> >>But I think even if only one board is made, a few people will buy it.
> >And that's exactly why only one board should me made, with the few people
> >buying a new board anyway you had better make sure they all buy the same
one!
>
> It's just a matter that I'll hardly buy a faster MSX that will not run
> faster my old programs. (-:
The same goes for me.
> (-: If you plan to do a 3D shooter, you will use the fastest machine,
> it doesn't matter if it is Z180 or Z380... (-: And better than gfx9000
would
> be a ADVRAM + Gfx9000. But you know what will happen if you make a program
> for padial's Z380 board plus MoonSound plus ADVRAM plus gfx9000... ?
You'll
> be the only person in the world that will play it... Well, there are
> one or two more people, but that's all. This is the real problem. ((((-:
> In the perfect world everyone has the topmost system... unfortunately,
> we do not live in the perfect world. Sometimes a MSX1 program may
> me more apreciated than a TR one.
Yup. And therefor it's important that the software also runs on a normal
Z80, and therefor the extended instruction set should hardly be used.
> >Emulators, especially MSX emulators, aren't perfect. If you develop on a
> >emulator, you will probably have to rewrite parts of the program or do
some
> >heavy bughunting if you later try it on the real hardware.
> >Heh, I see proof of this everyday (in the gameboy programming scene).
>
> The difference is: when we are programming on BrMSX and we find a single
> difference between the emulation and the real machine, we say it to
> Ricardo and he corrects ASAP.
Yeah? Well, I still haven't seen 8x8 sprite support in screen 5. And we
really need it, for GEM development...
> >No, I meant Z380 isn't much slower than Z180, so its useless to want a
Z180
> >for only a small speed increase while you can have all the extra
processor
> >power of Z380 if you just tap into it!
>
> You only think on matemathic functions? When will we use 32 bit mult on
a
> MSX?
Never!
(untrue, btw)
> >You say PMEXT/PMARC. It's old and stupid (rounds off files to 128 bytes).
> >It's better to use LZH. And writing a LZH compressor/decompressor is as
> >easy as downloading a C-sourcecode from the internet and compiling a Z380
> >version. (or a legacy Z80 versions that will still run fast on Z380)
> >And then you have subdirectory support!
>
> C compiled maybe becomes slower than PMExt. BTW, someone will have to
> write a C compiler, right?
I am sure it will become slower.
> >Well, ASCII doesn't seem like its upgrading the MSX standard, so why
> >shouldn't we?
>
> Because a new standard is not discussed. Someone do something and
> says: This is the new standard (as Panasonic done with TR). When
> a new standard is discussed, we never get to the point.
I think Ademir's ACE002 is a nice new standard.
And ACE003 in co-operation with LPE's Z380 will be a nice new standard
_after_ that.
~Grauw
--
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<
email me: [EMAIL PROTECTED] or ICQ: 10196372
visit my homepage at http://grauw.blehq.org/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<
****
MSX Mailinglist. To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and put "unsubscribe msx [EMAIL PROTECTED]" (without the quotes) in
the body (not the subject) of the message.
Problems? contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More information on MSX can be found in the following places:
The MSX faq: http://www.faq.msxnet.org/
The MSX newsgroup: comp.sys.msx
The MSX IRC channel: #MSX on Undernet
****
