Rminnich@dewey.udel.EDU (12/05/86)
The trouble with the Amiga is simple. I still, after almost a year now, can not point out a set of programs to someone that will let them work on the Amiga as well as they can on a Mac. Can anyone? Can I run TextCraft and paste in a DeluxePaint image from the clipboard? Or a spreadsheet? Look at how long it takes DPaint just to start up. And, when I am done, the output looks just plain lousy. One of the major complaints on a paper I submitted was the quality of the illustrations, done on an Amiga. And yes, i have LoadILBM and I have modified it to use the rast port dump. I have played with all the parameters. It still looks bad. Multitasking is wonderful. How many Amiga products really support it well? DeluxePaint for one takes up the whole machine. TextCraft used to. A lot of the early software showed (to me, anyway) that many DEVELOPERS did not understand multi-tasking. Sure, there are some really terrific programs, (InfoMinder comes to mind) but people are going to judge an Amiga by the Mac standard. And it fails. People just do not understand that the machine is different and better in most ways. They only understand that it will not do what a Mac has done since Jan. 1984. Things are looking up now that everyone talks IFF but there STILL IS NO WAY TO GET TO A CLIPBOARD! I wish I had the time to write this stuff; so does everybody. It ought to be there now, however! ron
ralph@mit-atrp.UUCP (Amiga-Man) (12/06/86)
In article <819@ulowell.UUCP> Rminnich@dewey.udel.EDU writes: >The trouble with the Amiga is simple. I still, after almost a year .... >Or a spreadsheet? Look at how long it takes DPaint just to start up. >And, when I am done, the output looks just plain lousy. >One of the major complaints on a paper I submitted was the quality >of the illustrations, done on an Amiga. And yes, i have LoadILBM and >I have modified it to use the rast port dump. I have played with >all the parameters. It still looks bad. I have been using the "screendump" program provided by C. Scheppner(sp?) of CBM, and by setting the correct parameters I get graphic dumps from my IBM(oooo...) Proprinter(which I wrote my own driver for) which are as good as that printer can perform and match up to any MAC output I've seen. The trick was essentially working with 1-bit plane images (i.e. black and white) and setting the parameters so the Amiga doesn't try to dither the pixels, but instead prints them 1 to 1. Send me mail if you need more information. >Multitasking is wonderful. How many Amiga products really support it >well? DeluxePaint for one takes up the whole machine. TextCraft used to. Well, it turns out that DPaint doesn't really take up the whole machine. If you run it in 1-bit plane, 640x400, there's enough room in the machine to actually run the screendumper(mentioned above) at the same time. I've even run some CLI commands. So the bottom line here is with some amount of memory expansion (say 512K more) things would be looking up. You have to boot the system from your normal workbench (with no fancy stuff) and then "cd" to the DPaint disk and start it up that way. However, I agree that thing takes WAY TOO LONG to come up. Plus....why does EA WASTE MY TIME putting up the pretty paint can ? Just get to the action OK. We all know it wastes time reading in that IFF file. Make it so I can shut it off. Long live IFF ! I hear that the standard is finding followers on other types of PC's.... Developers take note: capatibility of files is VERY IMPORTANT !!!! (as if anyone doubted). I use my Amiga to do all my work now, thesis processing, numerical analysis plotting, simple text manipulation, etc etc etc. I did have to write a few of my own programs (like the plotting and 3-D stuff) but I'm sure glad I have an Amiga here when every other day our Mainframe either crashes or issues smoke. I canned the vt100 that used to be on my desk. Why use it when I can multitask and get other work done on the Amiga while I'm waiting for the mainframe to get stuff done (a trusty crusty PDP 11/45). I also carry my Amiga home with me and just keep on getting stuff done. All I need is a LCD flat screen 640x400 with a composite video input, so then the Amiga, its keyboard and the flat screen will all fit in a tidy suitcase. Talk about the ultimate portable..(ok...luggable). (Make that a color LCD while you're at it...). There's no substitute for having your own Amiga to develop tools on. When I graduate, my future employer not only gets me, but get me with all the analysis and graphics tools I created to make me work better. Bank on the fact that I'll probably make them buy me an Amiga 2000 for my office. This is the future of the engineer and scientist ! I'm psyched ! Oh Commodore...if you only seeded Amigas here at MIT like apple and ibm do, things would really get rolling..... . MIT sells poor unsuspecting freshmen IBM's and Apples at special discount prices without even informing them of the Amiga and its capability......wanna work out a deal ???? Our Amiga group here is already 90 strong, with no incentives at all. Ralph, A Gradual Student at MIT
lyles@tybalt.caltech.edu (Lyle N. Scheer) (12/07/86)
In article <545@mit-amt.MEDIA.MIT.EDU> ralph@ATRP.MEDIA.MIT.EDU (Amiga-Man) writes: > >Oh Commodore...if you only seeded Amigas here at MIT like apple and ibm do, >things would really get rolling..... . MIT sells poor unsuspecting >freshmen IBM's and Apples at special discount prices without even informing >them of the Amiga and its capability......wanna work out a deal ???? >Our Amiga group here is already 90 strong, with no incentives at all. > > Ralph, > A Gradual Student at MIT Yes! Yes! Commodore, get your act together. The largest groups of Amiga owners I have seen have been college students. Get an educational discount system going(go for the high schools as well). It would do more for the Amiga than anything else I know. Wonko the Sane (you call this SANE??) Disclaimer: I am totally irresponsible. So shoot me then.
brent@well.UUCP (Brent Southard) (12/08/86)
eat me, lineeater. Wrong on at least two points: DeluxePaint DOES NOT tie up the machine. There is a Clipboard device, it just hasn't been implemented yet by many developers. This is a shame, but things are changing. brent
dickow@ui3.UUCP (12/08/86)
on...keep the faith. The Mac took a while to get going too, remember. There is nothing inherent in the Amiga that will prevent the release of equally flexible software. Besides, I wouldn't have a Mac based on two important factors: High price and no color. The Mac don't load too fast neither, by gum.
miner@ulowell.UUCP (Richard Miner) (12/08/86)
In article <1292@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu> (Lyle N. Scheer) writes: >In article <545@mit-amt.MEDIA.MIT.EDU> (Amiga-Man) writes: >> >>Oh Commodore...if you only seeded Amigas here at MIT like apple and ibm do, >>things would really get rolling..... . >>Our Amiga group here is already 90 strong, with no incentives at all. >> Ralph, A Gradual Student at MIT >Yes! Yes! Commodore, get your act together. The largest groups of Amiga >owners I have seen have been college students. Get an educational discount >system going(go for the high schools as well). > Wonko the Sane (you call this SANE??) I third the motion for educational support, and have talk to Commodore about it. They are planning on starting educational support, lets hope that it happens soon. If you want to help things out at your local Univerities, one thing that you should probably do is contact both your University bookstore and your local Amiga Distributor (not dealer). Have the distributor contact the book store about becoming an Amiga dealer. I was down at Chapel Hill almost a year ago and they had done this. I just recently mentioned it to our local distributor, they seemed like the thought never entered their mind! I could not even begin to imagine how many Amigas they would sell if if they could set up all the local NE Schools as dealers. It's not only one of the best machines for students, but with ethernet and NFS now available, set up a lab with a FileServer and 10 Amigas and you save $100,000. Anyone thinking of porting Sun-NeWs? How about you 90 MIT hackers porting X-Windows? -- Rich Miner ...!wanginst!ulowell!miner University of Lowell, Comp Sci Dept (617) 452-5000 x2693 HAL hears the 9000 series is not selling. "Please explain Dave. Why aren't HAL's selling?" Bowman hesitates. "You aren't Amiga compatible."
bj@well.UUCP (Jim Becker) (12/09/86)
This posting really hits home.. I find that this is really the truth of the matter in the use of the machine. Where are all the great applications that can be developed ?? I know that a lot of you are "real busy" but dread that a lot of it is games.. I still have my Mac Plus, and the only thing that I use it for is MacWrite, because nothing on the Amiga supports text and graphics and fonts. Why ? The IIGS already has these packages announced and reviewed in InfoWorld. I would be interested in putting together a set of information about those persons doing real work on the Amiga, and distribute the projects and the people names on Public domain disks. It is really frustrating to see all the enthusiasum for the Amiga but still nothing that can really impress people as much as the programs for the Amiga should be able to.. Sorry for this flame, I guess I have seen too much work go into the Amiga without it going where it should - to the moon. If there is interest in getting together a list of all the people doing work post me mail. I can put it together in InfoMinder format and make it available to everybody. Thanks. -Jim Becker Terrapin Software
conte@uicsrd.CSRD.UIUC.EDU (12/09/86)
> The trouble with the Amiga is simple. I still, after almost a year > now, can not point out a set of programs to someone that will > let them work on the Amiga as well as they can on a Mac. Can anyone? First, you are comparing apples and oranges :-). As you said, after almost a year... Apple... etc. Give the Amiga time. I see two adds in the Jan/Feb Amigaworld that look promising for Mac-alike word processing. (Check out ProWrite (p. 13) and PageSetter (p. 79)). > One of the major complaints on a paper I submitted was the quality > of the illustrations, done on an Amiga. And yes, i have LoadILBM and > I have modified it to use the rast port dump. I have played with > all the parameters. It still looks bad. Hang in there. The Mac took a while too. You chose to be different, you bought newer technology (Amiga vs. Mac) and now you have to live with the growing pains of that technology. There is no doubt the power is there in the Amiga, there is no doubt developers want to provide Amiga owners with the same or better features as Mac's. Hold out, you did the Right Thing. > Multitasking is wonderful. How many Amiga products really support it > well? DeluxePaint for one takes up the whole machine. TextCraft used to. > A lot of the early software showed (to me, anyway) that many > DEVELOPERS did not understand multi-tasking. TextCraft is the strangest program I have ever seen. It appears that its authors didn't want to use the Intuition interface at all and just brewed their own. That's not so great, considering it was one of the first programs out for the machine. A lot of the bugs I hear about seem to say that it was developed without any idea what the software for the machine would be like. My advice: throw it out. > Sure, there are some really terrific programs, (InfoMinder comes > to mind) but people are going to judge an Amiga by the Mac standard. > And it fails. People just do not understand that the machine is different > and better in most ways. They only understand that it will not do what > a Mac has done since Jan. 1984. ...and do more and less. People are going to have to realize that the Amiga is not another Mac. They don't seem to compare the IBM to the Mac and say, "ho hum, guess I'll buy a Macintosh." The Amiga is an Amiga. It can do many Mac-like things, it can do many IBM things (SideCar/Transformer). It can also do Amiga things. They are starting to understand it's different. You bought your machine just a little after mine, and we both knew the machine was still in its development stage. Now it is `giving birth,' and gaining mass appeal, hang in there. Tom Conte University of Illinois uucp: {ihnp4,seismo,pur-ee,convex}!uiucdcs!uicsrd!conte arpanet: conte%uicsrd@a.cs.uiuc.edu or conte@huey.udel.edu csnet: conte%uicsrd@uiuc.csnet usnail: 208 W. Oregon, Urbana, IL 61801 bitnet: conte@uicsrd.csrd.uiuc.edu
sdl@linus.UUCP (12/10/86)
> [The Amiga is] not only one of the best machines for students, but > with ethernet and NFS now available, set up a lab with a FileServer > and 10 Amigas and you save $100,000. Anyone thinking of porting > Sun-NeWs? My "well-informed sources" have informed me that Sun-NEWS *is* to be supported on the Amiga (will post more info as soon as I can). For those who aren't familiar with it, Sun-NEWS is Sun's new system for standardized, networkable remote windowing; uses Postscript; very nice overall. With Sun-NEWS on the Amiga, you could network an Amiga to a Sun workstation, then be able to remotely login to the Sun from your Amiga, and have SunWindows properly displayed on the Amiga. Steven Litvintchouk MITRE Corporation Burlington Road Bedford, MA 01730 Fone: (617)271-7753 ARPA: sdl@mitre-bedford UUCP: ...{cbosgd,decvax,genrad,ll-xn,philabs,security,utzoo}!linus!sdl
wagner@utcs.UUCP (12/10/86)
In article <2179@well.UUCP> bj@well.UUCP (Jim Becker) writes: > > > ?? I know that a lot of you are "real busy" but >dread that a lot of it is games.. I don't think this is true. I expect most of the software development for the Amiga at this point is elsewhere than games. > >I still have my Mac Plus, and the only thing that I use it for is MacWrite, >because nothing on the Amiga supports text and graphics and fonts. Why ? Why do you think that nothing supports text and graphics? Have you seen PageSetter? I saw it at the Toronto 'World of Commodore' show, and bought it. Allows you to do everything that the Mac PageMaker program did, according to a friend who has used the PageMaker. Michael
mjw@f.gp.cs.cmu.edu (Michael Witbrock) (12/13/86)
In article <545@mit-amt.MEDIA.MIT.EDU> ralph@ATRP.MEDIA.MIT.EDU (Amiga-Man) writes: >Oh Commodore...if you only seeded Amigas here at MIT like apple and ibm do, >things would really get rolling..... . MIT sells poor unsuspecting >freshmen IBM's and Apples at special discount prices without even informing >them of the Amiga and its capability......wanna work out a deal ???? >Our Amiga group here is already 90 strong, with no incentives at all. > > Ralph, > A Gradual Student at MIT I couldn't agree more. Here at CMU, apple and IBM sell their _things_ (I need a @distain() text attribute) at ridiculously low prices. Hence, there are still people here that think that IBM PCs (and RTs) are pretty neat ideas. There are rooms and rooms and rooms and rooms of macintoshes. Despite this, the people who are interested in music and art are getting Amigas on grants... If commodore started giving away amigas at really cheap prices at the computer store (say 500-800$) lots and lots and lots of people would buy them. These people can hack, boy can they. Lots of nice software would appear. Lots of people would get Amigas recommended to them. Amigas would live forever and conquer the world .... Kommodore Kommodore uber alles.. ...I really do think that if Commodore sold discounted Amigas at a few select places (CMU, MIT, Stanford, UCB might be a good start) they would be more than repaid in increased quality software, and increased market penetration when we leave to go and decide computer buying policies for schools, universities and industry. ---- I'm impartial, I already got one. I waited 5 years (after my superboardII (bless its little cotton socks)) to buy a computer I could respect. Amiga was the first one that appeared. michael witbrock - another gradual student. -------- no sig file. Heaven forbid that I should share any opinions with CM.
keithd@cadovax.UUCP (Keith Doyle) (12/13/86)
In article <2179@well.UUCP> bj@well.UUCP (Jim Becker) writes: >I still have my Mac Plus, and the only thing that I use it for is MacWrite, >because nothing on the Amiga supports text and graphics and fonts. Why ? >The IIGS already has these packages announced and reviewed in InfoWorld. This bring up a point that some of the *gang* around here have been wondering about. I personally don't use word processors much, and I don't even use PRINTERs much, as I like most of my output in sound or video. BUT, periodically I'd like to use something like DPaint to print out text using various fonts and the like. I've found it difficult, or rather virtually impossible to get DPaint to print stuff out that includes text fonts cleanly. I'm using a Canon 1080a color ink jet, with a driver I found on Compu$erve. I know DPaint II seems to be better at it, but I'd like to know, where is the problem. Can the printer driver correct this better, or is it a DPaint problem? What about the NotePad? I've tried to use it to print out good looking text fonts, and have been pretty disapointed in the output. It seems that the drivers are too busy re-sampling the image in order to re-size it, to notice that the text comes out looking like sh**. Or is it the programs that use the drivers? The fact that DPaint II works better than DPaint would make me think that it is up to the program to make effective use here. I know the drivers are probably trying to make the same image come out the same size regardless of the resolution of your printer, but that seems like a graphic oriented solution, not a text-font oriented solution, when re-sampling causes weird things to happen to the text. Is it possible to produce printer drivers that will force a more 1 to 1 pixel mapping screen-to-printer? My Canon has 640 dots across, and that seems like a pretty good fit! I've been able to set up DPaint to give me a good 640 across fit by adjusting the page width with preferences, but then the page length seems to have no effect, and the mapping comes out 1 to 1 horizontally but not vertically. I then end up with several horizontal lines being replicated in various places apparently to compensate for the aspect ratio. I'd like to turn this off, and get a more 1 to 1 mapping both horizontal and vertical. Not just with DPaint, but with the NotePad and whatever else I can muster. So what should be the answer here? Better guidelines for applications programmers? Better guidelines for printer-driver-writers? New features /options in the drivers? Has everyone been having these problems? Or is it just me with my Canon? Keith Doyle # {ucbvax,ihnp4,decvax}!trwrb!cadovax!keithd # cadovax!keithd@ucla-locus.arpa P.S. Anyone seen an Epson LQ-800 driver around somewhere that takes advantage of the 24 pin head while doing graphics? A friend of mine could use one.
sdl@linus.UUCP (Steven D. Litvintchouk) (12/15/86)
> I've found it difficult, or rather virtually impossible to get DPaint to > print stuff out that includes text fonts cleanly. I'm using a Canon 1080a > color ink jet, with a driver I found on Compu$erve. > . . . . . > What about the NotePad? I've tried to use it to print out good looking > text fonts, and have been pretty disapointed in the output. It seems that > the drivers are too busy re-sampling the image in order to re-size it, to > notice that the text comes out looking like sh**. > > Has everyone been having these problems? Or is it just me with my Canon? I've had results at least as terrible with my Okimate 20 printer. Even though it's claimed to be 120H x 144V DPI, most fonts come out from NotePad looking pretty bad. I also have Aegis Impact!. With that program, not only fonts, but *any* vertical line segment comes out so thin and faint that it cannot be seen. I have to use bold attribute on everything just so it will print legibly. I'm curious...How does the Mac get around this problem of "re-sampling the image in order to re-size it?" What would happen if I hooked up a printer to the Mac that had resolution, aspect ratio, etc. that was very different from an Imagewriter? Would printing be as impaired as it seems to be on the Amiga? Steven Litvintchouk MITRE Corporation Burlington Road Bedford, MA 01730 Fone: (617)271-7753 ARPA: sdl@mitre-bedford UUCP: ...{cbosgd,decvax,genrad,ll-xn,philabs,security,utzoo}!linus!sdl
daveh@cbmvax.cbm.UUCP (Dave Haynie) (12/15/86)
> > I've found it difficult, or rather virtually impossible to get DPaint to > print stuff out that includes text fonts cleanly. I'm using a Canon 1080a > color ink jet, with a driver I found on Compu$erve. > > I know DPaint II seems to be better at it, but I'd like to know, where is > the problem. Can the printer driver correct this better, or is it a > DPaint problem? The printer.device can print things out in a variety of way. It can be told to give you integer pixel mapping (what you want for text), scaled as a % of the total printer size (better for graphics), or absolute measured size (like, for CAD applications). Along with this are various modifiers, one of which forces the output to maintains a consistent aspect ratio. Now, if I tell the printer.device to give me a full page with consistant aspect ratio, from a 640x200 screen (for example), and my printer gives me 1200 pixels across, you know something's going to come out a little weird. The problem with DPaint is that it asks for a full-size, consistant aspect-ratio printout. This is hardwired into the program, so as long as you're using DPaint's printing option, you're only using a very small protion of the full power of the printer device. The only thing I can think of that might help you out is to fool around with the margins in Perferences; I think DPaint looks at these (never used it much, I could be wrong). If it is looking, you might be able to get very close to forcing DPaint into an integer-ratio pixel mapping by selecting the right margins. If not, you may have to look around for a better IFF printing utility. > Is it possible to produce printer drivers that will force a more 1 to 1 > pixel mapping screen-to-printer? My Canon has 640 dots across, and that > seems like a pretty good fit! I've been able to set up DPaint to give me > a good 640 across fit by adjusting the page width with preferences, but > then the page length seems to have no effect, and the mapping comes out > 1 to 1 horizontally but not vertically. This is because DPaint is still telling the program to produce a consistant aspect ratio, which almost invariably requires vertical scaling to take place. > I then end up with several > horizontal lines being replicated in various places apparently to compensate > for the aspect ratio. I'd like to turn this off, and get a more 1 to 1 > mapping both horizontal and vertical. Not just with DPaint, but with the > NotePad and whatever else I can muster. The DPaint folks should have offered you more options in the print menu. Turning off the Aspect Ratio flag would give you the results you're looking for, they just don't let you do it. > So what should be the answer here? Better guidelines for applications > programmers? Better guidelines for printer-driver-writers? New features > /options in the drivers? You'll probably see this problem with most printers; the scaling doesn't mess with images too badly, especially if you're also using the dithering provided by the print driver to simulate color. But unless you've got a printer that has a very large DPI number, text is going to look funny when its scaled to non-integer ratios in either direction. I don't think its a problem with the driver at all, its the application program. None of this stuff was hidden from the application programmer, its all there in the ROM Kernel Manual, in the section on the printer device. I could see DPaint I missing some of this, they were probably rushing to get it out, and they were the first. DPaint II, however, really has no excuses; neither does NotePad (since it was written a C-A). Its sounds like basic programmer laziness. > Keith Doyle -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dave Haynie {caip,ihnp4,allegra,seismo}!cbmvax!daveh "Laws to supress tend to strengthen what they would prohibit. This is the fine point on which all the legal professions of history have based their job security." -Bene Gesserit Coda These opinions are my own, though for a small fee they may be yours too. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
carolyn@cbmvax.cbm.UUCP (Carolyn Scheppner) (12/16/86)
In article <1118@cbmvax.cbmvax.cbm.UUCP> daveh@cbmvax.cbm.UUCP (Dave Haynie) writes: (RE: Appication non-support of 1:1 screen to printer dumps) > ... I could see >DPaint I missing some of this, they were probably rushing to get it out, >and they were the first. DPaint II, however, really has no excuses; >neither does NotePad (since it was written a C-A). Its sounds like basic >programmer laziness. I don't think it was "programmer laziness". A non-aspected pixel for pixel dump distorts the aspect ratio of the original image. The printout will be stretched in either X or Y (depending on the res of the display screen). Fonts are stretched, the Clock becomes an oval, etc. This was probably viewed as not desirable and therefore not offered as an option. -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Carolyn Scheppner -- CBM >>Amiga Technical Support<< UUCP ...{allegra,caip,ihnp4,seismo}!cbmvax!carolyn PHONE 215-431-9180 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
daveb@cbmvax.UUCP (12/16/86)
In article <1119@cbmvax.cbmvax.cbm.UUCP> carolyn@cbmvax.UUCP (Carolyn Scheppner) writes: >In article <1118@cbmvax.cbmvax.cbm.UUCP> daveh@cbmvax.cbm.UUCP (Dave Haynie) writes: > > (RE: Appication non-support of 1:1 screen to printer dumps) > >> ... I could see >>DPaint I missing some of this, they were probably rushing to get it out, >>and they were the first. DPaint II, however, really has no excuses; >>neither does NotePad (since it was written a C-A). Its sounds like basic >>programmer laziness. > > I don't think it was "programmer laziness". A non-aspected pixel >for pixel dump distorts the aspect ratio of the original image. The >printout will be stretched in either X or Y (depending on the res of >the display screen). Fonts are stretched, the Clock becomes an oval, >etc. > > This was probably viewed as not desirable and therefore not >offered as an option. > >-- >=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= >Carolyn Scheppner -- CBM >>Amiga Technical Support<< > UUCP ...{allegra,caip,ihnp4,seismo}!cbmvax!carolyn > PHONE 215-431-9180 >=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= I have to agree with daveh. At the very least the application programs could have offered the user the CHOICE of entering his/her own numbers for the printer dumps. I have been mentionting this stuff to the companys that produce programs that dump to the printer since the 'OLD' 1.0 days and STILL nobody has bothered to include a graphic dump requestor. Its a shame to have all those options go to waste. Maybe somebody could make a quick buck by providing a utility program that intercepts calls to the graphic dump routine and brings up a requestor so that user can twiddle the numbers. Oh well...just my two cents worth.
ralph@mit-atrp.UUCP (Amiga-Man) (12/16/86)
In article <1119@cbmvax.cbmvax.cbm.UUCP> carolyn@cbmvax.UUCP (Carolyn Scheppner) writes: > > I don't think it was "programmer laziness". A non-aspected pixel >for pixel dump distorts the aspect ratio of the original image. The >printout will be stretched in either X or Y (depending on the res of >the display screen). Fonts are stretched, the Clock becomes an oval, >etc. > > This was probably viewed as not desirable and therefore not >offered as an option. > Uh...I beg to disagree. People like me want to make fine line drawings with DPaint for technical figures and the like. We cannot live with flakey pixels ( i.e. special sampling to keep aspect ratio). I think it is very unfair of the EA folks to assume only a limited set of applications for something as generally useful as a paint program. I can only hope that such shortsightedness doesn't reappear in Dpaint II. I consider myself VERY fortunate that the Amiga, being a multitasking machine, allowed me to use your ScreenDump program with something like Dpaint (it actually is running multitasked....it's just real hard to get it to give you a CLI). Thus even though the EA folks tried to leave me in the cold, I came home to a crackling fire anyhow (whoops, holiday spirit). I realize it's hard to guess just how a program you write will be used, but I try to write mine with as many options as I can guess will be useful. Along the same lines, I use my Amiga in full 640x400 interlace mode most of the time. I need the resolution ! Too many programs don't run interlaced (or offer an option) because they're afraid of screen flicker. This is unjustified. By using lower ambient light levels, and intelligent screen colors, the normal Amiga montior is usable. And eventually I'll get a long persistance monitor somewhere. Ralph, A.G.S.
keithd@cadovax.UUCP (Keith Doyle) (12/16/86)
In article <1119@cbmvax.cbmvax.cbm.UUCP> carolyn@cbmvax.UUCP (Carolyn Scheppner) writes: > I don't think it was "programmer laziness". A non-aspected pixel >for pixel dump distorts the aspect ratio of the original image. The >printout will be stretched in either X or Y (depending on the res of >the display screen). Fonts are stretched, the Clock becomes an oval, >etc. > This was probably viewed as not desirable and therefore not >offered as an option. >Carolyn Scheppner -- CBM >>Amiga Technical Support<< Well, that may be, but it dosen't change the fact that I can't get decent font printing out of DPaint. Stretched fonts are better than ones that have random horizontal lines duplicated in them. At least with stretched fonts, I can build a new font that dosen't look so stretched, with DPaint I I have to look for a different printing program that isn't so limited that it won't allow me to output them 'stretched'. Maybe I'm using the wrong tool to do the job, but right now, DPaint is one of the few programs that allows me to combine text and graphics and color on screen and on paper. So far though, I haven't been able to get satisfactory hardcopy of anything that includes text (graphics is great though). I'll try the screen dump program you posted a while back (I'm sure I have it around here somewhere) and see if that will help. I realize that so far, the Amiga concentrates primarily on VIDEO output. That is why I bought an Amiga. I'm interested in that too. I've always felt that the computer ought to eliminate the need for paper. Unfortunately, I've found that most computers GENERATE more paper than they eliminate. And, there are times when paper is what I need (about twice a year). I have come to expect that a computer (any computer) CAN do the trick (after all, if it can talk RS-232 it ought to be able to do anything with any printer right?). Perhaps Amiga programmers are so caught up in getting their screen to look FANTASTIC (and it usually does) to remember that maybe someone might like to see a decent approximation on paper. And with deadlines, it's easy to see how these 'peripheral' features might suffer for lack of testing. It would seem that the best way to minimize this sort of problem is AWARENESS. Magazine reviewers should spend the time to test packages with printers if possible, to give us an idea as to how a package performs on paper as well as on the screen (assuming it is that sort of package). Particularly word processors, any reviewer who only checks it out on the screen is not doing his job as far as I'm concerned. As a general question for all of you out there, what successes/failures have you had with various packages when trying to print out fonted text with graphics? How does Deluxe Print do? Aegis Images? Have you figured out how to do it satisfactorily from your own 'C' or Basic program? Used various screen-dumper programs? Which one works best/worst? Keith Doyle # {ucbvax,ihnp4,decvax}!trwrb!cadovax!keithd # cadovax!keithd@ucla-locus.arpa "Inquiring minds want to know"
Ata@RADC-MULTICS.ARPA (John G. Ata) (12/18/86)
>TextCraft is the strangest program I have ever seen. It appears that >its authors didn't want to use the Intuition interface at all and just >brewed their own. That's not so great, considering it was one of the >first programs out for the machine. A lot of the bugs I hear about >seem to say that it was developed without any idea what the software >for the machine would be like. My advice: throw it out. Isn't Textcraft Plus supposed to fix all that. True, it may not handle fonts and graphics but it's supposed to fix the inadaqucies of the earlier version. One of Textcraft's strongest points is the canned form, where if you want to send a business letter, for example, it will format it correctly, after you fill in certain information. Hopefully, this product will be out soon. John G. Ata