bert@helix.nih.gov (Bert Tyler) (01/24/91)
> Is there a windows driver available for XGA?
My XGA adapter arrived with drivers for Windows (2.x and 3.0), OS/2,
Autocad, and one that emulates the 8514/A API. I tested the Windows 3.0
drivers and the 8514/A API driver (I don't have Autocad or OS/2)
The Windows drivers are kind of interesting. There are two Windows 3.0
drivers, labelled "high-rez" and "low-rez". I first installed the "low rez"
driver with a low-rez VGA monitor attached. Then I powered down the machine,
switched to a high-rez monitor, brought it back up - and Windows came up
in high resolution but using the (now tiny) low-rez fonts! I switched to
the "high-rez" driver and Windows switched to high-rez (8514/A-style) fonts.
I haven't yet had the guts to put the low-rez monitor back online and see
what happens when I fire up Windows with a low-rez monitor and the high-rez
driver active.
The 8514/A driver cautions that programs that run on single-monitor
setups and rely on the fact that the 8514/A video memory and the VGA video
memory are distinct and remain intact during mode switches won't work,
because the XGA adapter uses the same memory for both functions. CSHOW
had no problems, but my own Fractint program failed miserably because we
*do* make that assumption. Not a big deal, because the next release of
Fractint will include native XGA drivers.
...which brings up an off-topic question. I have written some simple routines
that I intend to give away as freeware that autodetect the presence of an
XGA adapter (including its available memory and what kind of monitor it is
attached to), throw the XGA into any of its text or graphics modes, and
read/write pixels to the adapter in those modes. I am having problems with
the 65536-color mode (a mode which the preliminary copy of the XGA Hardware
Users Guide discusses but does not include sample code for) - I can throw the
adapter into and out of that mode, and sling pixels at it, but the colors are
wrong. I have looked for an area on USENET to post questions about this
beastie, but can't find any likely suspects. Can someone post me a private
message telling me where to go? (No, no, not *there* - somewhere on USENET
<grin>.)
Bert Tyler
Bert@helix.nih.govtj@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca (Terry Jones) (01/24/91)
AN update to a posting I made about the XGA adapter. I said that it wasn't VGA compatible enough for WordPerfect, what I meant was it wasn't 8514 compatible enough. There may have been some code provided to make it more 8514 compatible but I didn't have time to try before the board went away. It DID work fin as VGA with WP 5.1 In WIndows, when you set lo rez mode, it says you can get 256 colours at 640x480. This is only true if you also add the paramater to win.ini [Display_Adapter] ColorPreferred=Y Then it comes up using the larger sized fonts looking like a 256 colour VGA. There were memory upgrade slots on this thing that were empty so there are probably high rez many colour modes possible. tj .
cohen@brodmann (Gregg A. Cohen) (01/24/91)
Can you tell us how much this hardware costs? Sounds like it might answer some problems I am starting to address with some imaging applications that we are trying to write. Thanks -- Gregg Cohen /\/\ cohen@brodmann.iaf.uiowa.edu Department of Psychiatry \/\/ (319)353-6358 if you be lucky University of Iowa /\/\ Mental health is more than a Iowa City, IA 52242 \/\/ state of mind!!
altman@sbstaff2.cs.sunysb.edu (Jeff Altman) (01/25/91)
From information that I have gathered and has been sent to me by Bert Tyler, here is a summary of what XGA gives Win3 users and how much it will cost. First of all XGA is only a Micro Channel product. It is Bus Mastering, ships in the standard configuration with 512k and can be expanded to 1MB. The XGA ships with two Win3 drivers. One for 640x480x256 and the other 1024x768x???. The number of colors on the hi-res driver I think is determined by the amount of memory on the board. The XGA will work with standard VGA monitors with the low res 256 color driver. Prices that I have been able to find are as follows: Product Retail Computer University Factory Pricing -------- --------- ---------- ----------- XGA (512k) $1100 $769 $675 XGA (1mb) $1500 512k upgrade $225 8515 monitor $669 $570 I realize the above list is incomplete, but its what I've got. -- - Jeff (jaltman@ccmail.sunysb.edu)
tmottonen@cc.helsinki.fi (01/28/91)
In article <1991Jan24.201315.647@sbcs.sunysb.edu>, altman@sbstaff2.cs.sunysb.edu (Jeff Altman) writes: <...> > > First of all XGA is only a Micro Channel product. It is > Bus Mastering, ships in the standard configuration with > 512k and can be expanded to 1MB. I've heard that the XGA adapter requires a 386SX or better machine. Any idea why ? > - Jeff (jaltman@ccmail.sunysb.edu) Teemu -- _________ Teemu Mottonen | | internet: tmottonen@cc.helsinki.Fi University of Helsinki | | bitnet: TMOTTONEN@FINUH Dept.of Computer Science |_________| decnet: HYLK::TMOTTONEN
raster@itsgw.rpi.edu (Jerry D Bain) (01/28/91)
tmottonen@cc.helsinki.fi writes: > I've heard that the XGA adapter requires a 386SX or better > machine. Any idea why ? The XGA's memory-mapped color-maps are typically placed in really high memory areas... like above the 3-4 gigabyte address range to prevent any software memory conflicts in the near future (unless someone gets the bright idea to write an application that actually needs 4 gigabytes on a '386). This frees up the first meg for normal DOS stuff... This means that in *XGA mode* only, the VGA memory area is freed up for DOS applications. In VGA mode, everthing works as before. In addition, up to eight XGA cards are supported in a machine (since each can have a different address). In addition, most of the actual software drivers require access to the priveledged '386 instruction set. At first blush, this '386 requirement may seen heavyhanded by IBM (the only manufacturer of a XGA board to date), but all in all it adds up to the first *well thought out* display standard for the iAPX86 architectures I have seen to date. It will last a long time, hopefully.
