Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.misc,comp.sys.amiga.hardware,comp.sys.amiga.graphics
Path: sparky!uunet!caen!destroyer!news.iastate.edu!barrett
From: barr...@iastate.edu (Marc N Barrett)
Subject: Avoid the Amiga 4000
Message-ID: <1992Oct7.193356.6639@news.iastate.edu>
Followup-To: comp.sys.amiga.misc
Sender: n...@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, IA
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 19:33:56 GMT
Lines: 105
Over two and-a-half years ago, when the Amiga 3000 came out, many people
remember how much I flamed the system because of the few improvements it
offered in the overall characteristics that make the Amiga an Amiga. But to
its credit, the A3000 did not head in reverse on any key technologies, either.
The A3000 offered substantial improvements in areas such as display resolution,
HD access, HD speed, and CPU speed. It offered no improvements in the key
areas of sound and color graphics capabilities. But it was in no way worse
than Amigas that came before it in any areas.
The A4000 is a different story. With the A4000, the only substantial
improvement is color. And it becomes clearer every day at just what the costs
have been to improve the color capabilities. In the key area of display
resolution, the A4000 is substantially inferior to the A3000, do to the fact
that the A3000 has a Display Enhancer and the A4000 does not.
The Display Enhancer in the A3000 is arguably its best feature. It allows
all resolution modes (except for the Super HiRes modes, which are limited in
color capability on the A3000 anyway) to be boosted to a high-quality 31Khz
display. Resolution modes that were non-interlaced before are improved
substantially by removing the scan-lines. And interlaced modes are now totally
flicker-free. Because of the Display Enhancer, the A3000 is usable with lots
of very high-quality monitors. I know one person who found a bargain on a
19" workstation monitor which syncs down to 31Khz, offers a brilliantly sharp
picture with lots of colors (as many colors as any computer can put out),
and just plain works beautifully with the A3000. With the Display Enhancer,
the user never has to worry about whether or not his or her monitor can sync
down to 15Khz because it never has to.
The A4000 is a totally different story. At first, I was a little confused
about the function of the scan-doubler and promoter features of the AGA Lisa
video chip. I thought at first that Commodore had basically moved the
Display Enhancer internally to the Lisa chip. I realise now that I was wrong.
The scan-doubler is not new at all, and is present in pretty much the same
form in the ECS Denise. In fact, it should be possible to generate the
A4000's DblPAL and DblNTSC modes on any Amiga with the ECS Denise, but with
very tight color restrictions. I have also found that the "Promoter" is not
hardware at all, but simply a function of AmigaDOS 3.0. With 3.0, the OS
can be told to intercept calls to open NTSC and PAL screens, and open DblNTSC
and DblPAL screens instead. This has lots and lots of problems, though, which
I will get to in a bit.
The biggest problem with the A4000 by far is its lack of a Display Enhancer.
With the A4000, it is no longer possible to purchase a monitor that will only
handle scan frequencies of 31Khz and up. If an Amiga problem insists on
opening a standard 15Khz NTSC or PAL mode screen, the screen will be opened
at 15Khz no matter what. The "Promotion" feature of the OS only works for
a tiny few, well-written Amiga programs, and no games. This means that a user
of an A4000 will have to put up with a flickering display in programs such
as PageStream, and games such as SimAnt and SimEarth that can open interlaced
screens. And there will be nothing that the user will be able to do about it
until the software is updated to support the A4000. Additionally, all games
will have scan-lines on an A4000.
It gets worse, though. With the A4000, it is no longer possible to use
high-quality monitors that can only sync to frequencies of 31Khz and up. To
be usable on an A4000, the monitor **MUST** be able to sync as low as 15Khz.
This is because of the very reasons I stated above. If a user were to try to
use a VGA or multisync monitor that cannot handle the 15Khz frequencies, the
display would by reduced to garbage every time a program or game opened a
15Khz NTSC or PAL screen. Don't worry, it gets even worse than this. It
turns out that the DblPAL and DblNTSC modes are output at 29Khz, not 31Khz.
This means that if a monitor were used that cannot sync to frequencies lower
than 31Khz, the only modes usable would be the few and unsupported VGA modes
(including the Productivity mode).
What would this mean to someone such as the person I mentioned above, who
already has a monitor that cannot sync lower than 31Khz? If this person were
to "upgrade" from an A3000 to an A4000, he or she would have to borrow a
monitor that can handle the 15Khz frequencies just to boot the machine. This
is because the A4000 probably defaults to a 15Khz 640x200 NTSC mode as it is
configured out of the box. The user would have to borrow a low-frequency
monitor just to adjust the preferences to yield a Productivity screen, so
that the system would be at all usable. And even then the system would be
only marginally usable, as every other program and all games produced a
garbaged display on the monitor.
In short, many A3000 owners who have been using high-quality monitors will
have to replace their monitors with inferior ones usable on the A4000. I have
thoroughly checked to monitors that can handle frequencies as low as 15Khz,
and few such monitors have ever been manufactured. Many of the ones that
were developed have been discontinued since I checked for them over two years
ago. The Commodore monitors are just about the only monitors available now
that will work with the A4000.
The point of all of this is that it has become clear to me lately just how
much the A4000 retrogrades in the important area of non-interlaced display
resolution. The system is vastly inferior to the A3000 in this respect. So
I seriously recommend that anyone considering the purchase of an A4000 not
purchase one, at least until a Display Enhancer becomes available for it.
Some people might want to simply abandon the A4000 altogether, purchase an
A3000 instead, and upgrade it with a third-party video card as soon as DIG
becomes available for the Amiga. (The A4000 retrogrades in more than just the
area of display resolution, though. Due to its use of IDE instead of SCSI,
the A4000 retrogrades in the area of HD access and HD speed as well)
BTW, so far the odd-numbered Amigas (A1000 and A3000) have turned out to
be the marginally good systems, and the even-numbered Amigas (A2000 and A4000)
have turned out to be disappointing pieces of shit. I hope this trend does
not continue. But even if it does, at least it bodes well for the A5000.
---
| Marc Barrett -MB- | email: barr...@iastate.edu
--------------------------------------------------
Amiga 4000: JUST SAY NO!!!!
Path: sparky!uunet!europa.asd.contel.com!darwin.sura.net!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!
usc!news.service.uci.edu!ucivax!ofa123!Aric.Caley
From: Aric.Ca...@ofa123.fidonet.org
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.hardware
Subject: Re: Avoid the Amiga 4000
X-Sender: newtout 0.02 Oct 1 1992
Message-ID: <n0ba0t@ofa123.fidonet.org>
Date: 08 Oct 92 10:08:00
Lines: 150
> Over two and-a-half years ago, when the Amiga 3000 came out, many people
> remember how much I flamed the system because of the few improvements it
> offered in the overall characteristics that make the Amiga an Amiga. But
> to
> its credit, the A3000 did not head in reverse on any key technologies,
> either.
> The A3000 offered substantial improvements in areas such as
> display resolution,
> HD access, HD speed, and CPU speed. It offered no improvements in the key
> areas of sound and color graphics capabilities. But it was in no way
> worse
> than Amigas that came before it in any areas.
So far, so good..
> The A4000 is a different story. With the A4000, the only substantial
> improvement is color. And it becomes clearer every day at just what the
> costs
> have been to improve the color capabilities. In the key area of display
> resolution, the A4000 is substantially inferior to the A3000, do to the
> fact
> that the A3000 has a Display Enhancer and the A4000 does not.
