From: terjem@stud.cs.uit.no (Terje Normann Marthinussen)
Subject: Re: Complete A4000/A600/A570 Press Release
Keywords: AA, Display Modes
Organization: University of Tromsoe
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 18:39:20 GMT

In article <z#0y0ng@rpi.edu>, danaf@vccsouth20.its.rpi.edu (Frank R. Dana Jr.) writes:
>
>So you're saying, independant of the (wonderfully clear...) resolution list you
>just gave us, you can stick and number between two and 256 onto ANY resolution
>on the list? 1280x400x256, 320x200x256, etc...?
>
>Hmmm.... not bad! I was expecting worse, I must say. When I saw WB 3.0 a while 
>ago, the only new mode listed was a wild low-res productivity mode... it was
>320x960 interlaced, with 16 colors. WIIILD to look at. Sorta like a crooked 
>SuperHiRes.
>
>Ok, Ok, I'm impressed with the # of colors at such hi res. But, as far as 
>graphics go, I hold to my complaint about resolution. I`ve always felt that
>resolution is more important than color - if you have the resolution, you can
>dither in the colors (don't believe it? Take a look at your average laser
>printer... that's only TWO colors! Still does grayscale pretty well...). The
>Amiga still does not have THE resolution - read: at least 1024x768 or some
>equivalent numbers to match IBM, preferably 1280x1024 or something in the 1600s
>to TOP IBM. I don't care if it's only 16 colors, it would still make a great
>WorkBench!  8)

Well, eveone here on this group is complaining about the price and to low 
resolution...

Well I to would like to have something similar to 1280X1024 but I fell that 
most of the complaints here really don't match.

I was just wondering, how are most of the people here obviously capable of
buying themselves monitor which is really usefull at such high resolutins
(meaning at least 17 inch and preferable 19 inch or more if you really 
want to run at 1280X1024). Well, if all of them has the economical backbone
of doing this I most certainly can't see why they can't afford to buy 
the cheapest 68040 based computer on the market today.....

At least as far as I know most PC users today have 14" or maybe 15" inch
screens. I suppose that most of you out there has seen with your own 
eyes how useful 1280X1024 or 1024X768 is at these screensizes.
I'm not talking speed here I'm talking about how small different
things on the screen can get before you're unable to see them.
This is probably why you see that most people out there using IBM compatibles
is still using normal VGA modes while working with windows, even though their
graphics cards might support 1280X1024 resolutions.


Anyway, anyone out there capable of telling me what the overscanned resolution
of the 800X600 mode is? I have a feeling that it probably should end up quite
near to the 1024X768 (quite often interlaced) resolutions that is offer on 
IBM compatibles.


>
>Also, something I implied in my last A4000 complaint, but did not directly state,
>we're still stuck at 2 megs of CHIP. I don't know about other users, but my
>FlickerFixed A2000 is running a 16 color HiRes-Interlaced Workbench, with a lot
>of stuff chucked into the startup, and by the time my WORKBENCH is up I'm down
>to 650K of CHIP!!! (out of 1 meg...)
>
>If I want to run ProPage, it just BARELY fits its 640x400x16(color) screen into
>the RAM, and if I want to PRINT I have to take the WB down to 8 colors! 
>
>Running ProPage and ProDraw 3.0 together is absolute HELL - I have to kick the
>WB into 2-color HiRes mode and run one of the Pro___ packages in 640x200. 
>Imagine if I ALSO wanted to have the Article Editor or ADPro running in the 
>background, as it is designed to do!!!!


Well I run PPage and PDraw (both 3.0) together quite often without any big 
problems with chip mem.
My problem though is that my 32bit Mem is eaten up quit fast and thereby 
redusing system performance to a crawl.

I really think you should consider your startup-sequence. Personally I loose
more than 1 meg of 32 bit mem to different programs started at boot time 
(including rom-shadowing) but I've never had any serious problems with chip mem
as long as I didn't do anything absolutely wild myselves.

>
>I heard a rumor a while ago that the AA/AGA chipset would have motherboard space
>for 4 megs of chip. My dealer and I agreed that it was not really ENOUGH space,
>and that there should be addresses and chip slots for a nice,round 16 megs.
>But **TWO MEGS**!?!?!?!?!? And with 256 colors onscreen at some new, 
>fair-to-middlin' resolutions!?!?!?!?!? SH*T! I hate Commodore. 
>

Hmmm.... well lets see... first of all I just GOT to have this 256 color 
SuperHires Interlaced picture as a Backdrop, then of course I must also have
a different 256 color backdrop in each of my windows so I can better see the
difference between them.....

Then of course, what is a multitasking machine if you can't have PPage, PDraw
ADPro, DPaint 4.1 and cad program working at one time on different Hires
interlaced superham custom screens, oh yeah, and then I got this wonderful new 
superham animation the other day, I think I will take a look at it while 
my Amiga is doing some tracing and printing that document from PPage
wiht all the different fonts in.... 
Oh shit..... No chip mem left??????
No it can't be......ONLY 2 MEG!!!! WHADDAYAMEAN ABOUT THAT, ONLY 2MEG OF CHIP!!!!
HOLY MOSES!!!!! WHAT A PIECE OF CRAP THIS NEW AMIGA IS!!!!!!

Well, well I suppose someone just never get satisified.


Terje Marthinussen
terjem@stud.cs.ui.no