Info-Atari16 Digest         Fri, 28 Jun 91       Volume 91 : Issue 360
 
Today's Topics:
                  Amiga is better then [sic] what???
                Amiga is better then what??? (2 msgs)
                        Canon bubble jet Again
                   Canon Bubble Jet printer/driver
 Converting Deags Elite pictures to the 1st Word Plus picture format
                getting TeX up and running on your ST
                   GFA Basic timeout INP possible ?
               MiNT, MGR, emacs, problems and questions
                   New Control Panel: xcontrol.tos
                  Sybex STe/TT systems book (2 msgs)
                       what's a prn_1000 file?
                        What archiving format?
 
Welcome to the Info-Atari16 Digest.  The configuration for the automatic
cross-posting to/from Usenet is getting closer, but still getting thrashed
out.  Please send notifications about broken digests or bogus messages
to Info-Atari16-Request@NAUCSE.CSE.NAU.EDU.
 
Please send requests for un/subscription and other administrivia to
Info-Atari16-Request, *NOT* Info-Atari16.  Requests that go to the list
instead of the moderators are likely to be lost or ignored.
 
If you want to unsubscribe, and you're receiving the digest indirectly
from someplace (usually a BITNET host) that redistributes it, please
contact the redistributor, not us.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Date: 28 Jun 91 11:09:06 GMT
From: iWarp.intel.com!ichips!intelhf!agora!robart@uunet.uu.net (Barton)
Subject: Amiga is better then [sic] what???
To: Info-Atari16@naucse.cse.nau.edu
 
In an article Rod.Fulk@f24.n228.z1.FidoNet.Org (Rod Fulk) writes:
> Compare OS's... The St is built with a much more complete OS then ANY of
> the amiga OS's.. (The 2.0 doesnt really count at this point since last time
> I looked it was not available on amiga 500's yet)
 
  No, it's not available for the A500 yet.  Feature-wise, I believe AmigaOS 2.0
was done some time ago, and Commodore programmers have spent the last several
months trying to make it compatible with older software.  Unfortunately some
people who developed software for the Amiga brought along various bad habits
which they picked up while developing for more primitive, non-multitasking
systems, thus leading to buggy software.
 
> Of course the amiga does multitask but I have very little use for
 multitasking..
 
  That's what many people say, until they try Amiga multitasking.
 
> As to sound? Well The ST is the only one so far that has the capability of 3d
> sound. The STe series computers have the capability of using 3 seperate
> speakers with different sounds out of each.... 2 of those full 8 bit digital..
 
  How many bits is the other channel?
 
> ALL the memory can be used in an ST as compared to the amigas limitation
> of chip memory...
 
  So you're saying the ST can use all 16 Megs for graphics?  I admit I wasn't
aware of that.  I thought it used a screen buffer.
 
> (Note the ST does not waste memory... You must waste memory on an amiga to
> do double buffered graphics and digital sound at the same time.)
 
  Please explain what you mean by "wasting" memory.
 
------------------------------
 
Date: 28 Jun 91 12:44:42 GMT
From:
 noao!ncar!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!usc!rpi!think.com!yale.edu!ox.com!math.fu-berlin.d
 e!unido!fauern!faui43.informatik.uni-erlangen.de!immd4.informatik.uni-erlangen.
 de!csbrod@arizona.edu (Claus Brod)
Subject: Amiga is better then what???
To: Info-Atari16@naucse.cse.nau.edu
 
rjc@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) writes:
 
>  They are working on device independent graphics right, the problem
>is, keeping rhe Amiga the leading desktop video computer without
>damaging it's performance. (DIG is always slower than hitting the hardware
>directly) We also have problems to worry about like programmable scan
>rates, beam synchronization, sprites,multiple play fields, genlocking ,etc
>Do many ST apps use VDI? I heard they hit the system a little more
>directly. If they don't, I'm surprised the ST doesn't have lots of
>graphic cards (and sooner). The main reason the Amiga didn't get them until
>recently was lack of a graphics standard for external cards.
 
Every GEM application uses the VDI. There are lots of programs, though,
that won't work with any resolution VDI will offer them, that's a sad
truth. But the standard is there, and it works fine. In Germany, we
have quite a few graphics cards for the ST, including a 24-bit graphic
card. In the US, the situation may be entirely different.
 
>>Who uses lo-res? Gamesters - but not me.
 
>  Don't you need 2 monitors for the ST? One lo-res color and one mono?
 
In general, I use the mono modes only. Using a multisync, you don't
need two monitors. It's just that the SM124 has such a brilliant display -
much better than standard multisyncs, and that's why people are using it.
Anyway, I'm a bit old-fashioned. I need exactly two colors on my computer:
Black and white.
 
>>Does it format standard MFM format so that every PC can read it?
 
>   The Amiga's filesystem isn't at like the ST/IBM PC format. But
>filesystems are only the higher level organization of data. The Amiga
>(and it's new HD drive) can write MFM tracks out exactly like
>720k/1.44mb IBM disks, or 880k/1.72mb Amiga disks. For instance, on
>my Amiga, I merely mount an MS-DOS filesystem and I can read/write
>IBM disks from any application as if ithere was nothing different.
 
I know quite a bit about the Amiga's filesystem, but I didn't know
the new HD drives can write a genuine PC MFM format. Tnx for the
information. This must have been done by using intelligent drives,
I suppose.
 
>  Well, you don't need any internal hardware to use it. You just buy
>a $499 monitor. The refresh rate is 15hz, yes, but it's not bad.
>The monitor is meant for publishing/cad/text applications, not
>animation. The Amiga can send out one 768x240x4 screen every 60th of a
>second (or 768x480x4 interlaced at 30hz) This is 92,160 bytes of data.
>A 1024x1024x2 (or 1008x800x2) is about 
>
>4 so the A2024 updates at 15hz.
 
And how many cycles does this cost for the CPU?
 
>  I hear its finished, but won't be released until AmigaUNIX v2.0
>with X11R4 is finished. That way, the 3000UX can run a nice megapixel
>/mega color Xwindows. (the A2410 has a 34010 processor onboard)
 
And a fast gfx processor will be needed judging from my experience
with X 8-(
 
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Claus Brod, Am Felsenkeller 2,                  Things. Take. Time.
D-8772 Marktheidenfeld, Germany                 (Piet Hein)
csbrod@medusa.informatik.uni-erlangen.de
Claus_Brod@wue.maus.de
----------------------------------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------
 
Date: 28 Jun 91 20:57:24 GMT
From:
 noao!ncar!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!think.com!mintaka!geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu!rjc@
 arizona.edu (Ray Cromwell)
Subject: Amiga is better then what???
To: Info-Atari16@naucse.cse.nau.edu
 
In article <1991Jun28.124442.15920@informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
 csbrod@immd4.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Claus Brod) writes:
>rjc@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) writes:
>
>>   The Amiga's filesystem isn't at like the ST/IBM PC format. But
>>filesystems are only the higher level organization of data. The Amiga
>>(and it's new HD drive) can write MFM tracks out exactly like
>>720k/1.44mb IBM disks, or 880k/1.72mb Amiga disks. For instance, on
>>my Amiga, I merely mount an MS-DOS filesystem and I can read/write
>>IBM disks from any application as if ithere was nothing different.
>
>I know quite a bit about the Amiga's filesystem, but I didn't know
>the new HD drives can write a genuine PC MFM format. Tnx for the
>information. This must have been done by using intelligent drives,
>I suppose.
 
   The Filesystem has alittle to do with the density of the drive. All
the file system cares about are block numbers. What controls the drive
is the trackdisk.device. For instance,a normal 880k disk has
1738 sectors and the Filesystem might ask the trackdisk.device to
read block 1600 (which may be a part of a file, a directory sector, whatever)
The new drives in the 3000 are variable speed drives like the Mac, so
the drive motor can be slowed to 1/2 speed giving twice the density without
a more expensive drive head or a new controller chip. So all the new
system does is check if your using an HD disk and switch drive speeds.
Writing PC format is no problem in the HD mode.
 
 
>>  Well, you don't need any internal hardware to use it. You just buy
>>a $499 monitor. The refresh rate is 15hz, yes, but it's not bad.
>>The monitor is meant for publishing/cad/text applications, not
>>animation. The Amiga can send out one 768x240x4 screen every 60th of a
>>second (or 768x480x4 interlaced at 30hz) This is 92,160 bytes of data.
>>A 1024x1024x2 (or 1008x800x2) is about 
>>
>>4 so the A2024 updates at 15hz.
>
>And how many cycles does this cost for the CPU?
 
  Zero CPU cycles. The display doesn't eat CPU cycles as long as you
have fast ram. A more appropriate question would be to ask, how
many blitter cycles does it cost? Answer: it will eat 50% of blitter
cycles. The A2024 monitor also has a 10hz mode that only ats 25%.
I suspect putting the A2024 in mono mode will eat zero.
 
>>  I hear its finished, but won't be released until AmigaUNIX v2.0
>>with X11R4 is finished. That way, the 3000UX can run a nice megapixel
>>/mega color Xwindows. (the A2410 has a 34010 processor onboard)
>
>And a fast gfx processor will be needed judging from my experience
>with X 8-(
 
  That's what the TI34010/34881 is for. The Xwindows code will probably
run on the 34010 processor itself instead of the 68030.
 
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>Claus Brod, Am Felsenkeller 2,                 Things. Take. Time.
>D-8772 Marktheidenfeld, Germany                        (Piet Hein)
>csbrod@medusa.informatik.uni-erlangen.de
>Claus_Brod@wue.maus.de
>-------------------------------------------------------