Me and my freinds have a phrase that we use for people like you: "You are
on BIG DRUGS!". You're completely clueless. The A4000 doesnt NEED a
display enhancer. The Flicker-Fixer was a HACK! It was a way of patching
the system to get around a shortcoming in the original chips, a shortcoming
that has been FIXED in the AGA chipset. There is nothing graphics wise on
the A4000 that is inferior compared to the A3000. Show me ONE MODE that
the A4000 cannot do that the A3000 can? It is clearly supperior: It can
do 8 bits at ANY resolution, and it can produce flicker-free displays
*without* need of a flicker-fixer hack. It uses LESS chips (no Amber, or
frame-buffer ram needed).
> The Display Enhancer in the A3000 is arguably its best feature. It
I'd say the best feature is the 32 bit CPU bus to chip ram, main ram, and
the SCSI controler. Any Amiga can have a flicker-fixer added.
> The A4000 is a totally different story. At first, I was a little
And now you are TOTALY confused.
> confused
> about the function of the scan-doubler and promoter features of the AGA
> Lisa
> video chip. I thought at first that Commodore had basically moved the
> Display Enhancer internally to the Lisa chip. I realise now that I was
> wrong.
> The scan-doubler is not new at all, and is present in pretty much the same
> form in the ECS Denise. In fact, it should be possible to generate the
> A4000's DblPAL and DblNTSC modes on any Amiga with the ECS Denise, but
> with
> very tight color restrictions. I have also found that the "Promoter" is
So? They've taken the features of ECS and expanded them.. and you are
trying to say thats a BAD thing? Now, instead of a flicker fixer HACK, the
chipset can internaly generate flicker free 8 bit-plane modes.
> not
> hardware at all, but simply a function of AmigaDOS 3.0. With 3.0, the OS
> can be told to intercept calls to open NTSC and PAL screens, and open
Yeah, 3.0 is great isnt it?
> DblNTSC
> and DblPAL screens instead. This has lots and lots of problems, though,
> which
> I will get to in a bit.
Joi. I can hardly wait.
> The biggest problem with the A4000 by far is its lack of
> a Display Enhancer.
No, it isnt. It DOESNT NEED ONE.
> With the A4000, it is no longer possible to purchase a monitor that will
> only
> handle scan frequencies of 31Khz and up. If an Amiga problem insists on
> opening a standard 15Khz NTSC or PAL mode screen, the screen will be
> opened
> at 15Khz no matter what. The "Promotion" feature of the OS only works for
> a tiny few, well-written Amiga programs, and no games. This means that a
And who's fault is that? NOT COMMODORE'S! Its the fault of the programers
who didnt properly write their programs. Complain to them, not commodore!
> user
> of an A4000 will have to put up with a flickering display in programs such
> as PageStream, and games such as SimAnt and SimEarth that can open
> interlaced
> screens. And there will be nothing that the user will be able to do about
> it
> until the software is updated to support the A4000. Additionally, all
> games
> will have scan-lines on an A4000.
You can complain to the software companies. Not to Commodore.
> The point of all of this is that it has become clear to me lately just
> how
> much the A4000 retrogrades in the important area of non-interlaced display
> resolution. The system is vastly inferior to the A3000 in this respect.
Its not. You are wrong. The A4000 is fine. It does everything the A3000
does in graphics terms. Its application software that has a problem.
> So
> I seriously recommend that anyone considering the purchase of an A4000 not
> purchase one, at least until a Display Enhancer becomes available for it.
I suggest that nobody ever listen to anything you have to say and consider
it seriously.
> Some people might want to simply abandon the A4000 altogether, purchase an
> A3000 instead, and upgrade it with a third-party video card as soon as DIG
So, instead of getting a machine which has enhanced graphics that can be
used now, you want people to get a machine with inferior graphics and wait
for who knows how long for DIG? What makes you think Commodore will deliver
DIG when you think they screw everything else up? Seems like you should be
saying "Ah, Commodore is so f*cked they will probably never get DIG right".
> becomes available for the Amiga. (The A4000 retrogrades in more than just
> the
> area of display resolution, though. Due to its use of IDE instead of
> SCSI,
> the A4000 retrogrades in the area of HD access and HD speed as well)
I doubt that you (as in YOU, personaly) could tell any real difference
between a typical IDE harddrive and the equivalent SCSI one.
> BTW, so far the odd-numbered Amigas (A1000 and A3000) have turned out to
> be the marginally good systems, and the even-numbered Amigas (A2000 and
> A4000)
> have turned out to be disappointing pieces of shit. I hope this trend
And whats wrong with the A2000? It was the first largely modular Amiga. It
had/has lots of slots, nice keyboard, drive bays, etc. Sure, its slow by
todays standards, but then again, you can stick an 040 in it and still be
way under the Quadra in price. The A4000 is every bit as good as the A3000
with possible acception to the IDE interface.
> Amiga 4000: JUST SAY NO!!!!
Marc Barrett: JUST SAY NO!!!!
--- Maximus 2.00
Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!spool.mu.edu!
darwin.sura.net!paladin.american.edu!news.univie.ac.at!hp4at!mcsun!sunic!seunet!
kullmar!piraya!overdose!Roger_Nordin
From: Roger_Nor...@atb.bbs.bad.se (Roger Nordin)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.hardware
Subject: Avoid the Amiga 4000
Message-ID: <OD.6badnetOA92-901-302p0_5134449a@piraya.bad.se>
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 92 18:12:49 +0000
References: <n0ba0t@ofa123.fidonet.org>
Sender: Bad...@piraya.bad.se
Reply-To: Roger_Nor...@atb.bbs.bad.se (Roger Nordin)
Distribution: world
Organization: ANet Test Bench, Karlstad, Sweden
OD-Comment-To: Internet_Gateway
Lines: 62
> Me and my freinds have a phrase that we use for people like you: "You are
> on BIG DRUGS!". You're completely clueless. The A4000 doesnt NEED a
> display enhancer. The Flicker-Fixer was a HACK! It was a way of patching
> the system to get around a shortcoming in the original chips, a shortcoming
> that has been FIXED in the AGA chipset.
Not quite. While the AGA chipset does offer flicker-free video via the Double-
NTSC/PAL resolutions, it *requires* applications written specifically with
support for these modes via the graphics screenmode-database. What about all
the existing applications (both commercial and freely distributable software)
that is hardcoded to use Hires with (often optional) Interlace? Those will be
running interlaced. Flickering. On the A4000, that is. Only the A3000, you
will get a sharp steady flickerfixed display using the same piece of software.
Video work can be done with both a flickerfixed 31Khz montior picture and a
15Khz video/genlocked video signal at the same time.
> I'd say the best feature is the 32 bit CPU bus to chip ram, main ram, and
> the SCSI controler. Any Amiga can have a flicker-fixer added.
Yes, but that will take up one Zorro III slot in the A4000, as the video slot
is located in-line with one Zorro III slot. Only three left. And then, you
probably need that SCSI host adaptor card too. Only two left. What if you have
three cards already in your A3000, will be pretty hard to upgrade then.
> the A4000 that is inferior compared to the A3000. Show me ONE MODE that
> the A4000 cannot do that the A3000 can?
The A4000 cannot host a genlock AND a flicker-fixer at the same time, to allow
you to work with video and still have a flickerfixed monitor picture to work
with, because although the video slot has improved in the A4000, it is only
one slot. It cannot host two video slot cards at the same time. Perhaps you
can find a genlock with builtin flickerfixer...
But the real problem, which Marc is refering to, is that the A4000 cannot
produce non-interlace hires-interlace resolutions, that the A3000 can, with
the help of the flicker-fixer. This is a quite important features, considering
the wast array of applications that use this display mode currently!
> It uses LESS chips (no Amber, or frame-buffer ram needed).
That is a matter of opinion. I think a flicker-fixer for hires-interlace mode
would be really nice, although I do realise the extra cost of such a device.
