Conference hydra::amiga_v1

    Terminology tends to change quickly in this business, and it isn't
    always consistent from place to place, even at the same time. 
    Therefore, I don't think we're short-changing the Amiga's graphics
    chips by calling them "co-processors", even though Mips means something
    different by that word.  Within the Amiga, the 68000 is the
    "processor", and the other chips of comparable complexity are
    "co-processors".  I think the Amiga terminology is as defensible as the
    Mips terminology.
    
    As for needing 1024 by 1024 to be a workstation---I don't agree at all.
    The number of horizontal and vertical pixels you need depends on what
    you intend to do.  The first workstation I used did have 1024 by 1024,
    but it was years ahead of its time.  (This was the PDP-1 with a type 30
    display, in 1963!)  If you are doing TV, you only need TV resolution,
    but you need 2**24 colors.  If you are Lucasfilm, you need more than
    1024 by 1024 resolution.
        John Sauter

Heck, DEC's workstations are either 1024x864 (all current GPX types..) or
1280x1024 (I think) for the FireFox. 

And I thought my VS3600 was a *real* workstation :-( :-)

John

    Hello,
    512x640 should be ok for the "normal" monitors but for a big one
    1024x1280 I think it's a must to stay competitive the next years. I'm
    thinking sure about non-interlaced. 1024 vertically seems to be ok for
    desktop publishing (full A4 page quality display).
    Regards, Sorin.

    About the ULowell board...
    
    U. of Lowell showed one working at the Siggraph convention held
    recently in Boston.  It's nice -- fast and with a large enough color
    palette to show subtle shadings.  The board was clean with no visible
    cuts and jumpers.  That's the good news.
    
    The bad news is that this board is strictly a peripheral.  It uses
    Texas Instruments' TIGA graphics library, and was showing much
    the same demos as other 34010-based boards at the show.  Its software
    is not integrated with the operating system -- you can't bring up
    a workbench on the ULowell screen.  In fact, you need either two
    monitors, or a multisync monitor with a video switch.
    
    People on Usenet have discussed this and come to the conclusion
    that it would take a major overhaul to adapt the Amiga OS to the
    TI chips.  Broadcast video compatibility is certainly one of Amiga's
    great strengths, and here one of its great liabilities.
    
    BTW, the board has an official Commodore designation, Axxxx, but
    the number just won't stick in my memory.
    
    Wes

    maybe they are saving that major overhaul of the os to handle add
    on graphics boards for 3.0 (sounds like it could break lots of things).
    
    What about taking another approach - the bridgeboard showed that
    they could bring up an ibmpc window on an Amiga display.  Could
    they do something similar with that board?  (just use it as a display
    and blit the workbench screen to it from somewhere in main
    memory?)  Wastefully of memory, and perhaps a tad slow, but it would
    give the illusion of Workbench running on the display, without having
    to wait for that major overhaul.
    
    -Dave

    re: .1
    
    Personally, I'm happy with an overscanned 710x470 display.  I wish
    I had 8 bits/pixel to work with, but I'm getting by.  It does 
    depend on your application.  Whether an Amiga 2500 is a "workstation"
    or not, is really semantics.  At work I really like my VS2000's 
    (monochrome) display, but when I get home I wonder how I ever got
    along without color.  IMHO, they're both workstations, because
    they allow me to work more productively.  
    
    In order to 'keep up' with current trends, though, there has to
    be an increase in resolution and # of colors.  If for nothing
    else than to keep up with the 'Jones' (ie. Mac's, PC's, NeXT's ).
    Certainly, the Amiga's ability to run applications on different screens
    gives it a level of functionality that even workstations don't have.
    
    ~Steve ( I think multiple screens *should* be a workstation standard!! )
           

> From VNS 10/10/89
>
> Multimedia - "It's A PC, It's A TV, It's Multimedia"
>	{Business Week, 9-Oct-89, p. 152} {MISG}
>   Companies are betting millions on `multimedia' a system that marries
> computers with audio and video. PC's are receiving a major transfusion of
> video technology, new hybrids that can display sharp, moving color images on
> the same screen with spreadsheets and text. Add to that high-fidelity sound
> and some imaginative software, and the PC may become a `multimedia' tool that
> could change the way people work learn and play. IBM, Apple, Intel, Microsoft,
> Commodore, Next, Philips, Fujitsu, and NEC are busily promoting multimedia as
> the next frontier in PCs. Market researchers forecast an $11.4 billion market
> for multimedia products and services by 1993. Some tough technical problems
> that remain to be tackled are specialized circuitry, memory requirements and
> lack of a dominant storage format. Hardest to predict is when the technology
> will be mature enough and cheap enough to bring full-blown multimedia systems
> into the office and home.
>
> MacroMind - Multimedia for the Mac may make them multimillions
>	{Business Week, 9-Oct-89, p. 155} {MISG}
>   MacroMind Inc. has shot ahead as the early leader in multimedia software.
> MacroMind's Director program priced at $695 helps assemble words, graphics,
> video, animation, and sound into slick, near-cinematic business presentations
> and training sequences that play on the color screen of an Apple Macintosh.
> Using Director, General Motors has trained new workers for its assembly lines.
> It's used in making TV commercials, helping salespeople prepare their pitches.
> Director's biggest audience remains industrial customers, such as ad agencies
> and corporate training departments. Apple is counting heavily on Director to
> help propel its Macintosh ahead of IBM and its PS/2 line in the emerging
> multimedia battles.

    The Amiga sure seems like a perfect platform for this type of
    application.  Producing video, animation and sound certainly is one
    of it's forte's.  I've seen the 'real-time' digitizers, and am
    suprised that no one has used similar technology to produce a
    "TV within a window (or screen)" for the Amiga.  Any rumors?
    
    ~Steve