andyrose@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu (Andy Rose) (11/09/90)
I will or could someone dispel or clarify some of the following:
a. Sun will or has introduced a graphics workstation with as much
vector processing speed as personal iris. cheap.
b. Silicon Graphics has or will introduce the "RS_6000 buster" with great
rendering speed. cheap.
c. SGI has an under $10,000 graphics workstation coming, as does Sun, or
they're already here.
d. AVS 3 will run under X windows (which would be super).
e. AVS will run on Silicon Graphics. AVS will run on RS-6000.
f. Silicon Graphics is developing an AVS-like product as is Sun.
g. SGI has a cool video card which produces comp out AND SONY
tape deck control protocal (whatever that is called).
Are price lists confidential? Can someone post the prices for new Sun, SGI,
IBM, Apollo/HP, Next products?
How about software? apE costs 75$ (?)
V for vis.
--
Andrew Newkirk Rose '91 Department of Visualization CNSF/Theory Center
632 E & T Building, Hoy Road Ithaca, NY 14583
607 254 8686 andy@cornellf.tn.cornell.edumccool@dgp.toronto.edu (Michael McCool) (11/09/90)
andyrose@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu (Andy Rose) writes: >I will or could someone dispel or clarify some of the following: >e. AVS will run on Silicon Graphics. AVS will run on RS-6000. >f. Silicon Graphics is developing an AVS-like product as is Sun. I would be highly irritated if a whole lot of products started showing up. Why can't people just license the basic "OS" and then sell modules? Both AVS and apE use this approach. Unless, of course, Sun or SGI have somethingly radically new in mind. Otherwise this path would just waste SGI and Sun's time and irritate the user base. >How about software? apE costs 75$ (?) apE is $75 only if you are at a university. Commercial users pay more, but not much more. They also make the source available! McCool@dgp.toronto.edu
hhe@ifi.uio.no (Hans Henrik Eriksen) (11/09/90)
In article <1990Nov8.173804.5775@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu> andyrose@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu (Andy Rose) writes: > I will or could someone dispel or clarify some of the following: > > a. Sun will or has introduced a graphics workstation with as much > vector processing speed as personal iris. cheap. Monday this week the Sparcstation 2 was released in Norway. The Ss 2 GT draws Gouraud-shaded Z-buffered 100-pixel triangles at a rate of 100.000/sec (PHIGS) on a 24-bit double-buffered display. 10-pixel vectors are 500.000/sec and 300.000/sec (anti-aliased). List price in Norway is about $80.000 (probably cheaper in the US)... > d. AVS 3 will run under X windows (which would be super). We've got AVS 2.1 Beta? for DECwindows, but no version 3... Hans Henrik Eriksen hhe@ifi.uio.no
mfi@serc.cis.ufl.edu (Mark Interrante) (11/09/90)
In article <1990Nov8.163535.11053@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu> mccool@dgp.toronto.edu (Michael McCool) writes: >andyrose@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu (Andy Rose) writes: > >>How about software? apE costs 75$ (?) > apE is $75 only if you are at a university. Commercial users pay > more, but not much more. They also make the source available! > Does anyone know if apE has been ported to the NeXT? Thanks. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mark Interrante Software Engineering Research Center mfi@beach.cis.ufl.edu CIS Department, University of Florida 32611 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote from a west Texas farmer "status quo is Latin for the mess we're in."
stanh@meyerhof.iaims.bcm.tmc.edu (Stan Hanks) (11/09/90)
In article <1990Nov8.173804.5775@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu>, andyrose@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu (Andy Rose) writes: |> I will or could someone dispel or clarify some of the following: Well, we can at least add some grist to the rumor mill.... |> d. AVS 3 will run under X windows (which would be super) AVS runs under X windows now, but not like I think you mean. AVS really wants to make DORE calls, and there is a DORE implementation for vanilla X, soooo..... We're working on the problem in my lab. I think it's tractible. And think about this: if Convex and Cray have licenced this stuff, why? When was the last time you saw a Cray with a frame buffer anyway??? [no snide remarks from anyone at LANL, please....] |> e. AVS will run on Silicon Graphics. AVS will run on RS-6000. AVS was shown by Convex being displayed on a SillyG machine. The current X implementation is so bad as to make it nearly intractible, despite a *REALLY GOOD* DORE implementation that's based on GL (useful for doing certain classes of distributed visualization where a Cray is doing the hard part and a SillyG doing the rendering, incidently). Last I heard, Stardent was looking for 3rd party software houses to do resellable ports to the SGI, Sun, and RS/6000 platforms. Haven't chatted with the right folks in a while, so I don't know the status. |> f. Silicon Graphics is developing an AVS-like product as is Sun. I can't comment on that, but what do you think? They've re-invented every other wheel.... Regards, -- Stanley P. Hanks Director, Information Technology Planning and Development Baylor College of Medicine, One Baylor Plaza, Houston TX 77030, Mail Stop: IR-3 e-mail: stanh@bcm.tmc.edu voice: (713) 798-4649 fax: (713) 798-3729
wave@media-lab.MEDIA.MIT.EDU (Michael B. Johnson) (11/09/90)
In article <25336@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU> mfi@serc.cis.ufl.edu (Mark Interrante) writes: >>In article <1990Nov8.163535.11053@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu> mccool@dgp.toronto.edu (Michael McCool) writes: >>>andyrose@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu (Andy Rose) writes: >>> >> >>>>How about software? apE costs 75$ (?) >>> apE is $75 only if you are at a university. Commercial users pay >>> more, but not much more. They also make the source available! >>> >> >>Does anyone know if apE has been ported to the NeXT? Thanks. >> Yes, it was reported one comp.sys.next that apE was shown at the announcement of the new machines running on them. I don't recall if that was running on an alpha of one of the color boxes, or if it was just a proof-of-concept running on a more stable platform, i.e. the 2 bit box. Personally, I'm quite excited about the applicability of the NeXT machine in the area of aiding the visualization and comprehension of scientific data and as a front end for computational science in general. I hope to continue my PhD work on a NeXT platform when the new machines become available next year. -- --> Michael B. Johnson --> MIT Media Lab -- Computer Graphics & Animation Group --> (617) 253-0663 -- wave@media-lab.media.mit.edu
jg@zorch.crl.dec.com (Jim Gettys) (11/09/90)
AVS runs under X on the DECstation 5000; pretty well, from what I've seen too :-). I believe it can be had from your local DEC salescritter... - Jim -- Digital Equipment Corporation Cambridge Research Laboratory
drw900@cacofonix.anu.edu.au (11/12/90)
In article <3978@media-lab.MEDIA.MIT.EDU>, wave@media-lab.MEDIA.MIT.EDU (Michael B. Johnson) writes: |> In article <25336@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU> mfi@serc.cis.ufl.edu (Mark Interrante) writes: |> >>In article <1990Nov8.163535.11053@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu> mccool@dgp.toronto.edu (Michael McCool) writes: |> >>>andyrose@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu (Andy Rose) writes: |> >>> |> >> |> >>>>How about software? apE costs 75$ (?) |> >>> apE is $75 only if you are at a university. Commercial users pay |> >>> more, but not much more. They also make the source available! |> >>> |> >> |> >>Does anyone know if apE has been ported to the NeXT? Thanks. |> >> |> |> Yes, it was reported one comp.sys.next that apE was shown at the announcement |> of the new machines running on them. I don't recall if that was running on |> an alpha of one of the color boxes, or if it was just a proof-of-concept |> running on a more stable platform, i.e. the 2 bit box. |> We got a notice from OSCP the other day saying that the apE 2.0 distribution has been delayed until they've finished the NeXT port. Personally I wouldn't have minded if they weren't porting to NeXT :-) -- /*---------------------------------------------------------------------------*/ /* Drew Whitehouse, E-mail: drw900@anusf.anu.edu.au */ /* Visualization Programmer, (and if that fails...)drw900@csc2.anu.oz.au */ /* Australian National University, Phone : (06) 2495985 */ /* Supercomputer Facility. Fax : (06) 2473425 */ /* GPO Box 4, Canberra ACT Australia 2601. */ /*---------------------------------------------------------------------------*/
mb7@prism.gatech.EDU (Michael Begley) (11/13/90)
I would like to know what other engineers use for graphics visualization on Vax computers running the VMS operating system. We are currently porting our data files to a PC and using Microsoft FORTRAN's new graphics library so that we may use paging to create a kind of animation. Our major models are in FORTRAN, so we like packages that may be called as FORTRAN subroutines. We have investigated Disspla and PV-Wave, but they cost a bit more than we want to spend. Same goes for DI-3000. We currently use GKS (free, with the VAX software library subscription), and I have dabbled with VWS, VMS Workstation Software. But without buying a Vax 3520 for double buffering, we have to watch everything get erased and redrawn, hence the use of PC's. Does anyone know of GKS shareware for standard graphics functions? It is very tedious to develop applications in GKS, unlike Disspla. I'd be happy to scavenge from any GKS code I could get! -- Michael Begley Georgia Tech Research Institute Internet: mb7@prism.gatech.edu
upson@lavalite.asd.sgi.com (Craig Upson) (11/13/90)
With respect to the recent flurry of messages regarding AVS's availability on SGI platforms and SGI's visualization plans I'd like to add my two cents. AVS on an SGI? I spent several months negotiating in earnest with Stardent regarding the licensing of AVS on our product line. Stardent was unable to accept our payment and royalty structure. They were also unable to propose a price for this product themselves (a job that the seller of an item usually performs!). The original goals of AVS, as it was conceived at Stellar, was to be available on all appropriate platforms, including Silicon Graphics. Clearly the market demands and competitive nature of the workstation business have caused Stardent to revisit these early decisions. If Stardent simply said that they could not license the product I would understand since Silicon Graphics is their largest competitor. Their inability to make a decision however I found disturbing. Visualization Environment on the SGI product line. We have no burning desire to develop a suite of visualization tools from scratch. On the other hand we understand the limitations of existing systems and don't believe that they will withstand the test of time. This happens with first generation, pioneering products. The pressure to deliver a first generation product to the marketplace frequently results in software that fails to meet the broad demands of the user community. This is reflected in recent messages in this newsgroup concerning limitations of these products. Given this situation, we are currently developing a second generation visualization software environment at Silicon Graphics. We have the luxury of learning from our own as well as others mistakes in previous designs and believe that we can add a unique product to the market which meets users expectations and desires. This is not meant to slam other efforts in this field. I have an overwhelming respect for my former colleagues at Stellar as well as others in this field. I believe that tough competition is the only way to produce software and hardware systems that meet the test of time. Requirements? What I'd like to see from this newsgroup is more user requirements, more wish lists and more involvement from users. - What are other's perceptions of AVS and apE? - Who has used Khoros? What do you think? - Does the "visual programming" paradigm work? - What's lacking from all these systems? -- Craig Upson upson@sgi.com Silicon Graphics Inc.
