[comp.sys.amiga] Tektronix 41xx

papa@uscacsc.UUCP (Marco Papa) (08/20/87)

In article <1245@gryphon.CTS.COM>, richard@gryphon.CTS.COM (Richard Sexton)
writes:

>In article <3621@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu> walton@tybalt.caltech.edu (Steve Walton) writes:
>>In article <1052@vu-vlsi.UUCP>, Wilson Cheung writes:
>>>                  Aegis Diga! 1.0  
>>>tektronix terminal is one of Diga!'s premier features.
>>
>>It should be emphasized again that it emulates a *4010*, not a 4014.
>>Really, it only has the MOVE and DRAW functions.  

If you need NOW a TEK4014 fo the Amiga it has been available, as part of
A-Talk Plus, since February.  It is a COMPLETE emulation of the Tek 4014,
including margins, 4 tek-type fonts, GIN processing, plus some extra goodies
like zoom and pan on a 1024x780 superbitmap, not present on a "real" 
Tektronix 4014.

>>What the world
>>*really* needs is a 4125 emulator!!
>>    Steve Walton, guest as walton@tybalt.caltech.edu

>Ahem. A short bit a history here to folks who dont use Tek terminals
>will know what I'm talking about. First there was a 4010 (Move, Draw)
>then there came the 4014. These were both stroke writers (ie. NOT raster
>devices.) Then came a whole slew of oddball terminals untill things
>really settled - 4111, 4112, 4113, 4114, 4114B, 4115 etc. I didnt see
>any of those, they are merely computer lore to me. What I have (and
>am typing on now) is a 4107 - 640 x 480 x 4 planes. Sounds like a
>good candidate for an amiga emulation so far right ? Well, this damn
>terminal has 3 planes for 'text overlay' ie, I can type, this without
>messing up the graphic on the screen. So we need 7 planes to emulate
>the (low end) 4107 series (now the 42xx series)

Funny that you think of the 4107 (or 4207) a low-end graphics terminal:
it is priced at more than $2000! In reality, the low end is the Tek 4105
which gives you a little less resolution (480x360), 3 bitplanes for graphics
and 3 bitplanes for text, minus support of Surfaces and Zoom/Pan (which
is included in the Tek 4107).  The Tek 4105 can be COMPLETELY emulated
on an Amiga.  This is what we have just been doing and have found no
area that cannot be emulated (including overlaying text over graphics, see
later).  Note that ALL commercial CAD programs for the Tek 41xx series do
support the 4105, since it is the best selling terminal (since it is also
the cheapest one).  Also most Hardware Tek 41xx clones, emulate the 4105.
The 4107 COULD be emulated entirely, save for the 1 extra bitplane that it
is not available for the Amiga.  The 480 vertical resolution can be achieved
on the Amiga using overscan (our Tek4014 emulator does just that).

And consider that the Amiga gives you far more possibilities than say can
be done using an IBM PC.  Graphpoint has been selling  Tek 4105, 4107, and
4115 emulator for the PC, running on things like the CGA (4 colors!!!), 
EGA (16 colors), or MUCH expensive 3rd party boards that cost more than the
Amiga itself.  Tgraph sales hurt Tektronix so much that they bought the rights
to the TGRAPH software and now Tektronix is selling TGRAPH together with
a TMS34010-based PC board, in direct competition with their own hardware.
The Amiga is the first machine on which one can do things like these
cheaply without having to buy fancy graphics adapters.  And I can tell
you that the Amiga blitter is really FAST at the things that are needed:
line drawing and area-filling.

>The 4125. Ahhh, the big daddy of graphic terminals. 1280 x 1024 x 8
>with 7 (I think) alphatext overlay planes. Now, we can always scale
>oe window to get the (apparent) resolution, but that 15 plane requirement
>is a killer.

Sure, but again TGRAPH-15 runs in full emulation only on boards whose
price is >$2000.  If you need that, get an Amiga-2000, TGRAPH-15, and
the Tektronix TMS34010-base board (when you sum up the price of the
various items, you'll see where you get).

>Plus have you seen the commands ? Gawd, they go on forever; there are
>sooo many. And while they seem pretty trivial, they are a bear to implement.
>(Pixel copy, hey no problem, oh, raster ops, oh, mirrored in X, oh, 
>mirrored in y, oh, mirrored in X and Y in place nondestructive copy
>...and on and on)

Again, there can be various levels of emulation.  Most programs do not use
PIXEL COPY for example, since it is non-portable accross different Tek
terminals, and its use is discouraged in the Tek manuals themselves.

>And while Tektronix makes GREAT terminals, wonderful CRT's (nicest 
>phosphors on the block) their manulas suck dead bunnies through a
>straw. I have them all from the 4014 to 412x, and yes, they do get 
>better as years go by, they are still awfull. Sure thay tell you
>what the command does, real briefly, they dont tell you in very
>much detail, and you end up having to write a program to try it on
>a real Tek terminal to see what it REALLY does.

I disagree.  We have implemented our Tek4014 just from the manuals and
a few test plots.  And apart from some "undocumented" features, everything
worked as the manual says.  The "undocumented" features were known to
most programmers, which were actually using them creating their plots.
I have found both the Tek4105 and the Tek4107 manuals very complete and
thorough.  I ported their FORTRAN examples to C in 30 min, and they
worked right the first time.  What one needs is a good set of plot
examples from some "commercial" packages (we got DISSPLA, ANVIL, GDS,
TEMPLATE, stuff from Precision Visuals, and some others), to see
how they actually use the command set.

>I can see no real solution to this 'alphatext overlay' problem
>on displays that just dont have the requisite number of bitplanes.
>I have seen some solutions, for example The Bristol Group sells
>a 4125 emulator for the Sun, but they do the dialog area (alphatext
>overlay) in a seperate window, which on the face of it appears to
>be a good idea, BUT, people often make menus that have graphics,
>alphatext and graphics text. How good is your menu going to look
>when 1/3 of it is in another window. No, you shouldnt do this,
>but the idea is to support existing Tek applications, and, by
>god, thats what existing Tek applications do.

Wrong!  Here the Amiga has a real adavantage over the IBM PC
emulations.  The "great" people that designed the Amiga put in a
feature whose purpose was (and is) maily for games. It is called
"Dual-Playfield".  One of the dual-playfield modes allows two rasters
of 3-bitplanes each.  This is perfect for what the 4105 needs. 3 bitplanes
can be used for "background" graphics, and 3 for foreground text, with text 
overlayed over graphics in "transparent" mode.  That is, text can scroll
over the graphics maintaing it intact.  For a 4107, I would just lose the
extra bitplane, and limit the text colors to 8 instead of 16 (unless one
is crazy and tries to use HALF-BRITE mode. I don't know if it can be done). 

>So, sad but true, the 4014 is probably the only Tek terminal a
>'bare' amiga can do.

Again I disagree.  FULL emualtion of TEK 4105 is real and it is
being done, and CLOSE emulation of TEK 4107 is also possible.

>Plus, what do you do about the bugs in the tek terminals ? Do you emulate
>them or fix em. :-)

You emulate them, since most commercial packages assume and use them.

>Richard Sexton
>INTERNET:     richard@gryphon.CTS.COM
>UUCP:         {akgua, hplabs!hp-sdd, sdcsvax, ihnp4, nosc}!crash!gryphon!richard


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Marco Papa            3175 S. Hoover St., Ste. 275            (213)669-1497
                         Los Angeles, CA 90007           USC: (213)743-3752
                             F E L S I N A
Now working for                 :::::::                           BIX: papa
But in no way                   ::   ::
Officially representing         :::::::              ...!oberon!pollux!papa
                            S O F T W A R E                papa@cse.usc.edu
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

richard@gryphon.CTS.COM (Richard Sexton) (08/23/87)

In article <260@uscacsc.UUCP> papa@pollux.UUCP (Marco Papa) writes:
>
>Funny that you think of the 4107 (or 4207) a low-end graphics terminal:
>it is priced at more than $2000!

$2395. But whose counting. Ours cost a *lot* more than this, we've had it 
a while.

> In reality, the low end is the Tek 4105
>which gives you a little less resolution (480x360), 3 bitplanes for graphics
>and 3 bitplanes for text, minus support of Surfaces and Zoom/Pan (which
>is included in the Tek 4107).  The Tek 4105 can be COMPLETELY emulated

Aww, nuts, I forgot about this one. We have all these Tek manuals at
work, and the 4107 is the lowest we have. Oops. Dont know why I forgot,
I used a C.Itoh clone of this terminal once.

>Again, there can be various levels of emulation.  Most programs do not use
>PIXEL COPY for example, since it is non-portable accross different Tek
>terminals, and its use is discouraged in the Tek manuals themselves.

Customer uses this feature. Had to include it. Unless I'm mistaken
its on all terminals made after the 4107 (ie 412x series). Good luck
to Tek for discouraging it. People are using it. Shoot, Tek still
includes commands like 'SET_4014_ALPHATEXT_SIZE' to let old 4014
code work properlt on its high end terminals. Blitting is so
important these days, that I'd venture we'll see PIXEL_COPY on 
every subsequent Tek terminal.

This was a fun one to implement, much moreso than DELETE_SEGMENT or
prompt mode or something. It was kinda neat playing detective figuring
out that the terminal was doing with all these wierd permutations and
combinations. Interesting thing, but, as you point out, most 
comtemporary hardware used to emulate Tek terminals often
has MUCH higher performence than the original Tek. I have a
pixel copy test which takes a good 15 minutes to do on a 4107, but
runs in less than a minute under emulation on an apollo DN660.

I've programmed the same sequence on the Amiga using 'The Director' from
the Right Answers Group, and its still faster yet. About 2 to 3 times
faster.

Of course the poor old 4107 has an 8086 with no fancy graphics
hardware.

>>much detail, and you end up having to write a program to try it on
>>a real Tek terminal to see what it REALLY does.
>
>I disagree.  We have implemented our Tek4014 just from the manuals and
>a few test plots. 

Well, sure, the 4014 is pretty straight forward. Its the little side effects
of the more complex commands sets that arn't documented that get you. I'd
hate to try to knock off a 4129 without actually having one. *Much* more
complex.

> And apart from some "undocumented" features, everything
                       ^^^^^^^^^^^^  ^^^^^^^^
                            |           |
                            |           +------ I'm not a bug I'm a ...
                            |
                            +-- Yup, this is what I'm yakking about.


>I have found both the Tek4105 and the Tek4107 manuals very complete and
>thorough.

Yes, I'll have to admit,the 4107 (which is the newest of all mine) is the best
of all the tek manuals I have. They have been steadidly been getting
better over the years.

>I ported their FORTRAN examples to C in 30 min, and they
>worked right the first time.

I'm glad. One of the examples I tried was :

DEFINE_SEGMENT #1 as some shape. Position at (0, 0).
SET_SEGMENET_POSITION to (1000, 0)
(This 'moves' the shape to (1000, 0))

Fine, that worked.

When I changed the example to 

for (i = 0; i < 10; i)
	{
	SET_SEGMENT_POSITION (i*400, i*400)
	}

it did not move the segment across the screen in a diagonal, rather, 
it ignored the Y component.

Teks official response was: "Well, yes it should work, and indeed does on
our 4129 here. We dont have a 4107, and besides you shouldnt do that, although
technically its legal, you are supposed to do that other ways". Amusing.

>What one needs is a good set of plot
>examples from some "commercial" packages (we got DISSPLA, ANVIL, GDS,
>TEMPLATE, stuff from Precision Visuals, and some others), to see
>how they actually use the command set.

I dont have any tek output from them, the ones I have are pretty funky. The
one I'm working with now is in Italian, has lots of text and seems to go
on for about 30K doing:

ENTER_ALPHA_MODE
ENTER_VECTOR_MODE
SET_4014_ALPHATEXT_SIZE 1
SET_4014_ALPHATEXT_SIZE 0

in the middle. Brain damaged,

>>I can see no real solution to this 'alphatext overlay' problem
>
>Wrong!  Here the Amiga has a real adavantage over the IBM PC
>emulations.  The "great" people that designed the Amiga put in a
>feature whose purpose was (and is) maily for games. It is called
>"Dual-Playfield".  One of the dual-playfield modes allows two rasters

Yeah, your right, you can do a decent 4105 on an amiga with this. The
concession of having 1 less bitplane for alphatext overlay is the
least offensive I've seen. Having fewer text colors isn't going to
kill anybody, compared to placing the alphatext ONTO the the graphics
planes (and then scrolling it) (apollo) or seperate window (sun).

>>So, sad but true, the 4014 is probably the only Tek terminal a
>>'bare' amiga can do.
>
>Again I disagree.  FULL emualtion of TEK 4105 is real and it is
>being done, and CLOSE emulation of TEK 4107 is also possible.

Agreed. Although the 4107 may not be close enough for some customers.
Some of these swine expect 100% emulation,

Now, if somebody were to come out with a 12 plane 1280 x 1024 video
card, we could really get fancy. 4125, (basic graphics), 4126 (stereo 3D)
4128 (3D wireframe) and 4129 (Shaded 2D, light sources etc.) Note that the
4129 is 15 or 30K.

>>Plus, what do you do about the bugs in the tek terminals ? Do you emulate
>>them or fix em. :-)
>
>You emulate them, since most commercial packages assume and use them.

If you emulate the bug where it hangs up the modem when you clear a screen
where DABUFFER = 1000 and hardware handshaking is selected, I'll
break your kneecaps. :-)

Also, I see no point to emulate the SET_SEGMENT_POSITION bug. In fact
I can't think or any that are really usefull. Perhaps you could Email
me some?

>Marco Papa            3175 S. Hoover St., Ste. 275            (213)669-1497
-- 
Richard Sexton
INTERNET:     richard@gryphon.CTS.COM
UUCP:         {akgua, hplabs!hp-sdd, sdcsvax, ihnp4, nosc}!crash!gryphon!richard

"It's too dark to put the key in my ignition..."