[comp.multimedia] NeXT/Amiga Multimedia...DROP IT!!!

msm@comp.lancs.ac.uk (Mark S Madsen) (06/14/91)

In article <2802@moscom.UUCP> mcc@moscom.UUCP (Mike Corbett) writes:

>In article <14192@dog.ee.lbl.gov> osborn@ux1.lbl.gov (James R Osborn) writes:

>> Besides if the !@#$%^&* Amiga is
>>!@#$%^&* hot, then why hasn't it dominated the market?  Maybe the
>>Amiga marketing dweebs are as big a jerks as arcTANgent...

You were doing OK until you came out with this bit, James.

>You mean the Amiga isn't dominating the Video/Multimedia market?

Oh, for goodness' sake!

Take a look at the following line:

	Newsgroups: comp.multimedia
                         ^^^^^^^^^^

Get the idea?  You will find there are other groups for Amiga, NeXT,
Macs, PCs &c &c.  Why don't you crosspost all your arguments to those
groups (don't forget to add comp.sys.atari-st to the newsgroups line)
and stay there in future.

If you guys want to play in the multimedia newsgroup, try to have
something to say about multimedia, OK?

Now, to justify my own posting, and to give you all an idea of what
this newsgroup is about, let me open something for discussion which I
consider to be a little more edifying.  Our group is analysing
specification requirements for multimedia, and we are looking at
synchronisation as being a central requirement of any practical
multimedia system.  How do you other people out there see this issue?
Does anyone have a handle on coping with the criticality/priority
problems posed by different data/object types?

Looking forward to some constructive discussion,
						Mark

-- 
______________________________________________________________________
      Mark S Madsen   +44-524-65201x3819    msm@comp.lancs.ac.uk
      Department of Computing, Lancaster University, LA1 4YR, UK
______________________________________________________________________

osborn@ux1.lbl.gov (James R Osborn) (06/15/91)

OK, OK, this is absolutly the last thing I will say on this topic.  Let me
apologize for fishing.  I could not resist rubbing yet another pompous
know-it-all into a frenzy.  (I am pretty good at fishing it seems.) I was not
trying to bash the Amiga at all, only the typical snobery of Amiga users.
It's funny how people get so personal about their hardware.

And as for open-mindedness, you know "arc", you made quite a few assumptions
about who I am just because I posted from an account at a lab.  I happen to
be an engineer and a person, not an "Oxy-Infested la-bore-atory freek."

The reason I brought "market" into the discussion is precisely because I get
so tired of hearing about how fantastic, great, easy, cheap, incredible,
mind-blowing, fast, etc. the Amiga is.  I think it is reasonable to ask "if
it's everything you say it is, why don't people buy it?"  I also think my
answer to that question is reasonable:  "the Amiga marketing people suffer from
the same attitude problems as most Amiga users."

I will not be posting anything else on this topic.  If you would like to
continue the battle, "arc" (or any other Amigasnob), let's do it via email.

-- James
Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory
osborn@ux1.lbl.gov

scott@blueeyes.kines.uiuc.edu (scott) (06/16/91)

In article <14318@dog.ee.lbl.gov> osborn@ux1.lbl.gov (James R Osborn) writes:
>
>OK, OK, this is absolutly the last thing I will say on this topic.  Let me
>apologize for fishing.  I could not resist rubbing yet another pompous
>know-it-all into a frenzy.  (I am pretty good at fishing it seems.) I was not
>trying to bash the Amiga at all, only the typical snobery of Amiga users.
>It's funny how people get so personal about their hardware.

I don't think "snobbery" is the right word here - "religious fanaticism" is
much more apt for describing SOME computer users (you know the type I mean - 
the ones who participate in these stupid "my computer is better than yours"
flame wars). I'm not sure what causes this (must be a great Psych Ph.D 
dissertation buried in there somewhere), but it seems to occur most often 
in owners of "underdog" platforms, i.e. those that don't sell as well as 
ISA-based machines. Perhaps the fact that their chosen platform is outsold 
by a couple orders of magnitude in terms of units sold really frosts their
fritters - who knows? Whatever it is, it turns them into harddisk-thumping
JehovAmiga's Witnesses, who then descend upon the net and attempt to convert
others to their cause (or at the very least slam the owners of other platforms
for their "stupidity" for not choosing God's Gift to Computing instead).

I often wonder if some sort of deprogramming therapy would be helpful to
these types - I mean, it works for former Moonies and Scientologists; why
wouldn't it work for these Amiga Worshippers, too?

-- 
Scott Coleman                                                    tmkk@uiuc.edu

"Unisys has demonstrated the power of two. That's their stock price today."
       - Scott McNealy on the history of mergers in the computer industry.

elg@elgamy.raidernet.com (Eric Lee Green) (06/17/91)

From article <14318@dog.ee.lbl.gov>, by osborn@ux1.lbl.gov (James R Osborn):
> mind-blowing, fast, etc. the Amiga is.  I think it is reasonable to ask "if
> it's everything you say it is, why don't people buy it?"  I also think my
> answer to that question is reasonable:  "the Amiga marketing people suffer from
> the same attitude problems as most Amiga users."

What? Marketing people? Commodore? That's almost as big of an oxymoron
as "Amiga dealer"!

:-):-):-).

I've talked to a lot of the Commodore tech folks and they know what
they're doing... they've done a darn good job of putting together a good
hardware platform and operating system on a shoestring budget. But as far
as marketing goes...

--
Eric Lee Green   (318) 984-1820  P.O. Box 92191  Lafayette, LA 70509
elg@elgamy.RAIDERNET.COM               uunet!mjbtn!raider!elgamy!elg

arctngnt@amiganet.chi.il.us (Bowie J Poag) (06/18/91)

Regarding Amiga fanaticism:

I agree with you...As far as the Amiga is concerned, where very touchy when it
comes to comparing systems. We look at IBMs, Macs, and all we do is yawn. I
mean, you cant blame us for disliking it. Its natural. Which would you rather
have at your disposal, a Testarossa or a lime-green Yugo?

We seem like a very misunderstood group, I agree. BUT. That still dosent
overshadow the fact that we CAN, and DO offer multimedia for the masses. More
so than any of the "big 3" in the industry put together.


Heh, and deprogramming isnt the answer. Theres nothing wrong being being proud
of your machine. Look at it this way; If Commodore was to finally ADVERTISE
for a change, I wouldnt have to do their job for them..




Give Me Amiga, Or Give Me Death!
Arctangent

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
psst......ever wonder why the comp.sys.amiga.multimedia newsgroup is more
active than the comp.sys.multimedia newsgroup?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
Flicker turns me on.  -BJP | Get back into the SeX PiSToLs if you program in
Arctangent, Naperville IL. | C. It helps.  //
----------------------------             \X/ A M I G A !
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

braudes@seas.gwu.edu (Bob Braudes) (06/18/91)

It appears that the requests to turn this into a technical newsgroup are
not receiving the attention which they deserve.  Is there anybody else
there who would like to see a _moderated_ newsgroup in which serious multimedia
discussions can be held?

Thanks.

johna@gold.gvg.tek.com (John Abt) (06/18/91)

Some of us do not know anything about the Amiga. Could someone 
post, in simple terms, devoid of BS, just exactly what it is about 
the Amiga that makes it a good multimedia platform?

Just curious,    John Abt

tmkk@uiuc.edu (K. Khan) (06/18/91)

The following post has nothing to do with multimedia. If you aren't following
the ArcTangent discussion, feel fre to hit 'n' now - you won't miss
anything important. ;-)


In article <arctngnt.7790@amiganet.chi.il.us> arctngnt@amiganet.chi.il.us (Bowie J Poag) writes:
>Regarding Amiga fanaticism:
>
>I agree with you...

At least we can agree on SOMEthing!

>If Commodore was to finally ADVERTISE for a change, I wouldnt have to do
>their job for them..

Who ever told you that you HAVE to do Commodore's advertising for them?
And in a newsgroup such as this where juvenile computer-slamming discussions
are off-topic to begin with?

I can just picture how you do Commodore's advertising job for them - My
guess is you go around from door to door with a stack of WatchTower - er,
I mean, Amiga brochures, - in your hand. Or perhaps you shave your head,
put on a bedsheet, and accost people in airports. You're a regular Hare
KrishnAmiga, I'll wager. I'll bet you play a mean tamborine, too.

Perhaps one day you'll realize that your religious rantings, replete
with numerous spelling and grammatical errors, do nothing to further
your cause. In fact, by behaving as you do and annoying great numbers of
people on the net, you are doing Commodore and the machine you love so
dearly a great DISservice. Do yourself (and Commodore!) a favor - give
it a rest.

bheil@scout-po.biz.uiowa.edu (06/19/91)

In article <2561@gold.gvg.tek.com> johna@gold.gvg.tek.com (John Abt) writes:
>Some of us do not know anything about the Amiga. Could someone 
>post, in simple terms, devoid of BS, just exactly what it is about 
>the Amiga that makes it a good multimedia platform?
>
>Just curious,    John Abt
>

Others have given good reasons for why the Amiga is a good multimedia platform.
 I'd like to offer one (or two) more:  
CDTV
With CDTV there is a low cost (list ~$900, going for <$750) delivery platform. 

Joe Public has never seemed too interested in a $3000 computer sitting on his
desk at home, enter CDTV.  It has the support of 6 years of Amiga developing
behind it, and the advantages of fairly inexpensive development machines (eg
stock Amiga 2000's and 3000's).  

A CD-ROM add-on for the Amiga 500 will provide the same capabilities as CDTV
has for all those who currently own A500's.  NOTE: This add-on is not
officially available though it has been shown.

elg@elgamy.raidernet.com (Eric Lee Green) (06/20/91)

From article <2561@gold.gvg.tek.com>, by johna@gold.gvg.tek.com (John Abt):
> Some of us do not know anything about the Amiga. Could someone
> post, in simple terms, devoid of BS, just exactly what it is about
> the Amiga that makes it a good multimedia platform?

Okay. As a non-rabid-fanatic type, I guess I can do that. Do note that
I am posting this message from an Amiga, which means that some of my
non-Amiga details may be inaccurate. However, I've seen much of the
stuff out there for the Amiga.

Okay, first of all: video output. This isn't such a big deal today,
since ISA and Mac cards exist to do the same thing, but every Amiga puts
out genlock-ready NTSC. The professional-quality genlocks (which are around
$300-$600, depending on what you want) have inputs for an external video
source and external synch. The Amiga graphics chip set is capable of
synching to that external synch. I.e., no additional hardware required
beyond the genlock, if you're wanting video.

Double-buffering is ridiculously easy with the Amiga. All Amigas come with
the capability. In addition, access to the framebuffer is fairly fast if
you're careful about what video mode you're using... especially on the
Amiga 3000 series, which has a 32-bit path to video RAM (I know of no
IBM-type video buffers with such a path, except perhaps some of the
Microchannel cards). Amiga hard drive controllers, too, are generally
fairly fast, which is important for getting the data into memory in the
first place... again, this is especially true of the Amiga 3000 series,
which has a 32-bit DMA controller that can easily handle anything up to the
limits of SCSI-1 (which is about 4mb/sec... still a bit faster than the
fastest SCSI hard drives, which can only do about 2.2mb/sec continuously).
When you're trying to display fast animations and have realistic sampled
sounds running simultaneously, having that bandwidth becomes critical.

Drawbacks: Amiga resolution is not state-of-the-art. It is fine for most
titling needs, e.g., if you want to run a cable directory channel off of
your Amiga (which is what a large percentage of cable companies are doing
now), but if you're wanting to put out spectacular ray-traced images, you
need to buy a more expensive display option. The three with which I am
familiar are the Ham-E, DCTV, and the Video Toaster. Ham-E and DCTV are
simple video enhancers. The Video Toaster is a whole lot more.

Talking about the Video Toaster... this $1500 widget has the big blurb "A
TV studio in a box!" on it. Which it isn't, but it does have a number of
interesting features. It does a bunch of wipes, fades, etc. between a
number of video sources, both internal and external sources, it has a
built-in genlock of course though all these sources must be
time-base-corrected, and it has its own video frame buffer which has much
better color availability than the standard Amiga display. (Note that since
we're talking NTSC here, color availability, rather than absolute
horizontal resolution, is more what's needed, to allow smoother transitions
with less fringing etc.) It can capture frames from an external source and
then you can use the video image manipulation tools that come with it to do
all sorts of things such as, say, draw a mustache on a politician's face
:-), or wrap the image around a ray-traced ball. (A ray tracer and a paint
package comes with the Toaster). The Toaster has a couple of problems,
though... it's not QUITE the best thing since sliced bread. It doesn't run
on the latest Amiga 3000 computers, and it sucks up a whole lot of system
resources doing its thing, making multitasking sluggish.

Second: the operating system. The Amiga operating system is a
nice lightweight near-real-time message-passing multitasking kernal with a
whole bunch of weirdness shoved on top of it. The weirdness sometimes
confuses people and gets in the way, but the near-real-time part is ideal
for multimedia presentations. A typical presentation, consisting of video
and sound orchestrated by, say, a slide-projector-like button on the end of
a cord, is relatively easy. You can show an animation and have the music
still running at full speed, for example, since you can spawn off seperate
tasks for each one. You can also control a laserdisk player while doing all
of this, or a MIDI port, or maybe both, I'm not quite sure since I've never
had a laserdisk player, and you can be controlling these while your
presentation is in progress. All of this is currently-available stuff, that
you can either do from scratch or do with currently-available scripting
tools such as The Directory, CanDO, or AmigaVision.

Third: software. The Amiga has a huge number of video paint packages, ray
tracers, texture mappers, titlers, character generators, flippers,
transitioners, animators, you name it. From what I understand, on ISA
setups you generally are limited to whatever tools come with the board that
you buy. On the Mac, you have QuickDraw, which allows device-independence,
but the Mac has other problems. None of the Macintosh input devices are
interrupt-driven, they're all polled I/O, so responsiveness in a
multiple-source environment can be problematic. Similarly, none of the
standard Macintosh I/O is DMA-driven, and the standard Macintosh hardware
doesn't have any co-processor to offload graphics manipulation. Again,
responsiveness suffers when you're trying to do a half-dozen things at
once. (Such as, e.g., control a MIDI device and animate a presentation at
the same time). Also note that until release 7 of the Mac OS, you had to
do a whole lot of kludgery to do two things at the same time, kludgery
such as stuffing pieces of code into the interrupts... stuffing code into
the interrupts most definitely hurts responsiveness, and can cause music
to get off-key if you're taking up too much interrupt time (i.e., you can
"lose" interrupts). This has definite ramifications on your ability to be a
"multi"-media machine (where "multi" assumes that you're doing more than
one thing at once).

Compared to Mac and MS-DOS, the Amiga is clearly superior as a multimedia
machine. It is possible to get equivalent results from both, but at a far
higher cost, and with a certain clumsiness (such as code running in
interrupts, etc.) Another system which has been mentioned is the NeXT. The
NeXT would be ideal, except that its current release of Mach doesn't have
any real-time extensions. This is especially problematic in the case of
MIDI, where accurate time-stamping of inputs, and accurate timing of
outputs, is necessary to get good results. The jerkiness of normal Unix
doesn't bode for smooth animations or smooth control of a laserdisk player,
either. The machine has potential. But the operating system will have to be
brought up to modern levels of responsiveness in order for that potential
to be realized. There's also the software problem, and the problem with
getting studio-quality NTSC out of the machine, but neither of those are
insurmountable -- third parties can easily handle those. The OS problem, on
the other hand, is something that NeXT themselves are going to have to
tackle, if they wish to position the machine as a multimedia platform.

==
Eric Lee Green   (318) 984-1820  P.O. Box 92191  Lafayette, LA 70509
elg@elgamy.RAIDERNET.COM               uunet!mjbtn!raider!elgamy!elg
    Looking for a job... Unix/Amiga/C... tips, leads appreciated.

arctngnt@amiganet.chi.il.us (Bowie J Poag) (06/22/91)

Oooooooh, the wrath of Khan. Im scared.

Why dont YOU give it a rest? Any publicity is good publicity. Commodore had no
publicity. Now THAT's simple to understand, right?


Should hope so...

\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
Flicker turns me on.  -BJP | Get back into the SeX PiSToLs if you program in
Arctangent, Naperville IL. | C. It helps.  //
----------------------------             \X/ A M I G A !
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

mcfarlin@mmedia.UUCP (David McFarling) (06/23/91)

In article <3321@sparko.gwu.edu>, braudes@seas.gwu.edu (Bob Braudes) writes:
> 
> It appears that the requests to turn this into a technical newsgroup are
> not receiving the attention which they deserve.  Is there anybody else
> there who would like to see a _moderated_ newsgroup in which serious multimedia
> discussions can be held?
> 
> Thanks.

Definately!

Dave
mmedia!mcfarlin

kaufman@eecs.nwu.edu (Michael L. Kaufman) (06/23/91)

In article <3321@sparko.gwu.edu>, braudes@seas.gwu.edu (Bob Braudes) writes:
> It appears that the requests to turn this into a technical newsgroup are
> not receiving the attention which they deserve.  Is there anybody else
> there who would like to see a _moderated_ newsgroup in which serious 
> multimedia discussions can be held?

No.  If you really want to turn this group into a place where technical
discussions can occur, start a few technical discussions.  It always amuses 
me when people think that a certain class of articles will magicaly start
to appear if they moderate a newsgroup.  Do you really believe that there
masses of people out there with technical multimedia articles who are saying,
"I'm not posting until they stop allowing all that lowbrow stuff."  It might
be different if this group had 100s of messages a day. Then maybe you could
argue that maybe people were not posting because they didn't want their 
articles to be buried in a crowd.  But what do we have here?  Maybe ten or 
so on a busy day.  This group does not have such a high vloume that we need 
to start pruning articles.

Michael


-- 
Michael Kaufman | I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on
 kaufman        | fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in
  @eecs.nwu.edu | the dark near the Tannhauser gate. All those moments will be
                | lost in time - like tears in rain. Time to die.     Roy Batty