jim@baroque.Stanford.EDU (James Helman) (11/14/90)
Does visual programming work? No, but neither does anything else ;-}. Visual programming advantages. 1) Flexible and extensible systems are easily designed. 2) Modular structure can limit UI visibility and mitigate the "lost-in-a-big-flat-wilderness" or "ten-menus-down-to-twiddle- favorite-knob" user interface problems. 3) It's customizable. Frequently used configurations can be saved and recalled. Visual programming disadvantages. 1) Many scientists and engineers lack familiarity with visual programming. 2) Complex tasks create rat's nests of connections. 3) It's difficult to interact with underlying or intermediate data, especially when an intermediate representation has inherent structure beyond it's drawable geometry.** #1 is a big problem. For many the incentive isn't great enough to warrant the learning effort. And a short term "paradigm" shift can't wait (a la Thomas Kuhn) for all the old school people to die, so you have to make systems look as much like more familiar canned applications as possible. An ideal system could configure itself to look either like a canned tool or an extensible tool depending on the user's needs and preferences. #2 can be mitigated by encapsulating groups. #3 could perhaps be resolved by adding in more sophisticated data structures and communication protocols between the "Viewing" modules and the "Analysis/Extraction" modules. In short, Visual Programming doesn't work completely in current implementations, but it probably could. And it looks better than any alternatives for building general purpose, extensible tools. No doubt some of the special purpose tools, e.g. CFD only, Vol Vis only, FEM only, will get by without extensibility, but a workstation vendor supplied system must have configurability and extensibility as it's hallmark. ** "Visualization" really isn't the right word for the process. We're really trying to facilitate data understanding using visual tools. It's an interactive process with a very high bandwidth channel (the *visual* part) in one direction. And in the other, a low bandwidth, but extremely important channel by which the user explores and interrogates. Both the data set and the representations (geometric and otherwise) need to be accessible to these interrogations. Jim Helman Department of Applied Physics Durand 012 Stanford University FAX: (415) 725-3377 (jim@KAOS.stanford.edu) Work: (415) 723-9127
murray@sun13.scri.fsu.edu (John Murray) (11/15/90)
>In article <3978@media-lab.MEDIA.MIT.EDU>, wave@media-lab.MEDIA.MIT.EDU (Michael B. Johnson) writes: >>Yes, it was reported one comp.sys.next that apE was shown at the announcement >>of the new machines running on them. I don't recall if that was running on >>an alpha of one of the color boxes, or if it was just a proof-of-concept >>running on a more stable platform, i.e. the 2 bit box. According to (I think) the same notice mentioned below, 2.0 was demoed on the new NeXT color platform at the Sept. 18 announcement of the new NeXT machines. 2.0 is supposed to support all NeXT platforms. In article <1990Nov12.100002@cacofonix.anu.edu.au> Drew writes: > We got a notice from OSCP the other day saying that the apE >2.0 distribution has been delayed until they've finished the NeXT >port. Rumor has it that apE started shipping in the last few days. We're eagerly awaiting our copy.. >Personally I wouldn't have minded if they weren't porting to >NeXT :-) Well, it is said that the extra time for the NeXT port gave them time to clean up some of the details in the overall system. Every silver lining has a dark cloud, I guess :-) >/* Drew Whitehouse, E-mail: drw900@anusf.anu.edu.au */ Disclaimer: "I'm not a real apE 2.0 answer person, but I play one on the net!" I don't work for OSC, but maybe if I get around to typing in my resume.. :) John R. Murray murray@vsjrm.scri.fsu.edu