kent@swrinde.nde.swri.edu (Kent D. Polk) (06/07/89)
Ramblings About My Second Biggest Amiga Gripe: Printer support. (First Biggest - No 640*400 non-interlaced video - should have been in 1.3) Proposition : Make prt: able to decode IFF text and graphic info. One could then just copy such an IFF file to prt: for output. IFF Text which has color & font info would make such info available to the printer driver. Couldn't one do things like writing a Postscript printer driver which worked somewhat like ProScript et all, building bit-mapped raster fonts when no metric font is available, etc... (Postscript Printer driver should be able to identify a Postscript file & just pass it to par:/ser:, etc.). Or be able to use special printer fonts (Laserjet) and other printer-specific capabilities that aren't accessible now through prt:? Yeah, I know - "just buy xxx", but really, IFF has been around a while now, seems like the OS could recognize it. It just seems a shame to have such a powerful computer throttled by the lack of OS supported capabilities. When Commodore fails to support it's own standards, it's kind of hard for developers to justify it. Proposition : Extend GraphicDump to support dumping a portion of the screen to the printer or a file. Have a requestor window pop up when requested which asks for output designation, countdown timer gadget, & rubberband window for area to dump if selected (check out Sun's screendump utility - pretty nice). Question : Why isn't there a Laserwriter Printer driver - even a simple-minded one? Question : Why is the info about writing printer drivers a closely guarded secret? Ok, so Jim mentioned about the $20 Developer Package. My understanding was that this is essentially the same info available in the Libraries & Devices Manual. Sorry, but unless there is substantially more direction, the package would be useless - I don't need to write for an Epson look-alike. (Prowriter, Mitubishi g500?) ----------------------------------------------------------------- Please, no flames, I'm trying for constructive criticism and real information . CATS' responses on the net are what give me hope that this machine will be around for a while, so none is directed toward them. It seems clear that they want the machine to succeed. The question is: how does one try to convince Commodore management to direct funds towards needed, purposeful & consistent development? Towards this end, what do others see as needed goals that we can request (in unison)? I wish CATS personnel could give us a look at what they would like to develop, but can't due to budget/time constraints. Thanks, Kent Polk
cmcmanis%pepper@Sun.COM (Chuck McManis) (06/08/89)
In article <17161@swrinde.nde.swri.edu> (Kent D. Polk) writes: >Ramblings About My Second Biggest Amiga Gripe: Printer support. >(First Biggest - No 640*400 non-interlaced video - should have been in 1.3) First point, the current chip set can't support non-interlaced video, no matter what the software did. Sorry, you just can't do it. New chips, new video modes, and with 1.4, system support for those modes. >Proposition : Make prt: able to decode IFF text and graphic info. Is that what you really want, how about just a IFFPrint program that does this instead? Putting it into the device driver would make the device driver huge and difficult to load into memory when all you wanted to do was to copy "Hello World" to the printer. >Proposition : Extend GraphicDump to support dumping a portion of the > screen to the printer or a file. An excellent idea. Doable too. >Question : Why is the info about writing printer drivers a closely > guarded secret? Ok, so Jim mentioned about the $20 Developer > Package. My understanding was that this is essentially the > same info available in the Libraries & Devices Manual. Sorry, > but unless there is substantially more direction, the package > would be useless - I don't need to write for an Epson > look-alike. (Prowriter, Mitubishi g500?) It isn't, it just hasn't made it into easily accessible print yet. There was a talk on it at DevCon last year, a copy of which is available from CATS in the DevCon notes. Plus there are a couple of examples on various disks, and generally most things get answered here on the net and BIX. Not exactly a deep dark secret no? >Please, no flames, I'm trying for constructive criticism and real >information . Great, how about meeting them halfway. >The question is: how does one try to convince Commodore management to >direct funds towards needed, purposeful & consistent development? As far as I can tell this isn't possible. >Towards this end, what do others see as needed goals that we can >request (in unison)? I wish CATS personnel could give us a look at what >they would like to develop, but can't due to budget/time constraints. This is where you get a lot of bang for the buck at the Developers Conference, you can talk to them directly and make suggestions at the Beyond 1.4 talk or even over lunch or dinner. I know, it isn't cheap and not everyone can afford to go to San Francisco for a week. But hey, I'm going and have many of the same concerns that you and Ron Minnich brought up about printing on the Amiga so I will definitely be lobbying for improvements in that area. So even if you can't go, it isn't like you aren't heard :-). --Chuck McManis uucp: {anywhere}!sun!cmcmanis BIX: cmcmanis ARPAnet: cmcmanis@sun.com These opinions are my own and no one elses, but you knew that didn't you. "A most excellent barbarian ... Genghis Kahn!"
kent@swrinde.nde.swri.edu (Kent D. Polk) (06/09/89)
In article <108759@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> cmcmanis@sun.UUCP (Chuck McManis) writes: >In article <17161@swrinde.nde.swri.edu> (Kent D. Polk) writes: >>(First Biggest - No 640*400 non-interlaced video - should have been in 1.3) > >First point, the current chip set can't support non-interlaced video, no matter [...] Yes, I know about the hardware limitation, but considering Amiga owner discontent over 640*400 interlaced & the number of sales lost to the ST because of it's hires mode availability, I still say it should have been considered earlier (like for the introduction of the A500's & A2000's). Now I don't have official figures here, just that I know more than a few people who wanted an Amiga but bought an ST just for this reason. (Made the wrong choice, no?) This discontent has been since the earliest release of the Amiga also. While drawn to the Amiga from the first Byte article by multitasking, shared memory-resident libraries, a structured OS, & many other things, I must say that when I first saw 640 * 400 interlaced mode, I almost gagged. >>Proposition : Make prt: able to decode IFF text and graphic info. >Is that what you really want, how about just a IFFPrint program that does >this instead? What I want is to make more information available to the printer drivers and to make it easier for applications programs to output to the printer. Now maybe this isn't the proper way to do it, but it was a suggestion as opposed to simply griping about the poor support provided for printers. I just felt that a different tack than filter hacks was needed. It seems kinda silly to me that to get things like Postscript output, one has to use a separate filter & can't even use prt:. Not consistent. If this info was available, couldn't one make a 'simple' Postscript printer driver (not easy maybe, but doable)? Exactly how could one get font names for text (imbedded in the file)? Seems like IFF Text would be the way to do this. It has such info available (and without resorting to graphics output). This way one could print directly from something like ProWrite to a Postscript printer without having to save the file & bring up ProScript. One could also just 'type' the ProWrite IFF Text file to prt:. Much more convenient. Now, for fancy page positioning & such, a separate program would be the advisable method. Also, one could create fonts compatible with HP laserjet cartridges for screen display, & then the IFF text info specifying those font names would be sent to a new Laserjet printer driver, which would specify a cartridge font for the text instead of resorting to graphics output to get what you want. Seems like a major coup for Deskjet/Laserjet types to me! If the printer driver couldn't understand, then just print the text. Maybe there would have to be a different prt: device for this kind of stuff, but it sure would be a shame if it wasn't compatible with prt:. Maybe implement it like CON: & NEWCON: - a superset for those who need such capability. >>Proposition : Extend GraphicDump to support dumping a portion of the >> screen to the printer or a file. >An excellent idea. Doable too. Thanks, I though so too. Anyone want to sign up? >>Question : Why is the info about writing printer drivers a closely >> guarded secret? >It isn't, it just hasn't made it into easily accessible print yet. >There was a talk on it at DevCon last year, a copy of which is available >from CATS in the DevCon notes. Please, Please, Please, lets work towards getting such info into readily accessible print. Sorry if this is repetitive, but how does one get the DevCon notes when one is not a developer? re UseNet response: Yes, UseNet responses are invaluable. Problem is I don't feel I should ask a question until I have a greater understanding about a subject than I do about writing printer drivers (graphics mainly). (Why am I asking these questions then, right? :-) ) And here I am asking for more capabilities included in printer drivers - Masochistic, aren't I? >>Please, no flames, I'm trying for constructive criticism and real >>information . >Great, how about meeting them halfway. I don't quite understand. If you are talking about supporting the Amiga, sure I haven't written much software for it - nothing worth giving out certainly, but I have been responsible for the purchase of about 30 or 40 Amigas through other efforts - Such efforts, and much greater ones than these from others :-) are what has kept the machine alive, certainly not Commodore. I believe in the machine, just wish it was easier on people who don't have the option of dedicating their life to learning how to program this machine. (Working on it though). >>The question is: how does one try to convince Commodore management to >>direct funds towards needed, purposeful & consistent development? >As far as I can tell this isn't possible. Big Shame on Commodore. >>Towards this end, what do others see as needed goals that we can >>request (in unison)? >This is where you get a lot of bang for the buck at the Developers Conference, >[...] so I will definitely be lobbying for improvements in that area. >So even if you can't go, it isn't like you aren't heard :-). >--Chuck McManis Then I can't say how much I appreciate your voice at these functions. Maybe my current high level of frustration with a few aspects of the Amiga are not just self-erosive. Thanks for listening. BTW, I really do love this machine, just wish ... Kent Polk
richard@gryphon.COM (Richard Sexton) (06/10/89)
In article <17222@swrinde.nde.swri.edu> kent@swrinde.UUCP (Kent D. Polk) writes: > >Yes, I know about the hardware limitation, but considering Amiga owner >discontent over 640*400 interlaced & the number of sales lost to the ST >because of it's hires mode availability, Wait a minute, is this the Atari 620x200 noninterlaced "hires", the same thing that apple calls super-hi-res on the GS. Hrmph. Sounds like low res to me. >I must say that when I first saw 640 * 400 interlaced mode, I almost >gagged. 1) Turn the brightnes down. 2) Get a Sony monitor. The perception of flicker is dependent on many things, but brightness of the tube, and the amount and kind of light are the two greatest contributing factors to an undesirable amount of flicker. I used hi-res exclusivly, and barly notice any flicker. Of course I did 1) and 2) above. >What I want is to make more information available to the printer >drivers and to make it easier for applications programs to output to >the printer. Now maybe this isn't the proper way to do it, but it was a >suggestion as opposed to simply griping about the poor support provided >for printers. I just felt that a different tack than filter hacks was >needed. It seems kinda silly to me that to get things like Postscript >output, one has to use a separate filter & can't even use prt:. Not >consistent. > >If this info was available, couldn't one make a 'simple' Postscript >printer driver (not easy maybe, but doable)? Exactly how could one get >font names for text (imbedded in the file)? Seems like IFF Text would >be the way to do this. It has such info available (and without >resorting to graphics output). This way one could print directly from >something like ProWrite to a Postscript printer without having to save >the file & bring up ProScript. One could also just 'type' the ProWrite >IFF Text file to prt:. Much more convenient. Now, for fancy page >positioning & such, a separate program would be the advisable method. This sounds great. I have a Postscript printer too, and while I havn't really had any problems in this area, what you describe might be moderately useful. Let me know when you're done. -- ``The who's who of Milwaukee only eats Ugandan pineapples'' richard@gryphon.COM decwrl!gryphon!richard gryphon!richard@elroy.jpl.NASA.GOV
stephan@cup.portal.com (Stephen Derek Schaem) (06/11/89)
Well the idea could be; From CBM to make a disk based iff library that will serve the printer driver, if the library is not on disk well the option wont be available. I think a ILBM or even IFF library is needed(one that is acepted as standart) But from the latest source by CBM I wish that idea never get to them!:-) I coulnd live with programs loading IFF 1000% slower than *normal*. But from what I see a shared iff library is defectly needed and alot of utilities are *waiting* for it.
kent@swrinde.nde.swri.edu (Kent D. Polk) (06/12/89)
In article <16615@gryphon.COM> richard@gryphon.COM (Richard Sexton) writes: >In article <17222@swrinde.nde.swri.edu> kent@swrinde.UUCP (Kent D. Polk) writes: >> >>Yes, I know about the hardware limitation, but considering Amiga owner >>discontent over 640*400 interlaced & the number of sales lost to the ST >>because of it's hires mode availability, > >Wait a minute, is this the Atari 620x200 noninterlaced "hires", >the same thing that apple calls super-hi-res on the GS. Now maybe I'm wrong here, been a while, but it used a monochrome monitor and sure looked hires. Displayed 80* ~50 text. Greyscale looked fine also. It was the only thing about the ST that I envied. >1) Turn the brightnes down. > >2) Get a Sony monitor. > >The perception of flicker is dependent on many things, but brightness >of the tube, and the amount and kind of light are the two greatest >contributing factors to an undesirable amount of flicker. > >I used hi-res exclusivly, and barly notice any flicker. Of course >I did 1) and 2) above. I have to work in an office with a large flickering fluoresent light. I have a 1080 monitor & colors are so washed out to keep flicker down that it looks really sick. I have things set so they are bearable to me. Anyone else who comes in my office says "How can you watch that thing? It's gonna ruin your eyes." It's a matter of image, partially. It contributes to the 'Game machine' image that the Amiga is straddled with. It kinda gets under my skin when I work so hard to build up its rightful capabilities to others, only to be destroyed by this stupid display. And no, I can't put a flickerfixer on it, its an A500. And no, I'm not gonna resort to a 640*200 display to work in. Now about that Sony monitor... I'm hearing conflicting reports about what the Sony does without a deinterlacer board. Every report I've heard states that the display flickers more than a 1080 does. If this isn't true, please tell me what model Sony you use & how it is connected. I'll do my best to try one. I'm just saying that with as many complaints about the 640*400 display as there have always been, I believe that Commodore should have looked into fixing it much sooner. >>What I want is to make more information available to the printer >>drivers and to make it easier for applications programs to output to >>the printer. [...] > >This sounds great. I have a Postscript printer too, and while I >havn't really had any problems in this area, what you describe >might be moderately useful. This could be VERY useful for those with Laserjet & Deskjet printers, and VERY useful to me with the Postscript connected to our Sun network. This section was not a complaint, I am responding to all the other complaints I keep seeing about poor printer support with a possible solution. You see, I believe in a balance of ideas. I don't think I should post a complaint (video) without posing a truly plausible solution for a problem. I appreciate the response. >Let me know when you're done. I'd love to try & see how far I could get, but to be useful, it would have to be a superset of PRT: & Commodore kinda has a lock on that device. :^) Printer drivers would have to be upgraded also. >-- > ``The who's who of Milwaukee only eats Ugandan pineapples'' >richard@gryphon.COM decwrl!gryphon!richard gryphon!richard@elroy.jpl.NASA.GOV Thanks much, Kent Polk
sparks@corpane.UUCP (John Sparks) (06/12/89)
In article <16615@gryphon.COM> richard@gryphon.COM (Richard Sexton) writes: >In article <17222@swrinde.nde.swri.edu> kent@swrinde.UUCP (Kent D. Polk) writes: >> >>discontent over 640*400 interlaced & the number of sales lost to the ST >>because of it's hires mode availability, > >Wait a minute, is this the Atari 620x200 noninterlaced "hires", >the same thing that apple calls super-hi-res on the GS. > No. I believe he is referring to the Atari ST 640x400 MONOCHROME mode. You know.., the one you have to buy a SEPARATE monitor to use?? pretty brain dead idea if you ask me. That was one of the main reasons I picked Amiga over the ST: 640x400 in COLOR vs. Monochrome and I could use one monitor for all of the graphics modes even though I did have to put up with interlace. -- John Sparks | {rutgers|uunet}!ukma!corpane!sparks | D.I.S.K. 24hrs 1200bps ||||||||||||||| sparks@corpane.UUCP | 502/968-5401 thru -5406 I want to live forever or die in the attempt.
farren@well.UUCP (Mike Farren) (06/13/89)
In article <17328@swrinde.nde.swri.edu> kent@swrinde.UUCP (Kent D. Polk) writes: >Now maybe I'm wrong here, been a while, but it used a monochrome >monitor and sure looked hires. Displayed 80* ~50 text. Greyscale >looked fine also. It was the only thing about the ST that I envied. You're right in that the mono display is hires, 640 X 400. You're wrong in that there is no grey scale, only dithered shading. >Now about that Sony monitor... I'm hearing conflicting reports about >what the Sony does without a deinterlacer board. I've had a KV1311CR for almost four years. Flicker is not non-existant, but IS well within my tolerance levels. MUCH better than a 1080. >I'm just saying that with as many complaints about the 640*400 display >as there have always been, I believe that Commodore should have looked >into fixing it much sooner. "Fix" it? It ain't broken! There are a lot of good reasons for the interlaced display, including higher performance and strict NTSC compatibility. It's a FEATURE. Seriously! -- Mike Farren uucp: well!farren
yuan@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu (Yuan 'Hacker' Chang) (06/14/89)
In article <17328@swrinde.nde.swri.edu> kent@swrinde.UUCP (Kent D. Polk) writes: -In article <16615@gryphon.COM> richard@gryphon.COM (Richard Sexton) writes: - ->Wait a minute, is this the Atari 620x200 noninterlaced "hires", ->the same thing that apple calls super-hi-res on the GS. - -Now maybe I'm wrong here, been a while, but it used a monochrome -monitor and sure looked hires. Displayed 80* ~50 text. Greyscale -looked fine also. It was the only thing about the ST that I envied. I don't see what the problem is. The ST uses a seperate monochrome monitor to get non-interlaced hi-res (640 x 400) without flicker. If that's an acceptable solution for you (that is, having to buy a seperate monitor to use hi-res), go buy out and buy a long-persistence monochrome monitor (either the NEC Multisync GS or any NTSC Composite). -I have to work in an office with a large flickering fluoresent light. I -have a 1080 monitor & colors are so washed out to keep flicker down -that it looks really sick. I have things set so they are bearable to -me. Anyone else who comes in my office says "How can you watch that -thing? It's gonna ruin your eyes." I wondered if the flicker at 60Hz can trigger epileptic seizure? 8( Anyway, the 1080 isn't particularly resistant to glare, and the tube's surface is not dark either. Something that enhances the contrast (like a glare filter) will help somewhat. If all else fails, an umbrella over your cubicle will do that job (although I can't say that your boss will like the idea 8). -I'm just saying that with as many complaints about the 640*400 display -as there have always been, I believe that Commodore should have looked -into fixing it much sooner. Ditto. -- Yuan Chang "What can go wrong, did" UUCP: {uunet,ucbvax,dcdwest}!ucsd!nosc!uhccux!yuan ARPA: uhccux!yuan@nosc.MIL "Wouldn't you like to INTERNET: yuan@uhccux.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu be an _A_m_i_g_o_i_d too?!?"