daly@ecs.umass.edu (Bryon Daly, ECE dept, UMass, Amherst) (01/28/91)
In article <1991Jan28.100703.4680@cc.helsinki.fi>, tmottonen@cc.helsinki.fi writes: > In article <1991Jan24.201315.647@sbcs.sunysb.edu>, altman@sbstaff2.cs.sunysb.edu (Jeff Altman) writes: > <...> > > I've heard that the XGA adapter requires a 386SX or better > machine. Any idea why ? I think I remember reading that the XGA card uses a 32 bit microchannel slot. I don't think that IBM's 286's have any 32 bit slots. When the clones start coming out, they will probably use 16 bit AT slots, I would think. (Someone else mentioned the software drivers for XGA using 386 code - so maybe XGA still won't work on a 286. But maybe new drivers can be created.) Bryon daly@ecs.umass.edu
rob@disk.uucp (Rob Miracle) (01/30/91)
In article <1991Jan28.100703.4680@cc.helsinki.fi>, tmottonen@cc.helsinki.fi writes: > In article <1991Jan24.201315.647@sbcs.sunysb.edu>, altman@sbstaff2.cs.sunysb.edu (Jeff Altman) writes: > <...> > > First of all XGA is only a Micro Channel product. It is > > Bus Mastering, ships in the standard configuration with ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > I've heard that the XGA adapter requires a 386SX or better > machine. Any idea why ? Simple, the XGA adapter is a BUS master microchannel card. Bus mastering is only supported under 80386 processors. Next real question, is any one out there using it? Rob -- ## Rob Miracle ## Call DISK (Multi-User Unix) (502) 968-5401 1200-8N1 ## rob@disk.uucp ## Available through Starlink! Louisville, KY 24 Hours "Many truths that we cling to are only true from a certain point of view." -- Obi-Wan Kenobi
U39648@uicvm.uic.edu (Darius Vaskelis) (01/31/91)
In article <1991Jan30.045751.3520@disk.uucp>, rob@disk.uucp (Rob Miracle) says: >Simple, the XGA adapter is a BUS master microchannel card. Bus mastering is >only supported under 80386 processors. Whoa! Bus-mastering is a function of the BUS, not the processor. When IBM introduced a 16-bit expansion bus on the PC AT, they even added a very simple (not terribly high performance) provision for bus-mastering adapters! The original PC AT used a 6MHz 80286. Or what about the IBM PS/2 Models 50 and 60 and the current counterpart, the 50Z? They are all 16-bit Microchannel machines that allow for full bus- masters! All three are based on a 10MHz 80286. IBM even makes a few 16-bit Microchannel full bus-mastering adapters: the Image Adapter/A and the extremely high-performance SCSI Adapter/A. Microchannel architecture is not "linked" to Intel's iAPX86 processor family in any way. Neither is the concept of bus-mastering. Note the IBM RS/6000 workstations, they use the i860 RISC chip for the CPU, and almost every Microchannel adapter designed for it it a full bus-master. - Darius ========================================================================= BITNET: U39648@UICVM | "Don't set fire to strangers." Internet: u39648@uicvm.uic.edu | - Mr. Zarniwoop
brandis@inf.ethz.ch (Marc Brandis) (01/31/91)
In article <91030.234048U39648@uicvm.uic.edu> U39648@uicvm.uic.edu (Darius Vaskelis) writes: >Microchannel architecture is not "linked" to Intel's iAPX86 processor >family in any way. Neither is the concept of bus-mastering. Note the IBM >RS/6000 workstations, they use the i860 RISC chip for the CPU, and almost >every Microchannel adapter designed for it it a full bus-master. > Although it is true that the S/6000 supports the Microchannel, it is not true that it uses the i860. Actually, it uses a chipset which is proprietary to IBM, and I have to say that it is much better than the i860. Marc-Michael Brandis Computer Systems Laboratory, ETH-Zentrum (Swiss Federal Institute of Technology) CH-8092 Zurich, Switzerland email: brandis@inf.ethz.ch
dbbrocklehur@lotus.uwaterloo.ca (Darren) (02/02/91)
Posting for ghost@eastern.uucp who has temporarily lost USENET post capability due to software hangups. Please direct replies to him. --- tmottonen@cc.helsinki.fi writes: > > First of all XGA is only a Micro Channel product. It is > > Bus Mastering, ships in the standard configuration with > > 512k and can be expanded to 1MB. > > I've heard that the XGA adapter requires a 386SX or better > machine. Any idea why ? Actually, the XGA adapter will only run in full-blown 386 machines using MicroChannel archetecture. Except for the 32-bit busmaster capabilities, the XGA specification is virtually identical to the 8514/a spec. XGA is much faster, but what do you expect from a card with a computer on board combined with a superior bus. As for the clones being 16-bit. If its not a 32-bit busmaster, it's 8514/a and NOT XGA.
ahall@vision.uucp (Andy Hall) (02/05/91)
While we're talking about XGA's, does anyone know what color support the Windows driver for an XGA provides, i.e. does it use palettes and Palette Manager? If so how large is the System Palette ?