> Its not. You are wrong. The A4000 is fine. It does everything the A3000
> does in graphics terms. Its application software that has a problem.
Sorry, but I disagree. Sure, it would be nice if applications would support
the displaydatabase and be able to use any screen resolution. But most
applications does not support this. For instance, I love CygnusEd Pro, but on
an A4000 it will operate in interlaced mode -- and there is no flickerfixer
that will convert it to a non-lace display. It would be useless, I'm afraid.
Although I don't agree with Marc in everything he says, I think he was quite
right this time. For people like me, that wants higher non-lace resolutions
rather than lots of colours, the A3000 seems to be a better deal. Especially
as the A3000 prices are dropping steady right now!
_ . __
Roger Nordin _ // /!Net /est Bench
2:203/602.0@fidonet \X/ Internet: Roger_Nor...@bad.se
---
Path: sparky!uunet!stanford.edu!rutgers!cbmvax!grr
From: g...@cbmvax.commodore.com (George Robbins)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.hardware
Subject: Re: Avoid the Amiga 4000
Message-ID: <35757@cbmvax.commodore.com>
Date: 11 Oct 92 03:51:07 GMT
References: <n0ba0t@ofa123.fidonet.org> <OD.6badnetOA92-901-302p0_5134449a@piraya.bad.se>
Reply-To: g...@cbmvax.commodore.com (George Robbins)
Organization: Commodore, West Chester, PA
Lines: 74
In article <OD.6badnetOA92-901-302p0_51344...@piraya.bad.se> Roger_Nor...@atb.bbs.bad.se
(Roger Nordin) writes:
> > Me and my freinds have a phrase that we use for people like you: "You are
> > on BIG DRUGS!". You're completely clueless. The A4000 doesnt NEED a
> > display enhancer. The Flicker-Fixer was a HACK! It was a way of patching
> > the system to get around a shortcoming in the original chips, a shortcoming
> > that has been FIXED in the AGA chipset.
>
> Not quite. While the AGA chipset does offer flicker-free video via the Double-
> NTSC/PAL resolutions, it *requires* applications written specifically with
> support for these modes via the graphics screenmode-database. What about all
> the existing applications (both commercial and freely distributable software)
> that is hardcoded to use Hires with (often optional) Interlace? Those will be
> running interlaced. Flickering.
I think you're substantially off base here. The system software works at it
harder than you describe, but I'll leave it to one of the software guys to
describe the details.
> Yes, but that will take up one Zorro III slot in the A4000, as the video slot
> is located in-line with one Zorro III slot. Only three left. And then, you
> probably need that SCSI host adaptor card too. Only two left. What if you have
> three cards already in your A3000, will be pretty hard to upgrade then.
>
> > the A4000 that is inferior compared to the A3000. Show me ONE MODE that
> > the A4000 cannot do that the A3000 can?
>
> The A4000 cannot host a genlock AND a flicker-fixer at the same time, to allow
> you to work with video and still have a flickerfixed monitor picture to work
> with, because although the video slot has improved in the A4000, it is only
> one slot. It cannot host two video slot cards at the same time. Perhaps you
> can find a genlock with builtin flickerfixer...
Yes, some subset of users may feel some pain due to this mutual exclusivity.
How many? There are plenty of non-video slot genlocks out there in any case.
> But the real problem, which Marc is refering to, is that the A4000 cannot
> produce non-interlace hires-interlace resolutions, that the A3000 can, with
> the help of the flicker-fixer. This is a quite important features, considering
> the wast array of applications that use this display mode currently!
...
>
> Sorry, but I disagree. Sure, it would be nice if applications would support
> the displaydatabase and be able to use any screen resolution. But most
> applications does not support this. For instance, I love CygnusEd Pro, but on
> an A4000 it will operate in interlaced mode -- and there is no flickerfixer
> that will convert it to a non-lace display. It would be useless, I'm afraid.
Do you know this, or are you must making an inference based on what
you've "heard"?
> Although I don't agree with Marc in everything he says, I think he was quite
> right this time. For people like me, that wants higher non-lace resolutions
> rather than lots of colours, the A3000 seems to be a better deal. Especially
> as the A3000 prices are dropping steady right now!
If you don't want more colors and are either happy with an '030 or already
have an '040 card, then the A3000 might be the best deal. Marc's error is
in asserting that some particular user profile, his or yours applies to
the 90'th percentile of the target market.
This especially comes across in the flaming about the IDE drive. Nobody
seems to want to really talk about how well it works or doesn't, just that
SCSI is what they think it should have and *everyone* should pay for.
Just about everyone needs a hard disk to make effective use of a machine
like this. Not many really care about the interface, only is it big enough
and can you get/attach a larger or second drive. Nowhere near as many
folks as should have have SCSI attached backup devices. All the A4000 does
is say that folks with special needs have to pay some increment over the
base model to address those needs.
--
George Robbins - now working for, work: to be avoided at all costs...
but no way officially representing: uucp: {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!grr
Commodore, Engineering Department domain: g...@cbmvax.commodore.com
Path: sparky!uunet!stanford.edu!rutgers!cbmvax!mks
From: m...@cbmvax.commodore.com (Michael Sinz)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.hardware
Subject: Re: Avoid the Amiga 4000
Message-ID: <35767@cbmvax.commodore.com>
Date: 11 Oct 92 16:41:18 GMT
References: <n0ba0t@ofa123.fidonet.org> <OD.6badnetOA92-901-302p0_5134449a@piraya.bad.se>
<35757@cbmvax.commodore.com>
Reply-To: m...@cbmvax.commodore.com (Michael Sinz)
Organization: Commodore, West Chester, PA
Lines: 153
g...@cbmvax.commodore.com (George Robbins) writes:
>In article <OD.6badnetOA92-901-302p0_51344...@piraya.bad.se> Roger_Nor...@atb.bbs.bad.se
(Roger Nordin) writes:
>> > Me and my freinds have a phrase that we use for people like you: "You are
>> > on BIG DRUGS!". You're completely clueless. The A4000 doesnt NEED a
>> > display enhancer. The Flicker-Fixer was a HACK! It was a way of patching
>> > the system to get around a shortcoming in the original chips, a shortcoming
>> > that has been FIXED in the AGA chipset.
>>
>> Not quite. While the AGA chipset does offer flicker-free video via the Double-
>> NTSC/PAL resolutions, it *requires* applications written specifically with
>> support for these modes via the graphics screenmode-database. What about all
>> the existing applications (both commercial and freely distributable software)
>> that is hardcoded to use Hires with (often optional) Interlace? Those will be
>> running interlaced. Flickering.
>
>I think you're substantially off base here. The system software works at it
>harder than you describe, but I'll leave it to one of the software guys to
>describe the details.
As George has said above and we have said before, 99% of the software will
be promoted to non-flickering modes if you select that option in preferences.
Why not 100%? Well, it is this simple:
The Amiga is used in video production fields and one of the strongest features
of the machine is that it does NTSC/PAL video very well and right out of the
box. (No add-ons) Now, as a video application, it is important to be able to
output video scan rate displays when you want. As such, if you ask for a video
scan rate, you get that.
Now, how does this impact current software?
Well, software that is pure 1.3 code (no 2.0 features are used) will always
be promoted as in pre-2.0 days there was no way to define the video monitor
(scan rate) that you wanted to open your screen in.
If the software does do 2.0-like things and uses the "default" monitor settings
it will also be promoted as that is a safe promotion.
If the software uses the 2.0 display database to let you select the mode you
get to choose the display mode you want and thus it will do as you choose
(which could include a true video-interlaced display - flicker and all)
If the software uses 2.0 functions and *asks* specifically for a VIDEO
compatible display, it will get what it asks for. (Or if it asks for
any other specific display/scan rate/etc.) Now, as it turns out there is
one rather popular program that does this: DPaint IV. It does this
so you can use PAL or NTSC as an option in DPaint. They know about the
problem and they also know about the display database so I would guess that
a version of DPaint will be available shortly that uses the display database
and gives the user the option.
>> Yes, but that will take up one Zorro III slot in the A4000, as the video slot
>> is located in-line with one Zorro III slot. Only three left. And then, you
>> probably need that SCSI host adaptor card too. Only two left. What if you have
>> three cards already in your A3000, will be pretty hard to upgrade then.
>>
>> > the A4000 that is inferior compared to the A3000. Show me ONE MODE that
>> > the A4000 cannot do that the A3000 can?
>>
>> The A4000 cannot host a genlock AND a flicker-fixer at the same time, to allow
>> you to work with video and still have a flickerfixed monitor picture to work
>> with, because although the video slot has improved in the A4000, it is only
>> one slot. It cannot host two video slot cards at the same time. Perhaps you
>> can find a genlock with builtin flickerfixer...
Yes, this is an issue, but it is mainly an issue of incompatible needs.
That is, if you are using a genlock, are you not also doing video? If you
are doing video, are you not using video display modes? And, since video
is needed, are you not interested in getting interlaced video (which is
what televison uses)?
>Yes, some subset of users may feel some pain due to this mutual exclusivity.
>How many? There are plenty of non-video slot genlocks out there in any case.
Right, George. How many people will need both?
>> But the real problem, which Marc is refering to, is that the A4000 cannot
>> produce non-interlace hires-interlace resolutions, that the A3000 can, with
>> the help of the flicker-fixer. This is a quite important features, considering
>> the wast array of applications that use this display mode currently!
>...
>>
>> Sorry, but I disagree. Sure, it would be nice if applications would support
>> the displaydatabase and be able to use any screen resolution. But most
>> applications does not support this. For instance, I love CygnusEd Pro, but on
>> an A4000 it will operate in interlaced mode -- and there is no flickerfixer
>> that will convert it to a non-lace display. It would be useless, I'm afraid.
>
>Do you know this, or are you must making an inference based on what
>you've "heard"?
Go play with an A4000 and use programs with it. Bring up DPaint III (not IV)
or ProPage or FinalCopy or most any other program. Make sure you have turned
on the promotion mode and, if you want scan-doubling, also the VGA-ONLY icon.
You may find out that the display that comes out of the A4000 is actually
cleaner than that of the A3000. You may also find out that you can use more
colours and have more colours to pick from or use the same number of colours
and run much faster.
>> Although I don't agree with Marc in everything he says, I think he was quite
>> right this time. For people like me, that wants higher non-lace resolutions
>> rather than lots of colours, the A3000 seems to be a better deal. Especially
>> as the A3000 prices are dropping steady right now!
>
>If you don't want more colors and are either happy with an '030 or already
>have an '040 card, then the A3000 might be the best deal. Marc's error is
>in asserting that some particular user profile, his or yours applies to
>the 90'th percentile of the target market.
Yes, please remember what all of you (net-people) have asked for. Also
remember what the Amiga market needs and asks for. The biggest need was
for more colour in *video* modes. More resolution with more colour too.
Non-video modes (non-interlaced 640x480) with more colour. Well, we have
given you this. You get more colour, more colours, and more resolution
in the A4000 and AGA chipset. You can now do photo-realistic displays
with the 24-bit colour resolution of the chips and the HAM-8 mode which
can mathematically give you all 16,777,216 colours if you had the pixels.
(Realisticly, you don't have that many pixels and good pictures display
just fine in the simpler to render 262,144 colour mapping type which is
what marketing calls 256,000 colours since we told them 256K colours.)
Anyway, the major need for the market of the Amiga was addressed. In addition
the 68040 gives you more speed too. (Which is always nice)
>This especially comes across in the flaming about the IDE drive. Nobody
>seems to want to really talk about how well it works or doesn't, just that
>SCSI is what they think it should have and *everyone* should pay for.
>Just about everyone needs a hard disk to make effective use of a machine
>like this. Not many really care about the interface, only is it big enough
>and can you get/attach a larger or second drive. Nowhere near as many
>folks as should have have SCSI attached backup devices. All the A4000 does
>is say that folks with special needs have to pay some increment over the
>base model to address those needs.
Notice that the PC market has 97% of the machines shipping with IDE as
the *only* hard drive interface. Notice also that this has not prevented
much in the way of sales or usability. Notice also that IDE costs *much*
less to have on the motherboard than DMA SCSI does.
Now, for me, I need SCSI. So do others. However, it is not a reason to
call the machine useless. In fact, if it were, most of the computers in
the world (IBM-PCs, 97.4% of them) would be useless too. (I do want SCSI
and so does the marketing department and so does Lou who had stated
that the SCSI board will be made and that highend machines will be
introduced with it on the motherboard in the future)
/----------------------------------------------------------------------\
| /// Michael Sinz - Senior Amiga Systems Engineer |
| /// Operating System Development Group |
| /// BIX: msinz UUNET: m...@cbmvax.commodore.com |
|\\\/// |
| \XX/ "I think not." said Ren'e Descartes, then he vanished. |
\----------------------------------------------------------------------/
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.hardware
Path: sparky!uunet!wupost!gumby!destroyer!news.iastate.edu!barrett
From: barr...@iastate.edu (Marc N Barrett)
Subject: Re: Avoid the Amiga 4000
Message-ID: <BvzsnG.G00@news.iastate.edu>
Sender: n...@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, IA
References: <OD.6badnetOA92-901-302p0_5134449a@piraya.bad.se>
<35757@cbmvax.commodore.com> <35767@cbmvax.commodore.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 05:02:03 GMT
Lines: 35
In article <35...@cbmvax.commodore.com> m...@cbmvax.commodore.com (Michael Sinz)
writes:
>Yes, please remember what all of you (net-people) have asked for. Also
>remember what the Amiga market needs and asks for. The biggest need was
>for more colour in *video* modes. More resolution with more colour too.
>Non-video modes (non-interlaced 640x480) with more colour. Well, we have
>given you this. You get more colour, more colours, and more resolution
>in the A4000 and AGA chipset. You can now do photo-realistic displays
>with the 24-bit colour resolution of the chips and the HAM-8 mode which
>can mathematically give you all 16,777,216 colours if you had the pixels.
>(Realisticly, you don't have that many pixels and good pictures display
>just fine in the simpler to render 262,144 colour mapping type which is
>what marketing calls 256,000 colours since we told them 256K colours.)
Yes, straight from the Commodore Line. The problem is that the increase
in resolution is a lie. From the A3000 to the A4000 (actually, from any Amiga
with a display enhancer to the A4000) the non-interlaced resolution did not
increase at all, but actually decreased. The magnitude of the decrease in
non-interlaced resolution is not the point; the point is that the resolution
did not increase at all, when it badly needed to. In a market with Macintosh
Quadras with resolutions beyond 1024x768 non-interlaced in standard hardware,
and $2000 486 systems from IBM (of all companies) also with resolutions of
1024x768 non-interlaced in standard hardware, 676x480 is no longer adequate.
>/----------------------------------------------------------------------\
>| /// Michael Sinz - Senior Amiga Systems Engineer |
>| /// Operating System Development Group |
>| /// BIX: msinz UUNET: m...@cbmvax.commodore.com |
>|\\\/// |
>| \XX/ "I think not." said Ren'e Descartes, then he vanished. |
>\----------------------------------------------------------------------/
---
| Marc Barrett -MB- | email: barr...@iastate.edu
--------------------------------------------------
Slick Willie Clinton: JUST SAY NO!!!