From: wallmann@backus.pu.informatik.th-darmstadt.de (Natuerlich!)
Subject: Re: **** A1200 Info **** (Part I)
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 17:36:58 GMT
Organization: MSD software vault #9 @THD

In article <1992Nov5.154148.5424@klaava.Helsinki.FI> lindblad@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Jarkko Lindblad) writes:
>HAM is as real graphics mode and I can compare it to any other
>graphics mode if I wish.
Of course you can. You may also compare cars to ships. No one will mind. 

>There is also one very real limitation in 16-bit truecolor-modes in
>Falcon - they're dog-slow (in the usefull modes). 
Question is how limiting is it ? Not as limiting as you hope it to be.

>If 'animation' now means shoot 'em up's and other games, then you're
>right, however the truecolor modes in Falcon aren't really better
>because of the lack of speed in those modes.
When the first truecolor actiongame comes out you'll see how much worth
that statement was. In the lowrez mode there should be -ample- processor
speed left. 


>> 	Falcon pallete is approx. 260000 
>
>It is not in truecolor modes - you can not choose what of the 256k
>colors you use.
Ah yes, I goofed there.


>> Oooh!  I see!  You want to run games in 16bit direct!  Well, ok, thats cool.
>> Especiallly when you get only 15Khz resoltions anyway (except 320x200 VGA,
>> right?).  
>> 	Hngh?? Are 90% of Amiga games running in 640x400 (interlaced) or
>> 	in 320x200 (non-interlaced) ???
>
>Actually 640x400 is rarely used - I only know one "action" game that
>...
It's kinda sad that apparently noone figured out, that this was meant
as a rhethoric question. The guy I answered said, "you wanna run games in
320x200" ? I go "Well do Amiga games run in hirez or in lowrez usually ?"
Two dimwits answer "Of course they run mostly in lowrez". 

Hint: In a rethoric question the answer is already implied.

>> 	Falcon I can do it in a window, in arguably not bombastic but still 
>> 	AA-bashing 640x200x65536 colors.
>
>This 640x200x64k colors dies in front of 1450x566xHAM8 even as the
>latter is interlaced.
As soon as it is interlaced it's already useless. The 1450 sound like
overscan eh ? Anyway we had the HAM discussion already.
Figure vertical rez /2 for non-interlace and we are down to (with no
overscan 1280/200. Figure one byte per pixel only for HAM whereas TrueColor
has 2 bytes you get 640/200. In terms of Mbytes/s AA is app. the same as
the Falcon030, whereas the Falcon chipset has (for future models like
the 040) still 'breathing space' as can be shown by using OverScans
Screenblaster, that raises the internal pixel frequency of the Falcon
Chipset. Someone requested the address it is:

	OverScan
	Saentistr. 166
   1000 Berlin 48
   ---------------------
	Germany (tel:030-721 94 66, Mo.-Fr. 14-18 MEZ)

>> 	pretty quick, whereas IDE will hopefully die.
>
>DO you honestly think that all those dozens of PC-cloners will move to
>dramatically more expensive SCSI-II when there is much cheaper IDE
>available when 95% of users don't know or care what advantages each
>has over the other.
Not in a matter of months. But the current PC architecure is a dead end.
A 486 on a AT-bus ?? Har har!

>You don't have an Amiga, that if probably why you can't use a HAM
>window. One can of course use HAM-windows - the only problem is that
>one should not overlap windows.
I'll concede on this, although I can't quite imagine it. Anyway windows
that don't overlap are not 'real' windows.


>> Trivia note:
>> 	The Atari TT has a HAM mode.

>Another:

>I don't think so.
Computers are not a matter of religious beliefs (although the Amiga scene
sometimes makes you think otherwise). As much as you wish, it's not going
to go away.



Nat!
P.S. Jarkko before seeing 'red' and replying, read the next funfilled
     post too.
-- 
 -----   Email: wallmann@backus.pu.informatik.th-darmstadt.de  -----
               "Bang that bit that doesn't bang"   
Album of the month: "The plague that.." Infectious Grooves (an oldie)

Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy