HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: barrett@iastate.edu (Marc N Barrett)
Subject: Re: AGA Compatable A3000 - Why Not?  Isn't it possible.
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, IA
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 04:10:10 GMT

In article <1992Sep12.182353.58839@cc.usu.edu> slbfn@cc.usu.edu writes:
>
>
>   Somebody told somebody that told somebody that told me that...
>
>     (In other words, a semi-true but possilby false rumor)
>
>
>The AGA (AA) CHIPSET WILL NOT WORK IN AN A3000!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
>
>If this is true (which it may, or may not be...) then it F---S BIG time!
>
>However, I am no hardware dude (yet...  give me 4.3 years...) but isn't
>the arcitechture of the A3000 completely 32bit except for the path to the
>ECS?  And if it is, wouldn't it be possible to install the AGA in the
>CPU slot?  Of course, you'd probably have to change some Workbench memory
>locations, I don't know.
>
>I want a Commodore solution!  A 3rd party solution would be nice, too...

   I think an AGA board for the A3000 would be {ossible, and might even be
fairly easy to design.  If Commodore does not develop such a board, it will
probably be because the R&D budgets are too tight to develop such a product,
and the management refuses to raise the R&D budgets.  At any rate, as I've
already stated, the A4000 is really just an A3000 with the AGA chipset 
hcked in, anyway.  If you do not believe me, just check for yourself: with
the exception of the SCSI circuitry (which does not exist in the A4000),
all of the circuitry external to the chipset subsystem -- the circuitry 
that implements the CPU, the 32-bit memory, the Zorro III slots, etc -- is
the same on the A3000 and A4000.

>Greetings,
>
>	Travis Carter
>	slbfn@cc.usu.edu

---
| Marc Barrett -MB-  |  email: barrett@iastate.edu
--------------------------------------------------
Xref: sparky comp.sys.amiga.advocacy:23477 comp.sys.amiga.misc:13635
From: mwm@contessa.palo-alto.ca.us (Mike Meyer)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy,comp.sys.amiga.misc
Subject: Re: Black Apples
Date: 5 Sep 92 19:26:17 GMT
Organization: Missionaria Phonibalonica
X-NewsSoftware: Amiga Yarn 3.4, 1992/08/12 15:49:52

In <ZLbBr*gV0@caleb.UUCP>, jdp@caleb.UUCP (Jim Pritchett) wrote:
> In article <crystal.714977696@glia>, Crystal writes:
> 
> > (I even played on a black Apple at the local Community college as late as
> > 1986!  It was an ordinary Apple...just the case was black....)
> 
> Weren't the Bell & Howell Apples black?  I don't remember for sure...

Yes, they were. I was part owner of an outlet that sold them in the
early '70s.

Of course, I also worked with a MITS Altair 8800. Friend I went to
school with bought one. 256 _bytes_ of RAM, and a front panel for IO.
Not a very useful machine, but a great teaching device.

For those feeling old, I'm just barely entering my late youth.

	<mike
From: slbfn@cc.usu.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: FlickerFixer Preferences?  (!)
Date: 15 Sep 92 13:40:01 MDT
X-From: slbfn@cc.usu.edu
X-Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.applications
Followup-To: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy,comp.sys.amiga.applications

X-Date: 14 Sep 92 15:53:53 MDT
X-Organization: Utah State University

I read somewhere about a commercial utility made by (I *THINK*) IDE
called "flickerfixer preferences" or something like that.

It claimed was able to "boost" up current 60Hz and 50Hz to 72Hz or even
stuff like 100Hz totally transparent to the system.

I have really sensitive eyes and was wanting to know how the 72Hz mode
works.  If it works nicely, I'll buy the package.

The ad said it worked with IDE's flickerfixer and the A3000 de-interlacer.

Can somebody please tell me about this product!

Greetings,

	Travis Carter
	slbfn@cc.usu.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: gerald@seas.gwu.edu (Gerald G. Washington)
Subject: Re: Some random thoughts on the A4000
Organization: George Washington University
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 04:32:35 GMT

bmccnnll@unix1.tcd.ie (Barry McConnell) writes:
>I haven't actually *seen* one of these beasts yet (I guess they won't make an
>appearance here in Ireland for a long, long time...), but I have a few
>thoughts on the specs which have been posted numerous times here:
>
>- 25MHz 68040. Boring! :-)  [...]

I certainly would not mind having one.  As you say, the modular design
allows the CPU to be upgraded.

>- Graphics. Mmm, very nice - [...]

Yes, I am very pleased with the new graphics.  A 1024x768 resolution would
be nice, but it is not necessary in the standard configuration.  I really
want to see a 1280x400 picture with 250000 colors!  (How could any HAM-
fringing be noticeable at that resolution?)

>- 2MB Chip RAM. Aghhhhhh!! [...]

I agree.  This problem needs to be addressed soon.

>- Icons. Please, please, please, please Commodore, colour in all your icons,
>so we can have really sexy-looking desktops if we choose to run in 16 or 256
>colour mode. I had to colour in all the 2.04 ones myself, and I don't want to
>have to do it all over again for 3.0.

Yes, this would be a good bonus.  Those coming from Windows and System 7
environments would appreciate it.

>- SCSI vs IDE. [...]

This does not concern me much.  A SCSI-II board can be added later if needed.
Still, it is surprising to see IDE in an 040 system.

>- Enhanced sound. Yes, we're waiting. :-)  [...]

This would be a good bonus, too, but I like the current Amiga sound.  It is
still easy for me to impress people with the Amiga's 1985 sound technology.

>- KS/WB3.0.  [...]

One thing I did not notice in the specs is virtual memory.  This would be
a nice option.

>- Can we have a slightly cut-down version without the PC slots?  [...]

A low-end system would be great--no PC slots and a 68030 module.
(I hear that the GIF images of the A4000 are bogus.  Apparently there
is no PCMCIA slot.)

>Hmmm, there goes another 8K of bandwidth! Sorry for rambling...

Well, we are advocating the Amiga...

-- Gerald
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: The BOOK that will CHANGE YOUR LIFE
From: alanb@sdl.mdcbbs.com (Alan Braggins)
Date: 09 Sep 92 15:29:13 GMT
Organization: Shape Data (Division of EDS), Cambridge UK
In-reply-to: barrett@astro.cs.umass.edu's message of 8 Sep 92 20:35:03 GMT

>>>>> On 8 Sep 92 20:35:03 GMT, barrett@astro.cs.umass.edu (Daniel Barrett) said:

> 	o	How to win at BLAZEMONGER and lose only 2 limbs!

> ?	Can't win at BLAZEMONGER?  [See page 3,719 to learn why it's
>       not possible.

Shome mishtake here, shurely??

--
Alan Braggins, Shape Data (A Division of EDS Ltd), Cambridge, UK +44-223-316673
   "Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced."
 "My employer does not necessarily share my views - but I'm working on it."
From: root@rkamiga.UUCP (Rick Kelly)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re:  Amiga 4000/Atari Falcon
Date: 11 Sep 92 09:03:27 GMT
Organization: Rick's Amiga

In article <1992Sep10.153132.16109@ctr.columbia.edu> jerry@connection.prospect.com (Jerry Shekhel) writes:
>In article <BuC71z.55I@medar.com> jseymour@medar.com (James Seymour) writes:
>>
>>------------------------- begin included text --------------------------
>>
>>    kludge (klooj) or kluge (kluj) [origin unknown]  n.  1. An ill-sorted
>>     collection of poorly matching parts forming a distressing whole.
>>     2. An ill-conceived, and hence, unreliable system that has
>>     accumulated through patchwork, expediency, and poor planning.  3. A
>>     system and esp. a computer system made up of poorly matched
>>     components.  intr.v. -ed, -ing, -es.
>>
>>-------------------------- end included text ---------------------------
>>
>>Now, I don't know as I'd call MS-DOS/clone systems kludges as per
>>definitions 1 & 3, but I'm certainly of the opinion that "modern"
>>DOS-boxes fit #2 perfectly.  EMS/XMS is just one reason.  There's a
>>whole raft more.
>>
>>[more deleted]
>>
>
>I understand and agree with all your comments.  I just want to point out
>one thing.  All of this applies to DOS only.  Put a real OS on the system
>and the kludge (definition #2) goes away.

I think that a lot of people here haven't seen Intel boxes running real
multitasking, multiuser operating systems that do real work.

1. Take an NEC 486/EISA box and stuff the slots with Corollary 486 EISA
   cards or get an Everex 486/MP box that is stuffed with processor cards.
   Now load SCO MPX.  You have a UNIX system that can support up to 200+
   users.  It's not a big deal as the EISA setup software autoconfigs the
   processor boards and saves the info in cmos.  I have set up an NEC MPX
   system.

2. There are real world 386/33 systems out there supporting 25-30 users
   with XENIX 386.  These are ISA systems.

3. There are Coherent 286 systems out there supporting 4 or 5 dial in
   lines.

In the UNIX world, good performance can be had from Intel boxes with
enlightened purchases of hardware, and good system setup and administration.

And a lot of people probably don't know that UNIX, ported from AT&T sources,
was running on the PC/XT back in 1982/83.

--
Rick Kelly		Rick's Amiga		Framingham, Mass.

		think!unixland!rmkhome!rkamiga!root
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: bleys@tronsbox.xei.com (Bill Cavanaugh)
Subject: Re: CDTV is dead.
Organization: Xanadu Enterprises Inc.
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 04:24:43 GMT

In article <1992Sep5.054311.2328@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> rjc@hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Ray) writes:
>
>   I will tell you right now, that for Commodore to build a a .6-.8
>fab plant will cost 1/5 - 1/2 the total net worth of the company.
>Explain to me how Commodore could afford to mass produce a .8 micron
>chipset (build their own fab plant)? The best thing they could do
>would be to contract out to a Japanese company, but they could 
>never mass produce .6-.8 themselves.
>

Please explain to us un-enlightened folks why Commodore has to
manufacture the chips themselves instead of contracting (no reason to
single out the Japanese;  there are chip manufacturers all over the
world).  There are companies with the needed technology that exist for
this purpose.  Such contracting would let Commodore concentrate their 
resources on R&D.   It would also let them set up alternate suppliers 
in case there was a problem meeting demand.

>   1.6 micron CMOS is fine for a chipset. Most chipsets you find 
>in VGA cards are 1.2 or greater. Your complaints are really getting
>pathetic. Atleast the AA chips won't be stupid shifters like VGA and
>will actually contain some _real_ logic.

I'm sure I'm being obtuse, but did you just say that 1.6 is just fine
for the more complex AA chipset, since the simple VGA cards average
1.2?  It's late, I'm tired, and I MUST be misunderstanding you.....

bill

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

                           Malcolm X
XY + XX = :-)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: wesdia@sniap.mchp.sni.de (Wolf-Eckart Schmidt)
Subject: Wanted: The _real_ specs of the A4000 (WoC)
Followup-To: comp.sys.amiga.misc
Reply-To: Wolf-Eckart.Schmidt@ap.mchp.sni.de
Organization: Siemens-Nixdorf AG
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 92 13:49:52 GMT

Are there any official announcements of Commodore for the A4000 (A3400 ?) known now?
Perhaps announcments of other new machines... :->>>

Who know's something?

Eike

-- 
Eike Reinel        | private:                   | A500 2.04    ;-)
Siemens Nixdorf AG | Scheinerstr.64             | 1 MB RAM     :-(
AP 421             | W-8070 Ingolstadt Germany  | 44MB Quantum :-|
email to: Wolf-Eckart.Schmidt@ap.mchp.sni.de    | IRC-Nick : Sid
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: cpca@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Colin Adams)
Subject: Re: WB 3.0
Organization: James Cook University
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 12:13:08 GMT

In article <amuser.716111407@marsh> amuser@cs.curtin.edu.au (Bill Sharp-Smith AUG) writes:
>dtiberio@libws2.ic.sunysb.edu (David Tiberio) writes:
>>palette. The other new library is the 68040.library, which makes any
>>Amiga run at about 20 mips.
>
>Even my stock A500 ? 8-) 8-)
>
>But seriously, how does the 040 library speed things up ? 

It doesn't speed anything up.  The chip does :)  The library is
for maths instruction emulation.  David wasn't in the slightest
bit serious when he said it would make your Amiga run at 20 mips.

> mips is a
>processor speed as far as I know and is independant of the OS being run.

Yep, that's right.

-- 
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 
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: dingebre@imp.sim.es.com (David Ingebretsen)
Subject: Re: Marc Barrett: an Amiga pioneer (was Re: More AmigaWorld Lies)
Reply-To: dingebre@imp.sim.es.com (David Ingebretsen)
Organization: Evans & Sutherland Computer Corp., Salt Lake City, UT
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 20:17:04 GMT

In article <53062@dime.cs.umass.edu>, barrett@gleep.cs.umass.edu (Daniel Barrett) writes:
> In article <1992Sep8.003808.6875@news.iastate.edu> barrett@iastate.edu (Marc N Barrett) writes:
> [posted in c.s.a.misc]

WONDERFUL description of -MB- deleted...
> 
> 	Oh wait... NOW I understand why Marc is an Amiga pioneer!
> If it weren't for him, nobody would have proposed the creation of
> comp.sys.amiga.advocacy.

***** touche' ******

>                                                         Dan
> 							(no relation)
> 
>  //////////////////////////////////////\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
> | Dan Barrett -- Dept of Computer Science, Lederle Graduate Research Center |
> | University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA  01003  --  barrett@cs.umass.edu |
>  \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/////////////////////////////////////

Thanks, Dan for adding a little sanity.

-- 
	David

	Disclaimer: The content of this message in no way reflects the
	            opinions of my employer, nor are my actions
		    encouraged, supported, or acknowledged by my
		    employer.
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: cadwallader@forty2.enet.dec.com ()
Subject: Re: FINALLY!  THE MARC BARRETT POSTING TRANSLATOR!!!
Reply-To: cadwallader@forty2.enet.dec.com ()
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 12:51:46 GMT


I hear Marc Barrett **CRAWLS** when operating in fingers-typing and
watching-screen-at-same-time-whilst-breathing mode.

								- JIM CAD*
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: cpca@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Colin Adams)
Subject: Re: WOC - A4000 - sunga rattef
Organization: James Cook University
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 92 12:34:52 GMT

In article <1992Sep11.161824.42915@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu> 2ftqkiln@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu writes:
>> AmigaDOS 3.0
>  ^^^^^^^^^^^^
>Whats different in 3.0 from 2.04 other than the AA support?
>

It's a lot faster.  They must have spent quite a lot of time trying
to make the interface faster due to the extra memory they were
going to be moving around.   It also is closer to RTG.

It is interesting to note that even C= are referring to the Amiga 
operating system as AmigaDOS, so I guess we finally have an official 
name for the operating system...

>Would have been nice but at least we have an 040, AA chipset, HD floppy,
>and ADos 3.0 all at a 'reasonable' price. At least a lot more reasonable
>than the A3000T.

The A3000T must have been a bad joke.  Were they mentioned or on show at
WOC?

-- 
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 
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: aciceran@spartan.ac.BrockU.CA (A. J. Ciceran)
Subject: Quote of the Week 
Organization: Brock University, St. Catharines Ontario
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 03:06:56 GMT

In article <35108@cbmvax.commodore.com> daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) writes:

>...if improving the system is screwing the user base, you all need to be
>screwed more often.

Definitely another one for the Fortune data file!

>Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Cool Advanced High-End Systems You Can't See Yet)
                              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Ah man, I hate it when they tease us like that :).
     

Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: peter@NeoSoft.com (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: a4000 specs? who know
Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- (713) 684-5900
Distribution: comp
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 21:36:37 GMT

In article <1992Sep13.4477.28515@dosgate> "robert buonincontro" <robert.buonincontro@canrem.com> writes:
>  I agree 100%! I own an Amiga 3000 and an IBM 386. When shopping around for
> harddrives I find that IDE drives cost less then a simular SCSI drive and you
> usually get more storage for your money. 

Similar drives? Did you compare them side by side and see if the quality of
the construction was the same, the transfer rate, the error handling, and so
on? If you did, you'd find the price difference negligable. Try comparing the
price of drives that come in both SCSI and IDE versions.

SCSI drives cost more because they're better drives to begin with.

Given that the hard drive is the most likely thing to break, and the unit
that's toughest to put back together (even with backups), I'll pay a few
bucks more for peace of mind.
-- 
Peter da Silva.  <peter@sugar.neosoft.com>.
 `-_-'   "Have you hugged your wolf today?"
  'U`  
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: gblock@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Gregory R Block)
Subject: Re: Unreal demo!
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 19:18:05 GMT

mykes@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG (Mike Schwartz) writes:
: Yeah, the A1000 could do the bouncing ball demo using 9% of the CPU.
: It can't do much of anything USEFUL with 100% of the CPU.  That's the

That's not true, and you know it...  Exaggerations are just that, and
they'll get you nowhere fast.

: rub.  The A500 isn't much more than an A1000...  And the Amiga doesn't
: compare with a Sega Gensis for hardware for doing demos.  So obviously,
: cheaper is better, right?

If all you're talking about is demos, yes.  Why is it that it takes a
386 at a good speed to make this demo move at any respectable clip?
There's obvious reasons.

Perhaps what we need isn't more demos for the 500.  Someone needs to
code one for the 3000.  Then you'll see what people can do with a
powerful cpu AND a powerful graphics engine rather than just relying
on the first.

If an 8 mhz 68000 and a chipset running at less than half the speed of
the 386 can do BETTER than that 386, isn't there something going on?

--
(: (: (: (: Have you overdosed on smileys today?  Why NOT!?! :) :) :) :)
(:"...High adventure that's beyond compare, they are the Gummi Bears.":)
(:	gblock@csd4.csd.uwm.edu			Gregory R. Block      :)
(: (: (: (: (: (: (: (: (: (: (: (: (:) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: terjem@stud.cs.uit.no (Terje Normann Marthinussen)
Subject: Re: Here's one for ya....
Organization: University of Tromsoe
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 09:13:04 GMT

In article <1992Sep14.172706.13835@microsoft.com>, iank@microsoft.com (Ian Kennedy) writes:
>At the WOC, Commodore mentioned plans for new chipsets beyond the
>AGA chips. A "low end" and a "high end" both with impressive sound
>and graphics. These chips are suposedly destined for a modular
>Amiga architecture in which the CPU clock rate and audio/video
>sub-systems are no longer interdependant. This is good. It allows
>for easier upgrades of graphics and processors.
>
>Now, my question: What happens to A4000 owners when these new chips
>hit the market in new cool machines with zippy 24bit graphcis and 
>16bit 100Khz sound? Speculations anyone?
>
>My feeling is the A4000 and the "AGA" machines to come are just a stopgap
>measure to give the Amiga graphics comprable to the common denominator
>in the Mac and PC markets.
>
>When the "highend, 4 chip set" and "low end 2 chip set" machines finally
>arrive I believe the A4000 and othere "AGA" owners will be in the same boat
>we A3000/A2000/A500/A600 owners are in now.
>
>Thus I believe I will just hold onto my A3000/25. It's a good machine.
>If I'm lucky some clever 3rd party hacker will marcket some sort of
>kluge to put the new chips in my A3000.

Isn't it amazing?
Here people have complained about C= not giving any info about future 
releases and then once they do, people wont't buy the new machine's
because C= has said that they are developing a new and better one!!!

Anyone wondering why C= has been so restrictive about info on the A4000?

Terje Marthinussen
terjem@stud.cs.uit.no
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: CDTV is dead.
From: lkoop@TIGGER.STCLOUD.MSUS.EDU (LaMonte Koop)
Date: 5 Sep 92 13:44:56 -0600
Reply-To: lkoop@TIGGER.STCLOUD.MSUS.EDU
Organization: St. Cloud State University, St. Cloud, MN

In article <1992Sep4.224431.1758@news.iastate.edu>, barrett@iastate.edu (Marc N Barrett) writes:
>

[stuff deleted]

>   As an example, someone mentioned that the AA chipset uses 1.6 micron CMOS
>technology.  To put it bluntly, 1.6 micron CMOS sucks.  I looked through my
>complete set of Intel databooks, and noticed that Intel was using 2.0 micron
>technologies way back in *1978*, and was using 1.2 micron CMOS technologies
>by 1983.  If 1.6 micron CMOS is the best technology that Commodore has
>available to them in-house, you can forget about anyone ever buying them out.

    Marc, you are right that 1.6 micron technology is not the 'state of the
art'.  However, you are not looking at the entire picture, both in engineering
terms, and in economic sense.
    If I were to sit down and design an IC for some purpose right now, I would
also take into account the needed chip real estate, and technology level
which would implement this with the least cost.  Blindly throwing a design to
1.2 micron CMOS technology would be wasteful if this level was not needed for
the setup in question.  Simply making a technology choice based upon the
'most neato' setups in use today is poor engineering to say the least.
    Take a closer look at those data books Marc, and for once try to understand
what is being said in them, rather than just look at the buzzwords.  You will
find a great many parts are NOT 1.2 micron CMOS technology as this is not
required for them to fulfill their intended purpose with the greatest
cost/performance ratio.

                 ----------------------------------------
           LaMonte Koop -- SCSU Electrical/Computer Engineering
 Internet: lkoop@tigger.stcloud.msus.edu -OR- f00012@kanga.stcloud.msus.edu
              "You mean you want MORE lights on this thing???"
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: kdarling@garfield.catt.ncsu.edu (Kevin Darling)
Subject: Re: IBM lamers at their worst - uiuc siggraph meeting
Organization: North Carolina State University
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 05:31:09 GMT

gfm@hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu (George McBay) writes:
>jerry@connection.prospect.com (Jerry Shekhel) writes:
>>[someone wrote:]
>>>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.
>
>Have you finally gone off the deep end, Jerry?  Or am I the crazy one?
>When did Atari (or a 3rd party) develope a genlocking device for the 800?
>The original poster was *not* talking about just taping output from an
>Amiga RF connected to a VCR....Almost anything can do that, if you use
>proper cables.  He was talking about things like Genlocks, [...]

If he was, then he should make it clearer.  This is .advocacy, y'know :-)
Broad claims are eaten alive here!

kevin <kdarling@catt.ncsu.edu>
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy