rhm5684@isc.rit.edu (R.H. Mowery ) (04/30/91)
I am currently examining various multi-media boards and packages for a firm where I am doing my co-op(paid internship). I have received a great deal of literature and some demos and even video tapes (thanks to the IBM Multimedia group). My problem is that there are so many great things out there it is hard to choose. So I am requesting advice and sugesstions from anyone out there who may have or are currently developing multi-media applications on the IBM - PC platform. I know it is not the best, yet things are getting better for the PC environment in this regard. What I have reviewed so far is the toolbook system by samnatec, the Plus system by Spinnaker, and the IBM AVC environment. The later seems to be the best I havelooked at so far, in that it allows one to capture live motion video and build a nice little presentation or training aid. Our main goal behind this is for in-house use and for building presentations of our machines to take and show our clients. The machines are for use in a manufacturing environment and perform as such. My only reason for questioning the IBM system is that it seems that the run-time (at least from what I read) will only work on PS/2 systems. If this is true, that means luggin our system with us and also limits us from sending out a disk to let the clients view our machines. Has anyone out there used the IBM AVC software with the Motion video Apdater A card, or the 750 motion media card? IS there anything out there that will allow me to do this kind of quality? We do have true blues at work, but of course at home I don't, so no taking work home. It seems I have seen many capture boards, but nothing to grab full motion and store it in compressed format. IBM says that 1 hours worth of video can be stored on 650 MB drive, because the 750 card captures and compresses in real-time. Any arguments on that??? I also cannot seem to find any software that can handle live motion video other than the IBM motion video. They also said the card only works on the PS/2 series because of the Multi-Channnel Arch. Why would this be true? Could it be designed around this -- guess it's just there way of selling more machines??? I must say they were very helpful in getting me information, but I still would like opinions from the rest of the world. Thank you. Email or post responses here. -R. Mowery III
marti@saturn.ucsc.edu (Marti Atkinson) (05/01/91)
>Has anyone out there used the IBM AVC software with the Motion video >Apdater A card, or the 750 motion media card? We've been working with the AVC boards, but not with the M-Motion adapter. We love the boards, but the software interface is a real pain, especially the graphics. U. of Delaware (302) 451-8164 (talk to Janet Harbauh or Sherry, they can fill you in) puts out a product called "Podium" which uses the boards and has an easier to deal with interface. We're also investigating using Plus with external commands. >I also cannot >seem to find any software that can handle live motion video other than >the IBM motion video. They also said the card only works on the PS/2 >series because of the Multi-Channnel Arch. There is also a version of the AVC which runs on non-Micro-channel machines, but I am not sure if it can handle live motion video. There's a new verison of Podium which runs on plain vanilla MS Dos coming out any day now. Perhaps the U. of Delaware can help you on that one. Also, there is a new Intel chip set due out early 1992 (so they say) which will handle live motion video, but of course these chips won't help you at the moment. Unless you're married to IBM equipment, you might also invesitgate both the Amiga and Macintosh multimedia systems. You might be especially interested in taking a look at Macromind's Media-Maker for the Macs. It's a joy to work with. Good Luck! Marti Atkinson University of Calif. at Santa Cruz marti@saturn.ucsc.edu marti@uccrls.BITNET ..!ucbvax!ucscc!saturn!marti
milne@ics.uci.edu (Alastair Milne) (05/02/91)
In <1991Apr29.200448.14543@isc.rit.edu> rhm5684@isc.rit.edu (R.H. Mowery ) writes: > My only reason for questioning the IBM system is that it seems >that the run-time (at least from what I read) will only work on PS/2 >systems. If this is true, that means luggin our system with us and also >limits us from sending out a disk to let the clients view our machines. I know, having argued the same thing within our own group, that MicroChannel machines (what people usually mean when they refer to the PS/2's) are having limited acceptance, but is it really as bad as that? >Has anyone out there used the IBM AVC software with the Motion video >Apdater A card, or the 750 motion media card? IS there anything out >there that will allow me to do this kind of quality? We do have true >blues at work, but of course at home I don't, so no taking work home. A PS/2 is not totally out of the reach of the home market, though IBM's prices may make it seem as if they'd like that. A model 55x will do fine for using M-Motion/A. >I also cannot >seem to find any software that can handle live motion video other than >the IBM motion video. I'm not quite sure what software you mean, but it's true that running the M-Motion video/A card requires loading 3 TSR's (MMEDIA, MMOTION, and drivers for the players you want to use). However, your application can be in anything you like as long as it can allocate the variable blocks M-Control wants, raise M-Control's software interrupt, and ideally, be able to create and link in a WakeUp routine. I've been doing it with Turbo Pascal 5.0 and 6.0 . Once I'd got some communications problems sorted out, it worked very nicely. This is giving me a Turbo Pascal unit which any application can use to obtain simple, straightforward calls to use video. >They also said the card only works on the PS/2 >series because of the Multi-Channnel Arch. Why would this be true? IBM are pushing the microchannel bus as hard as they can, even though they're making it more expensive to build machines with it than with ISA bus. However, there are actually machines from other manufacturers appearing which use MicroChannel. I only know this, though, because BYTE examined a set of them last October. Apart from that review, I've never heard them mentioned. MicroChannel is a *really* different beast from the old ISA bus. Adapters built for it are a different shape from adapters built for ISA. Its abilities, signals, etc. etc. are all quite different. You might just as well try to use a board made for the Mac's NuBus. >Could it be designed around this -- guess it's just there way of selling >more machines??? I must say they were very helpful in getting me >information, but I still would like opinions from the rest of the world. I found them reasonably helpful too. In one case where they were less so, I got a handsome apology by e-mail after I mentioned it on the net -- in fact, in this group. My feeling at the moment is this: take MicroChannel boards, like M-Motion; ISA boards, like VideoLogic's DVA-x000; boards for the Mac, boards for the Amiga, etc.; and establish some portable, system-independent interfaces on which applications can be built, which use features common to them all. As Borland's GRAPH unit for Turbo Pascal does across the variety of graphics adapters for PC's. Why do that, at the risk of losing some favourite feature from a particular one of them? Because this area is still very young, and it remains to be seen exactly what standards will emerge and stabilise. Until then, you want your applications and their support as portable as possible. And as I always do, I will again recommend high-level languages for this work, not authoring languages. You need readability, maintainability, portability, and strong support for software engineering precepts (and moderately efficient code generation is rather nice too). Alastair Milne
milne@ics.uci.edu (Alastair Milne) (05/02/91)
In <15244@darkstar.ucsc.edu> marti@saturn.ucsc.edu (Marti Atkinson) writes: >We've been working with the AVC boards, but not with the M-Motion >adapter. We love the boards, but the software interface is a real >pain, especially the graphics. How so? M-Control's consists of a software interrupt, with registers set to point to a carefully-documented variable block. It was quite straightforward. What happens to graphics on AVC? With M-Control they are unaffected. Alastair Milne
harrism@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com (05/19/91)
In article <1991Apr29.200448.14543@isc.rit.edu>, rhm5684@isc.rit.edu (R.H. Mowery ) writes: > So I am requesting advice and sugesstions from anyone out there who > may have or are currently developing multi-media applications on > the IBM - PC platform. I know it is not the best ... > -R. Mowery III Hi. I am doing something like what your doing. If you could call me at work 216-646-4229 or home 216-951-4845 it would be great. I just got back from NCGA '91 and the best thing I saw was SF-QUAD/1. Both Alan Paller(SP) and Aaron Marcus told me to check it out. It is a board that can display 4 camera feeds on the same screen along with computer data and graphics. The video images can be sized, dragged and frozen. You can configure your system to display 64+ video windows but, 64 is the most anyone has done to date. You even have the ability to access the video source from the pc(play,ff,rewind,lights,drapes,ect.) You might want to look into it. If you do call me or Scott R. Sharer at SFPS 1-800-736-9242. Good Luck; Mitch Harris harrism@mc.ab.com ak251@cleveland.freenet.edu