In a message of 16-Nov-99 Daniel Thornton wrote:
>> Please don't get me wrong. But I *really* can't understand why people
>> still use AGA and complain about it.
> Because most people can't afford a GFX card for their machines; you
> forget that many people are using A1200s, so they need to buy a PPC
> board first, and then an accelerator. Not cheap.
Considering all the money they saved when they purchased an A1200 instead
of an A4000 they ought to have plenty of money.
If people don't want to purchase a graphics card, then they are naturally
welcome to do so. But in my opinion it really isn't such a big difference
in total cost whether you are an A1200 user or an A4000 user.
>> Some people say, Olli should improve image dithering. Hmpf. I would prefer
>> him to do a PPC version of the image decoders first.
> But few people have PPC's because they are too expensive; provide for
> the majority first, and then work on minority hardware.
The Amiga market is a funny place. We are so small that we get in direct
contact with the developers and "force" them to develop for old, slow and
obsolete equipment. The PC market is quite the opposite - here the market
is so huge that the users aren't in touch with the developers and this
enables the developers to develop for the next generation computer - and
accordingly "force" the users to upgrade.
I have known/spoken with several developers/users that have left the Amiga
community, because "the users doesn't bother upgrading, so they are not
worth developing for".
Another example are a couple of my friends who at this very moment are
developing games for the PC. They admit that they are developing for the
computer of tomorrow - because unless they do so they can't be competitive.
We have surely got some fine pieces of software on this platform, but I
think it would be even better if we gave the developers an overall better
platform to develop for.
>> Some people say, Olli should improve image dithering. Hmpf. I would prefer
>> him to do a PPC version of the image decoders first.
> But few people have PPC's because they are too expensive; provide for
> the majority first, and then work on minority hardware.
I just re-quote to follow another thread.
I surely support Frank's statement. We want PPC image decodes. I don't
even have a PPC board, and I haven't looked into what they cost, but it
is most probably a lot. But still I want ALL developers to develop for
the PPC. And why? Because I need an incentive to upgrade. At the moment
I have no real need to upgrade, because so few applications support the
PPC, but the more applications that begin to support PPC the more reason
for me and other users to upgrade - and by upgrading we raise the overall
quality of our platform.
Another way to look at what Frank said is to substitute PPC image decoders
with JavaScript. In my opinion Olli shouldn't waste his time improving
the image dithering, but should rather spend his time improving the
JavaScript, because this surely needs improvements for all users - and not
only the portion of users who for some reason still use AGA.
Well, we have had this discussion before, so you know my attitude with
respect to this. Therefore: flames >NIL:
Uffe Holst
____________________________________________________________
Voyager Mailing List - Info & Archive: http://www.vapor.com/
For Listserver Help: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "HELP"
To Unsubscribe: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "UNSUBSCRIBE"
