bard@jessica.stanford.edu (David Hopper) (05/16/91)
In article <5+aHafz4@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > >I know that the Amiga 500 can do better animation, I have said that >myself in several posts. Why isn't it as good is of great interest to >me. One big problem with the NeXT is that the Mach kernal can't be >interrupted so you can't guarantee that you animation routines will be >acknowledge within a given time period. It has been stated in this >group that the 030 moves memory faster than the blitter, so the NeXT >should be decent at blasting images to the screen. But it's not. Plain and simple. If speed and imaging is what you need out of your workstation, it's clear what isn't the serious choice. Remember that this is a 7.14MHz 68000 + blitter combo that is proving to be better at animation that a 25MHz '030 (in my case), and more consistent and smoother than a 25MHz '040. Look, the NeXT is great for many things. It was certainly made for DTP and word processing. These are, however, static media. Anyone who claims that animation and multimedia is an option for any NeXT below the NeXTDimension, they're wrong, plain and simple. >...Many Amiga >users seem to think that 20 or 30fps is impossible on the NeXT. I >just want to set the record straight. >...other variables come into play. Like interrupting the kernal, >drawing in a device independant language,etc. You mean, things you can't do without on the NeXT? Bummer. Sorry, man. 20 or 30fps, while not impossible, is certainly not professional-looking. Because that's how you describe an animation on th NeXT. 20 to 30 fps. For one animation. Show me something that delivers a clean, consistent 30 fps of a large blit and I'll be content. >I think that if you sit >any Amiga user down in front of a NeXT who isn't doing video or who >doesn't want a $3000 Nintendo and he will chose the NeXT. It is the >better machine, all things considered. Well, I'm not doing video and I certainly don't want a $3000 Nintendo. Your bias against motion is rather apparent and annoying. The world is not a static world, my boy, and we're seeing the future of computing manifested in advances toward Virtual Reality, and real-time user-computer interfaces. AmigaDOS is the fastest, most transparent OS I've ever used. I appreciate it for that. When I use my NeXT, it feels like I'm bundling myself up like a gradeschooler in winter. >Click< wait... wait... >Click< ...wait... >Type< ..wait... >Mommeee, I've fallen down and I hafta pee...< And Mike, please understand that you're talking with Amiga users. We're all quite accustomed to motion on our computers. You can't write animation out of the picture. To do this would be to admit defeat. >Then I write: > My good friend is a NeXT consultant. He can't come up with anything > that shows off the NeXT as a workstation to do animation on. Are those > movies in 'Scene' a standard format? Are they? No? Why not? Because > they're hardcoded into the application? So as a user, then, *I* can't > do animation on the NeXT at all. Hmm... > >Huh? I thought the movies were postscript. The Fish(best one IMHO) >is just a binary postscript file. You should be able to find the >files somewhere on the NeXT. Same with the eagle. You can add your >own movies if you want. You like the Fish, huh? Listen, everyone... what Mike has chosen as his favorite NeXT animation is a 4 frame-per-second (YES, I timed it on my '030 Cube) animation that locks up the machine (all the movies available trap input). I thought it was absolutely pathetic. And, if I'm a PostScript programmer, I can add my own movies to Scene. Big deal. >-Mike Dave Hopper | /// Anthro Creep | Academic Info Resources, Stanford |__ /// . . | Macincrap/UNIX Consultant bard@jessica. |\\\/// Ia! Ia! | -- Just remember: love is life, and Stanford.EDU | \XX/ Shub-Niggurath! | hate is living death. :Black Sabbath