Adept joe@vixen ...!uunet!iconsys!caeco!vixen!joe Phone: (801) 292-2190
wayneck@tekig5.PEN.TEK.COM (Wayne C Knapp) (02/05/90)
In article <354@vixen.uucp>, joe@vixen.uucp (Joe Hitchens) writes: > > OK, if all of the special BB stuff is ENTIRELY transparent to me as > an artist, ok. But what about this, is the IFF file going to be stored > as a standard 8-bitplane IFF ILBM that can be displayed on a SUN or PC > with absolutely no change on their part? Wow! An Artist puts every programmer on the net to shame. He is right, this is the key issue of IFF, clearly if BBVB stores IFF in the fashion we been told, then the only program that can use that IFF is one that works with the BBVB! It will be unlikely that programs that support IFF on other machines will have any code to handle the BBVB generated IFF and the result will not be a 256 color picture. So putting a cookie in the bitmap data of an IFF file does make it unportable. Still the BBVB will have its place in the Amiga world. Just so much for standards! Wayne Knapp
barry@netcom.UUCP (Kenn Barry) (02/05/90)
In article <5539@tekig5.PEN.TEK.COM> wayneck@tekig5.PEN.TEK.COM (Wayne C Knapp) writes: >In article <354@vixen.uucp>, joe@vixen.uucp (Joe Hitchens) writes: >> OK, if all of the special BB stuff is ENTIRELY transparent to me as >> an artist, ok. But what about this, is the IFF file going to be stored >> as a standard 8-bitplane IFF ILBM that can be displayed on a SUN or PC >> with absolutely no change on their part? > >Wow! An Artist puts every programmer on the net to shame. He is right, >this is the key issue of IFF, clearly if BBVB stores IFF in the fashion >we been told, then the only program that can use that IFF is one that >works with the BBVB! It will be unlikely that programs that support IFF >on other machines will have any code to handle the BBVB generated IFF and >the result will not be a 256 color picture. So putting a cookie in the >bitmap data of an IFF file does make it unportable. Yeah, well, that's all very interesting, but it's more than a bit late for this kind of complaint about the Amiga's graphics, guys. By the offered definition, the Amiga's original HAM mode is ALSO a kludge. It's an Amiga-exclusive and, just like the BBVB pics, would not display properly on some other machine that supported IFF, but expected X bitplanes for 2^X colors. It just happens that most Amiga IFF programs understand HAM mode, because it's supported on Amigas (and choke on an honest 8-bitplane IFF image, incidentally). You're right - they're kludges, HAM included. But they work, and format converters can be written to translate such pics for compatibility with other machines. And when you remember that the Amiga included a graphics kludge for large numbers of colors right from the git-go, it's kinda silly to get all righteous about a new kludge, long as it works. - Note new email address! - Kenn Barry ---------------------------------------------------------------- ELECTRIC AVENUE: apple!netcom!barry
tron1@tronsbox.UUCP (HIM) (02/08/90)
> Resp: 7 of 9 by *Masked* at vixen.uucp >Author: [Joe Hitchens] > Date: Tue Feb 06 1990 11:33 > Lines: 69 >> But the PC VGA card is a "kludge" by that defibition. It is a harware >> PERIPHERIAL that overcomes the limitation of PC's (no built in video). By >Please, I specifically pointed out that I was not saying a KLUDGE was >necessarily "bad". I was just trying to explain why I used the word. Ok.. I understand know .. but to the rest of the world KLUDGE has many more negative connotations than you seem to put on it. >> >Amiga. Notice I didn't say "programming", I said "GRAPHICS". I >> >DRAW pictures, I don't write neat programs to generate them or manipulate >> >them. >> >> Then please don't presume to know how the BB will affect software >> developers. > >Actually I am not presuming. I DO in fact do those things. >I said that I don't do programming so as not to confuse the issue. >I "DO" program quite a bit and have made a BUT -- when you start discussing the internals of something like this then you are in the realm of programming , and , by leaving that avenue of explanation out ARE confusing it. BTW -- Sorry my reply was such a flame but it really upset me when you sadi that you don't program and then started in about the programming., >Forgive my imperfections. But my statement still stands about Ditto. >OK, if all of the special BB stuff is ENTIRELY transparent to me as >an artist, ok. But what about this, is the IFF file going to be stored >as a standard 8-bitplane IFF ILBM that can be displayed on a SUN or PC >with absolutely no change on their part? This is a software question. The picture can be stored any whay you want , three field 24 bit images, 8 plane IFF (to lazy to do that math by the way -- how many planes would the BB REALLY need.) >plug it into my amiga, sit down, load DPaint 7 (BB compatible DPaint), >select 256 color mode, edit a picture EXACTLY as I used to only with >256 color registers, never have ANY contact in ANY way on the amiga >(paint program, screen dragging, ILBM reading into my animation >program, etc). Yes. That is certainly the way it was explained to me. >with magic cookies and such, save the picture, dnet the file to a sun There is no reason to save the MAGIC cookies if you dont want to. The program on the Amiga top maipulate the 8 plane picture will simply set up the cokies for the display when it SHOWS you the picture. No need to save it in the file at all. The >ONLY< reason that one would save the cookies with the file would be , a NORMAL >DISPLAY< program can show a picture with magic cookies imbedded and it will look right. >which reads standard 8-plane IFF ILBMS, and say "show picture" on the sun >and see the SAME picture as a perfectly normal 8-bitplane ILBM >exactly like any other that may have come from another non-amiga source? Yes. This is >SOFTWARE< and up to the developers of DPAINT. >BUT!!!!! I would STILL call it a KLUDGE. If the mode could be >completely transparent, and the pictures stored as standard 8-plane >ILBMS, then I may consider it an acceptable KLUDGE. Hmm... as I say ... by your definition all hard drives , video cards, most modems (the list goes on) are kludges so .. **************************************************************************** Everything I say is Copr. 1990, except the stuff I stole from someone else and the stuff I don't want responsibility for. Kenneth J. Jamieson: Xanadu Enterprises Inc. "Professional Amiga Software" UUCP: tron1@tronsbox.UUCP BEST PATH ---> uunet!tronsbox!tron1 Sysop, Romantic Encounters BBS - (201)759-8450 / (201)759-8568 ****************************************************************************