HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: aciceran@spartan.ac.BrockU.CA (A. J. Ciceran)
Subject: Re: Random tidbits regarding WOC & A4000
Organization: Brock University, St. Catharines Ontario
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 03:57:36 GMT

In article <copes.716441585@marsh> copes@cs.curtin.edu.au (Simon Cope) writes:

>A RISC board would only be of use to a UNIX box.  NO SOFTWARE AT ALL would run
>on it, if used for a general amiga.
>Perhaps a RISC unix machine is in the works?

Until AmigaDOS is rewritten for a RISC-based processor, no * AmigaDOS *
software would function. But theoretically speaking, a RISC processor
like the DEC Alpha could run Unix, VMS and Windows NT. How's that for
versatility? :).

 
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: copes@cs.curtin.edu.au (Simon Cope)
Subject: Re: Upgrade path from A3000 -> A4000? Ask at WOC!
Organization: Curtin University of Technology
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 04:18:27 GMT

ggiles@cie.uoregon.edu (Gregg Giles) writes:

>>Not pin compatible but what about installing it on a ZorroIII Card or through
>>the CPU slot.  

No.  The ZorroIII slots cannot see chip ram or custom chip register accesses.

>   I don't think so. The AGA aren't just plop-in chips, folks. That's why
>Commodore put them on the motherboard of the A4000. These chips must have 
>access directly to the Chip RAM bus of the Amiga, and I don't think that any
>Amiga model has nearly enough data/address lines in the CPU slot to do what
>people are calling for. It just isn't technically possible.

The cpu slot does.  But I would rather an 040.

>   Don't hold your breath on hacks. AGA is way more than a simple upgrade.
>(BTW, even if it were possible to hack the AGA chips in an A3000, it would
>still be impossible to get the additional graphics modes new to the AGA set.
>The AGA chips >>>require<<< the additional bandwidth of the A4000. The A3000
>does not physically have enough data/address lines for these new bandwidths.

The 'Additional Bandwidth' is achievable on a daughter board.  That is
how chip ram accelerators work, by doubling the chip ram bandwidth.  They have
new faster ram on the board.  Likewise, it IS possible for a daughter board
with the new chipset and some fast ram on it to be designed and built by 
someone other than c=.  Whether or not they will be able to source the new 
chipset is another thing.  You WOULD get the new modes, as well.

>-- 
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Gregg Giles (Dynamix, Inc.)                 BIX: ggiles 
>All opinions expressed are my own.          Internet: ggiles@cie.uoregon.edu
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------

--
copes@cs.curtin.edu.au
From: ahansfor@wpi.wpi.edu (Andrew L. Hansford)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: C= Press Conference in Boston??
Date: 11 Sep 92 00:37:40
Organization: Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Worcester, MA 01609-2280
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: wpi.wpi.edu


I have heard that C= is holding a press conference on the East Coast
in Boston and New York to introduce the A4000. Could someone please
email and/or post information on the Boston date?  Where?  When?
General Public invited?  Developers?  BCS Members?

Thanks 

-- Andrew Hansford
   ahansfor@wpi.wpi.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: Holt@cheme.washington.edu (Brad Holt)
Subject: Re: Random tidbits regarding WOC & A4000
Followup-To: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Organization: Chemical Engineering, U Washington
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1992 00:52:59 GMT

In article <1992Sep15.234921.12102@uwm.edu>, gblock@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
(Gregory R Block) wrote:
> 
> Holt@cheme.washington.edu (Brad Holt) writes:
> :    Huh?   All of the Mac II line supports 24 bit graphics, just get the
> : Apple
> : 8/24 bit card.  In fact we have an old Mac II here (what year was that
> : released
> : anyway)that supports 24 bit graphics.
> 
> He did not say that cards weren't available to support 24-bit graphics
> for the Mac.  He did say, however, that aside from the Quadras, which
> cost more than the 4000, 24-bit graphics is not standard.  8-bit out
> of 24 are.  And since those are driven by the main processor, the
> Amiga has an advantage.  Again.
> 

   Now wait a minute.  If I can buy a standard configuration from Apple 
that includes a 24 bit card, then I would say it is standard.  I do not
have to resort to any third party board.  Just like if C= comes out with
a SCSI card for the A4000, then it is standard.

   The point is sort of mote anyway since Apple uses DIG.  I was very
disappointed to see that the A4000 does not support DIG.  I fear this
was the last chance for C= to really make an impact.  I was just reading
PC week today and they commented on the new Macs comming out (I do
not know why they are covering Apple so much).  New ones came out today, 
replacements for the IIsi, IIci in October.  New powerbooks in October.  
New Quadras in January.  We do not even have the A4000 available yet.

   By the way, when will you be able to buy one.
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: mike@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Mike Smithwick)
Subject: Re: Enough AGA!  WANTED:  WRKBNCH2.1 SPEED INCREASE INFO!
Organization: SF-Bay Public-Access Unix
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 22:30:01 GMT

In article <1992Sep14.063319.15118@marlin.jcu.edu.au> cpca@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Colin Adams) writes:
>In article <1992Sep13.233301.58851@cc.usu.edu> slbfn@cc.usu.edu writes:

>>  And, when can I order 2.1?  And what cost?
>
>Why do people ask these questions?  As soon as anybody knows, they'll
>post the information.
>
>>	Travis Carter
>
>-- 
>Colin Adams       Honours Student - James Cook University of North Queensland
>  "And if I seem a little strange, well that's because I am." - The Smiths 

The 2.1 update manual is being finalized. The update will consist of a
single disk and the book. No release date, but I'd assume about 2 months
if that.

Mike


-- 
"There is no problem too big that can't be solved with high explosives"-Rush

Mike Smithwick - ames!zorch!mike

Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: skip@tacky.cs.olemiss.edu (Skip Sauls)
Subject: Re: Some random thoughts on the A4000
Organization: University of Mississippi, Dept. of Computer Science
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1992 03:27:55 GMT

>Brad Holt writes:
>>I originally wrote:
>> I'd like to know why 2M is considered to be deficient on the A4000, yet
>> the Mac Quadras only offer 2M VRAM and most SVGA boards for the PC do
>> not have more than 1M VRAM.  How in the world do the users of those
>> machines manage on such a paltry amount of memory for the display?
>> 
>For one reason the Mac's and PC are using VRAM only for video, not for 
>sound and even for programs.

If you wanted, you could use nearly all of the Chip RAM for video.
Yes, many people will want to use the memory for sound, but there have
been programs available for years now which allow audio data to reside
in Fast RAM and only use a small portion of Chip RAM.  I maintain that
the Amiga A4000 with 2M Chip RAM is much more versatile than a 486 with
a 1M SVGA card and as much or more so than a Quadra with 2M VRAM.

As for programs occupying Chip RAM, I don't think anyone still writes
that sort of garbage anymore except for the demo coders.

>While we are on the topic, why in the world is there only 16Mb available
>of fast ram??  This is supposed to be the top of the market machine!

Are you an Amiga owner?  If not, then I suggest that you try out an
Amiga A3000 with 8M Fast RAM and tell me how often you find that it
is not enough.  I don't doubt that there are certain applications 
which may indeed require more than 16M Fast RAM, but the Amiga's OS
is not a pig like Mac OS, OS/2, or hacks like Windows.

BTW, the limit of 16M is for the motherboard only.  The A3000 and
above can address up to 1.8G of Fast RAM, enough to satisfy most
users I'd expect.

Skip Sauls
skip@tacky.cs.olemiss.edu



Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: skip@tacky.cs.olemiss.edu (Skip Sauls)
Subject: Re: Interlace video (Was Re: PC (OS/2) / Amiga debate)
Organization: University of Mississippi, Dept. of Computer Science
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 20:21:43 GMT

In article <1992Sep8.181514.386@ctr.columbia.edu> jerry@connection.prospect.com (Jerry Shekhel) writes:
>skip@tacky.cs.olemiss.edu (Skip Sauls) writes:
>>
>>I've been programming the VGA for a while now and wonder why so few games,
>>demos, etc. take advanatage of the extra resolution.
>
>I think VGA animation is still in its infancy.  Tweaked VGA modes like Mode X
>provide *big* gains when it comes to animation, but they aren't used much in
>games yet (Wolfenstein 3D uses one).  Also, VGA is perfectly capable of smooth
>scrolling in both directions (look at the Keen games, parts 4-6), but only
>a few games take advantage of it.  Keen 5, IMHO, has the nicest graphics I've
>ever seen in a PC action game.

I've seen a couple of the Keen games and think that everything is great
except for the ugly colors used.  It looks like they've tried to make it
work on EGA, so they stuck with those colors.  None of the PC games have
the same level of "parallax" scrolling found on Amiga games of the same
type, but I'd bet that they'll figure it out given time.  Considering how
little the VGA provides in comparison to the Amiga's chipset, the demos
and games on the PC are actually more impressive.

I've been working on animation in the VGA 640x480 16 color mode for a 
project and have managed to get some decent frame rates.  With a window
size of 160x160, the animation plays at 80fps of the hard disk.  Of course
this is too fast to be useful, but it does hint at the speeds that are
possible.  I'm going to increase the window size a bit and see what sort
of frame rates are possible.  Although it might seem odd, the 8 bit chunky
SVGA modes are actually better for some operations than the 4 bit planar
mode, so 256 color animations should also work well.

>+-------------------+-----------------------+--------------------------------+
>| Jerry J. Shekhel  | Molecular Simulations | Time just fades the pages      |
>| Drummers do it... | Inc.  Waltham, MA USA | in my book of memories.        |
>|    ... In rhythm! |     (617) 890-2888    |              -- Guns N' Roses  |
>+-------------------+-----------------------+--------------------------------+
>|           ...! [ princeton mit-eddie bu sunne ] !polygen!jerry             |
>|                            jerry@polygen.com                               |
>+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

Skip Sauls
skip@tacky.cs.olemiss.edu



Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: bleys@tronsbox.xei.com (Bill Cavanaugh)
Subject: Re: A4000 at WOC
Organization: Xanadu Enterprises Inc.
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 03:47:36 GMT

In article <1992Sep13.145220.1204@msus1.msus.edu> lkoop@TIGGER.STCLOUD.MSUS.EDU writes:
>In article <1992Sep13.025524.16629@tronsbox.xei.com>, bleys@tronsbox.xei.com (Bill Cavanaugh) writes:
>>In article <1992Sep12.162130.1197@msus1.msus.edu> lkoop@TIGGER.STCLOUD.MSUS.EDU writes:
>>>In article <1992Sep12.193651.17020@cco.caltech.edu>, keith@cco.caltech.edu (Keith Allan Schneider) writes:
>>>>He wasn't using a second hand report.  He was using mine.  I tried one of the
>>>>things out, and it was much slower (in 256 color mode) than my A3000 in
>>>>16 color mode.
>>>
>>>Which is second hand from Marc's perspective.  It is a matter of opinion as
>>>to the speed of the system in the 256 color mode.  Some feel it is faster than
>>>you say, some slower.  This one point is highly subjective in this setting.
>>>
>>
>>Wrong.  That report is second-hand data from Marc's perspective, but
>
>Exactly what I said, please re-read before you post to flame.
>

Actually, what you said was:
lkoop@TIGGER.STCLOUD.MSUS.EDU (LaMonte Koop) writes:
>    Interesting enough how you are making your own assumptions based upon
>second and third hand reports.

I was pointing out that it was a first-hand report;  a report from
someone who's hands actually touched the machine.

>
>Well, in fact it is you who is playing semantic games, and in that respect
>I am really not in the mood.  You missed the point of what I was saying and
>chose to move on to attack language usage.  I was making the point that Marc
>was making judgemental remarks when he himself has not even used the system
>in question.  In that respect, what I have said is true.  Marc is not right
>on that respect, and I am in no way playing 'games' as you put it.

The point of what you said was that Marc has to actually use the
machine before he can comment on it, even when someone he trusts uses
one and tells him about it.  By that logic, none of us has any right
to comment on anything, since we're all relatively inexperienced
compared to the number of things that happen every day everywhere.  Do
you think that we should all go to Florida before we believe that the
hurricane was bad?  That we should go to Somalia before we believe
that the people there are hungry?

bill

-- 
 *         Bill Cavanaugh       bleys@tronsbox.xei.com          *
 *                                                              *
    "There is nothing more frighful than ignorance in action."  

                           Malcolm X
XY + XX = :-)
From: jorngh@dhhalden.no (JORN GUNNAR HALONEN)
Subject: Re: Way to go Commodore! Yeah...right.
Organization: Ostfold College
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 09:46:25 GMT

In article <1992Sep14.153710.20705@newshost.unh.edu> ggg@kepler.unh.edu (Gregory G Greene) writes:
>	Why would they bother?  The only Amiga that has the AGA chipset
>  is the A4000.  The Amiga that is truly going to sell well, the A600, still
>  only has the ECS.  Where the heck is Commodores affordable AGA chipset
>  machines??  Do they call the A4000 at over $3000 without a monitor 
>  affordable?

Affordable ? YES!

I wonder why you americans whine about prices all the time, no matter
how low the prices are they still are too high. I wish I could buy an
Amiga 4000 for _ONLY_ $3000, but I live in Norway and I expect to pay
about $4500 for it (roughly calculated). Yet I won't complain.

*JORN* (A3000)
From: pk-asdg@cup.portal.com (Perry S Kivolowitz)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Does AGA = HAME on a chip(s)?
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 92 18:29:03 PDT
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
Distribution: world

David says:
>Also, weren't there rumors at one time that there was collaboration 
>between Black Belt and CBM? 

These rumors were carefully fostered by BlackBelt as a smoke screen 
for the real reason HAME was removed from the market. While, to my
knowledge, BlackBelt never actually said they had any deal going
with Commodore, the level to which this story spread is a tribute
to how far you can go by saying ``I can't comment.''
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: copes@cs.curtin.edu.au (Simon Cope)
Subject: Re: IBM lamers at their worst - uiuc siggraph meeting
Organization: Curtin University of Technology
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 04:16:27 GMT

jerry@connection.prospect.com (Jerry Shekhel) writes:

>matt@gbrmpa.gov.au (Matt) writes:
>>
>>Yep, that's right, Amiga is the only computer that can lay graphics
>>onto video tape.
>>

>Bullshit.  My 1981 Atari 800 can do the same thing.

Do you have Imagine on your Atari?  How about a A$400 32 bit graphics board?
Sorry, but I couldn't resist ;-)

>>
>>matt.
>>

--
copes@cs.curtin.edu.au

Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: jerry@connection.prospect.com (Jerry Shekhel)
Subject: Re: Amiga 4000/Atari Falc
Organization: Molecular Simulations, Inc.
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 17:31:46 GMT
X-Posted-From: connection.prospect.com
X-Posted-Through: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

andy@cbmvax.commodore.com (Andy Finkel) writes:
>>
>>No, I just think that a computer grafted on top of another computer is
>>a kludge.  It has nothing to do with the Intel CPU.
>
>Then, by obvious implication, an operating system grafted on top
>of another operating system is also a kludge.  Therefore, the
>DOS box grafted to OS/2 is a kludge.
>

I don't see where you got this "obvious implication".  Software is different
from hardware.  There's nothing kludgy about software layers; that's the way
software is designed.  Consider X-Windows.  There's Xlib, above which is the
X Toolkit, above which is a widget set (like Motif), above which is a virtual
toolkit (like XVT).  So, OS/2 supports the DOS API.  I don't see anything
wrong with that.  However, the amount of "kludginess" depends on which OS/2
you're talking about:

>
>Seriously, read the book _Inside OS/2_ by Gordon Letwin.  If you are
>at all familiar with the details of other operating systems, and
>the details of MS-DOS, you'll be amazed at the kludges that MSDOS
>compatibility forced into OS/2.  The first time I read the book I
>was not familiar with MSDOS, so in a lot of places I was puzzled
>as to why they took a clean concept, then grafted a really twisted
>mode into it.  I recently reread the book , and now that I know MSDOS
>I understand why the screwy twists got in.  The MS-DOS compatibility
>box is probably the worst thing to happen to OS/2 as an operating
>system.  (You can argue all you want about how it was necessary
>to OS/2 as a marketable product;  this is different from what it did
>to OS/2 as an OS)
>

I read the book, and yes, OS/2 1.x had to do a lot of trickery to switch
the 286 CPU into Real Mode from Protected Mode (something the 286 isn't
designed to do) and execute a DOS app while running OS/2 processes in the
background.  All of this is gone now that we have the 386 and OS/2 2.0; read
"The Design of OS/2" by Deitel & Kogan.

>
>On the realtime nature of OS/2:   Again, from _Inside OS/2_, the
>scheduler always runs the thread with the highest priority, until
>that thread blocks for some reason, or a higher priority thread
>requires the CPU.  (Has this changed in OS/2 2.0?)  
>

OK, what does this imply about OS/2 -- is it real-time or isn't it?

>
>andy finkel		{uunet|rutgers|amiga}!cbmvax!andy
>
--
+-------------------+-----------------------+--------------------------------+
| Jerry J. Shekhel  | Molecular Simulations | Time just fades the pages      |
| Drummers do it... | Inc.  Waltham, MA USA | in my book of memories.        |
|    ... In rhythm! |     (617) 890-2888    |              -- Guns N' Roses  |
+-------------------+-----------------------+--------------------------------+
|           ...! [ princeton mit-eddie bu sunne ] !polygen!jerry             |
|                            jerry@polygen.com                               |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
From: mcramm@dct.ac.uk
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Upgrade path from A3000 - > A4000 (thread 999999)
Date: 14 Sep 92 13:12:39 GMT
Organization: Dundee Institute of Technology

One thing I forgot to mention in my last post / follow-up is that I'm
looking at this from  UK poitn of view - over here C= (UK) don't 
publicise power-up deals (if they exist) to the existing user base very well.

It's got to the stage where I'm being offered different trade-in / power-up
options by different dealers, depending which distributor they talk to.

However, I stick to my original theorem which is that an AGA card could be
produced for A3000. It would probably have separate chip RAM from the 
motherboard, and an independent video port. Unless someone can tell me
why this could not (not will not) be done, I'll continue to believe it.

Since C= seem to be committed to processor modules, why not custom chip
modules as well ?

-- 
 Angus M. Marshall.
From: daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: A4000 at WOC
Date: 14 Sep 92 22:59:17 GMT
Reply-To: daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie)
Organization: Commodore, West Chester, PA

In article <u894776.716429582@bruny> u894776@bruny.cc.utas.edu.au (James McCoull) writes:

>Hmm... I've been doing solid realtime window drags on my 1987
>Archimedes in 256 colour mode for quite some time now...  

Well, the A4000's display does slow down some in 256 color mode at higher 
bandwidths, but I can assure you, none of the modes will cause a window drag
to last five years.
-- 
Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Cool Advanced High-End Systems You Can't See Yet)
 "The Crew That Never Rests"  {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh   BIX: hazy
             "We're not hitchhiking anymore, we're riding" -Ren Hoek
From: gs@TEETOT.ACUSD.EDU (Sir Greg Simon)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Amiga production history thoughts
Date: 14 Sep 92 06:58:01 GMT


In Andre Yew's post, he mentioned that Eggelbert (sp?) talked about how
the high-end chip set could produce a blitter per plane.

Hmm...I seem to recall a lecture given by RJ Mical in the pre-KS-1.3
days about the history of the Amiga.  He (RJ) talked about the orginal
AMiga group in Los Gatos and how they were working on a chip set with a
_blitter per bit plane_ but "nothing was ever produced because Commodore
stopped financing them."  

I wonder, if C= had continued financing them, if we would have had this
(or some) of these 'enhanced' features many year's ago?

I realize that tecnology is always a factor; but it's funny how
Eggelbert is talking about this now like it's 'all new,' when the Amiga
group in L.G had thought about it half a decade ago...

-Greg

***********************************************************************
* Greg Simon               "Amiga: the computer for the creative mind"
* <gs@teetot.acusd.edu>    "Macintosh: the computer for the rest of us"
* Univsersity of San Diego
* Electrical Engineering    Blitting is a way of life.
***********************************************************************
From: CS19241727H@LUST2.LATROBE.EDU.AU (KOUKOULAS, STEVEN)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: It's so obvious...
Date: 10 Sep 92 08:44:00 GMT
Organization: La Trobe University
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.22


       <<    To all you IBM/PC-Clone owners who insist that they    >>
       <<       have a better machine than the average Amiga.       >>


   Please don't take this as a stab at the PC because I know that the IBM is
a very capable machine when it comes down to the business side of software and
power but when you get into the domain of graphics/software/handling the Amiga
wins hands down.

   Ever since the Amiga first came out in '85 the PC market has been trying
desperately to compare with the Amiga. We've seen certain products and software
that the PC market has delivered that are a dead set give-away that the IBM/PC
is trying to encroach on the Amigas turf.

	Things like this:

1. Windows - a direct copy of the Amiga Workbench (and the Apple interface.)

2. VGA/SVGA cards - Quote*: "We've got good graphics too!!".

3. Sound Cards - Quote*: "We've got good sound too!!".

*Quotes supplied by a frustrated 486-Clone user.

   It's not that I hate IBM/PC users, it's just that they strive to prove that
their machines are better even though they know they're wrong. It's a waste of
oxygen.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
P.S. To all you Amiga Graphics admirers out there I am putting together some
     ArtWork of my own using some decent software and I will be distributing
     them in Victoria.Australia. The Pictures come on disks and are free. If
     you would like to view some of them you can always write back for info.
     I am thinking of transferring them to an FTP site for anyone to view. I
     am also thinking of resorting to converting them to GIF format so that
     the IBM/PC users can have a looksee. With some help, they will eventually
     make the trip overseas. 

     My artist name is Amskart 3000.
		Am   : Amiga
		sk   : Steven Koukoulas   (My initials.)
		art  : Speaks for itself
		3000 : The one and only Amiga 3000



		Lifes pretty straight without an Amiga.
  
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy