ftp.xmission.com/2014.06.ftp.xmission.com.tar/ftp.xmission.com/pub/lists/fractint/archive/v01.n198

Internet Message Format | 1998-05-11 | 40KB

From: [e-mail] (fractint-digest)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: fractint-digest V1 #198
Reply-To: fractint-digest
Sender: [e-mail]
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk


fractint-digest         Tuesday, May 12 1998         Volume 01 : Number 198




----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 21:06:20 -0400
From: davides <[e-mail]>
Subject: (fractint) Brieana

For my newest granddaughter, Brieana, a spiral:

Brieana            { ; David Shanholtzer, 1998
                     ; For my newest granddaughter
                     ; Frm: GenInvMand1_N by Jm Collard-Richard
                     ; color map: dav9b
  reset=1960 type=formula formulafile=fractint.frm
  formulaname=geninvmand1_n function=tan/sin/sin/sin passes=t
  center-mag=-1.07429130009775100/-0.38213820078226900/98.03922
  float=y maxiter=800 inside=260 outside=real decomp=256
  distest=1/71/1024/768 finattract=y
  colors=mHr<4>nIr000<89>0003Km<12>klt000<72>000R0p<7>S0pS1pS1pT1pT1pT2p<5\
  6>mHr
  }


[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Back up my hard drive?
How do I put it in reverse?

- --------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 20:17:42 -0700
From: "Angela Wilczynski" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) Some boundary trace pars

Paul and/or Joyce Carlson wrote:
>
> These pars use the Dbl_Expos_Newt2 formula that I just posted.
> They do not use the double exposure rendering  - instead they
> use Fractint's boundary trace method.  It's fun to watch the
> images being plotted by this method and as for the images
> themselves -  well, they're kinda nice, too.  The fourth one
> is really different.
>

I too have been fiddling......and especially with color maps for all of Paul's
new goodies.  Below is a par plus two color variations.  Once you see the color
methodology, you ought to be able to play with the colors to suit your own
preferances.  Note that to use and change the maps you need to be cycling all
256 colors.

wiz_newt1          { ; 5/12/98 Angela Wilczynski w. newnwt_1.map
                     ; from a Paul Carlson Formula
  reset=1960 type=formula formulafile=may98.frm
  formulaname=dbl_exp_newt1_j
  center-mag=-0.10626847380645170/-0.10663663899035230/139159
  params=0.1/50/1e-007/2/0.99933510184/0.03646053069 float=y
  maxiter=3000 inside=253 outside=summ
  colors=Tav<28>80UUGD<30>UGDzcc<30>mKKUGD<30>UGDUzz<7>NllMkkLiiLhhKff<18>\
  3CCUGD<30>UGDwob<30>ZK8UGD<30>UGDUcwUbw cyclerange=0/255
  }

wiz_newt3          { ; 5/12/98 Angela Wilczynski w. nwt-blk3.map
                     ; from a Paul Carlson Formula
  colors=vm`<28>ZK8000<30>000m6U<30>F0A000<30>000zuU<30>UA0000<29>000mAA<3\
  0>A10000<31>000wobwna cyclerange=0/255
  }

wiz_newt2          { ; 5/12/98 Angela Wilczynski w. newnwt-2.map
                     ; from a Paul Carlson Formula
  colors=uau<28>K0Kwww<30>wwwwob<30>UA8www<30>wwwzcc<30>K0Azzz<30>zzzczz<3\
  0>0AAzzz<30>zzzwcwvbv cyclerange=0/255
  }

Enjoy!!!

Angela

p.s. I haven't tried the maps on all of Paul's variations, but they ought to
work for any that have 2/125 in the last expression of the formula.

- --------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 20:37:33 -0700
From: "Angela Wilczynski" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) Spiral Valley

John W. Evans wrote:
>
> Hi all
>
> First par post from a long-time lurker - nothing original but inspired by
> Angela's Spiral Valley recently posted
>
> Wizzle_Tree        <<snipped>>

John....

Welcome out of lurkdom!! I loved your pars.....especially that last
one.....Paul's images are often tough to color properly and that one came out
well, I thought.

Here's a color par for your fractal forest....try it on any of your "trees"

Wiz_TreeColor      { ; for John Evan's fractal forest
                     ; zoomed by John W. Evans [Par date: May 12, 1998]
                     ; t=  0:03:28.88 using a P-200 at 800x600
                     ; Formula by Paul Carlson colours by Damien Jones
  colors=000zzc<28>cKA000<28>0000wz<27>03C00A000<28>000Uz0<27>2C90AA000<28\
  >000AcU<28>050000<43>000
  }

- --------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 21:33:55 PDT
From: "john Weeks" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) Filtering images with Fractint

>From [e-mail] Mon May 11 06:09:23 1998
>Received: from domo by lists.xmission.com with local (Exim 1.82 #1)
>    id 0yYsHU-0006t1-00; Mon, 11 May 1998 07:06:12 -0600

>On Sat, 2 May 1998, Weldon Morgan wrote:
>> Part of the reason I became interested in Fractint had to do with the
>> possibility of improving the resolution of photographic images
through the
>> use of fractel technology.  As I understand it, one can use the
fractel
>> algorithm to simulate the pixel information that does not exist in
the
>> original image.  Does anyone on this list have any information on
this
>> process, or can point me in the right direction
>
>I haven't heard of the idea.  Sounds interesting.
>
>There's going to be a finite limit to your improvements, though, even
>if it's possible to do this at all, on information-theoretic grounds.
>

Done and Done again!!!
Check out  www.Iterated.com
Downloadable Shareware that does just what you're talking about.
>Kragen
>
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------
>Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
>Post Message:   [e-mail]
>Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
>Administrator:  [e-mail]
>Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"
>


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

- --------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 22:18:27 -0700
From: "Terry W. Gintz" <[e-mail]>
Subject: (fractint) beyond the hype

Thanks for all the feedback!  It matches what I've come to expect from a
community of fractalists this diverse.
But as the poet said "Nothing is revealed", or something like that.  The basic
lines of fire have been drawn for a long time.  I've been in the fractal game
nearly as long as Fractint(Fra386), since 1984, though always with the windows
interface foremost rather than DOS.  From Macintosh to Amiga to MS Windows, so
maybe I know as well as anyone what is involved in  making a windows program
work.  It's been a revelation to incorporate some of the Fractint optimizations
in my own programming, though they never worked quite the same.  This is mainly
because I refuse to copy anyone's code verbatim, but prefer to emulate an
algorithm with my own code.  So I know there's much in Fractint that would make
my Windows programs even faster/more versatile, if I understood its source code
better.

With all the steady stream of DOS pandering, Damien probably came closest to
reality when he mentioned the problem of converting 16-bit assembly code to the
32-bit model.  That could be done in stages, initially removing any troublesome
code.  Just having the program compiled on a 32-bit compiler would speed up the
plotting 40 to 60 percent, based on my own porting experiences.  Having a
functional Windows version of Fractint also eliminates the need to support a
hundred different graphics modes and boards.  It doesn't do much good to have a
fast DOS version if your graphics card isn't supported, a major irritant for me
in the past when I tried to run DOS games that couldn't recognize my super vga
board.  Things didn't become really compatible until the Pentium came around
with its VESA support for 256-color mode.

Angela mentioned a compelling reason for having a Windows version:
multiple-document support.  I can open up to 20 files in my programs, each with
its own "window", and this is an arbitrary limit just to keep the window menu
manageable.  Right now I just simulate multiple windows, and switch between
them, drawing on one main window.  With MDI or MFC, as Steve Ferguson uses in
his programs, any number of windows can be open at the same time.  With
Fractint, you have to save one picture before opening another, etc.

I'd like to take each barb from a DOS lover, and refute all their claims as
nonsense.  It would take some time to respond to each of them in a different
letter, so I'll just touch on what I can recall of them.  It does not take 4
weeks or 4 hours to generate a fractal in Windows.  On my 233Mhz system, most
of my pictures plot at 800X600 in 5 minutes or less(Mandelbrot/Julia sets in
under a minute.)  Slowest to plot are custom formulae that I've loaded through
a Fractint par file, such as Sylvie Gallet's and Paul Carlson's intricacies.
Some of these work better than others, the biggest lag being when the bailout
is set to very high iterations.  If I convert them to hard-coded versions, they
may actually run faster in my programs than Fractint.  I've optimized Paul's
orbit-trap methods to plot up to 3 times faster than Fractint, and in true
color!  So speed is the biggest myth about Fractint that I've seen touted.  If
I had a parser in my programs as optimized as Fractint's parser, there would be
little speed difference there, a matter of minutes or seconds at most rather
than hours.  And many good programmers tell me Fractint doesn't have the
fastest parser that could be coded.

About the mouse interface:  when I want to zoom in Fractint using a mouse, I
can't remember which way to roll the mouse to shrink the zoom box after
clicking in the draw window.  Then I have to exit the window and look up help
to figure it out.  In my programs, I have keyboard "hotkeys" and toolbar icons
to execute many tasks.  For zooming, I hold down the left mouse button to
shrink the zoom box, hold the right mouse button down to enlarge the box, hold
the left arrow key to rotate the zoom box counter-clockwise and hold the right
arrow down to rotate the box clockwise.  I don't support skewing, but something
as simple could be done in Fractint.  The point is, keyboard commands are
easily added to a windows program, and don't have to interfere with mouse
usage.

About batch mode:  this can be done with Windows as easy as in DOS.  I have a
redraw-all option in my program that redraws all open windows(up to 20, at any
resolution and color map)  to full size or thumbsize automatically!   I don't
have to write a batch file to do this.  Windows provides for edit boxes, so any
custom formula you want to enter in my programs is edited inside my programs,
not by a separate text editor.

IMHO, touch typing is not a necessary skill for using a fractal program, or any
computer program these days.  Anyone who advocates gearing a program solely
around a touch typist is out of touch with ergonomics.  I suspect mice and GUI
were invented just to replace the awful burden of touch-typing on a person's
wrists, as well as providing a more intuitive way to work in a multi-tasking
environment(Fractint is *not* multi-tasking; all my programs *are*.)
Programming sets its own limits on the wary typist.  I refuse to argue anymore
with what my own hands tell me is the gentlest method of data input.  The
business schools and colleges are still pushing touch typing, but who do they
work for?  Big business doesn't care about people's wrists, just getting the
job done in the shortest time.  If you are doing a lot of touch typing with
your fractal program, you are working too hard.

I know it was unfair to imply Fractint's programmers are lazy or incompetent,
which they obviously aren't.  Stubbornness is more to the point.  Lack of time
is an accurate assessment too.  The latter argument is not one I'd care to
stick up for though.  Spending close to ten years on a fractal program, as I
have, it is fair to say that I chose to spend the time I had developing a
program with a Windows interface, while the Fractint programmers never really
got started in that direction.  But it's never too late, which is the  reason I
offer my support in this.  Either to rebuild Fractint from the ground up to
fully support Windows 9x, or to offer my program(s) as a platform to use the
bulk of Fractint's options/features.  Would there be a lot of interest in a
program that was fully Fractint compatible, and just as fast or faster, but ran
in Windows 95 and was called by a different name than WinFract?   There are
some things in the old Fractint that need to be updated to use a true-color
space more effectively.   My programs use an expanded "palette"  editor like
Fractint's palette editor, with additional features not found in Fractint.
You'd find that my palette editor has little resemblance to Steve Ferguson's
"slider"-based color editor, though I use sliders for defining rgb/hsv values
for each palette "index."

If I were to upgrade my programs to make a Windows substitute/replacement for
Fractint, I'd probably start with the parser, since my parser already supports
a great deal of the Fractint 19.x par/frm standard.  Unfortunately, the parser
code in Fractint is some of the most dense and  undocumented code I've seen.  A
parser engineer could understand it, and it probably uses some of the same
methods as I do in precompiling, though with a lot of additional assembly-code
support.

If I go down in flames, I have at least made the effort to rock the boat.

Cheers,

Terry
- --
[e-mail]
http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Lofts/5601/
http://www.zenweb.com/pan/rayn/twg/
http://www.fortunecity.com/victorian/palette/31/



- --------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 22:44:28 PDT
From: "john Weeks" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) Isn't DOS Dead?; Was fractint v20 and beyond

Dave Kolasa wrote ->
>The DOS version seems to be the preferred route but it seems that we
are
>all ignoring the fact that Microsoft will not be releasing any more
>versions of DOS. At least that is what I recall reading sometime ago.
>
>Does it make sense to continue developing something for a dead OS?
>

Windows 98 does not support DOS applications.  You can have them both
installed but I for one will continue to let my old 486 run my Fracint
and other DOS applications while I do my Windows on a separate machine
(to avoid hassles).  Who cares if the 486 is slow, I can let it chug
away while I work on other things.

           john

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

- --------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 17:56:28 +1200
From: "Morgan L. Owens" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) fractint v20 and beyond

At 07:39 11/05/98 -0700, Wizzle wrote:
>Jack...
>
>I think your comments were right on!!!
>
>I'd like to add that when I'm going to seriously work on fractals, I'm always
>going to choose the DOS version of Fractint. But there are often times
when I'm
>in "mess around mode" and a Winfract that could at least "see" all the new
pars
>would be my choice......even with it's other current limitations.
>
>Angela
>
I would agree with this as well - so long as Winfract can update its
rendering in realtime as parameters are fiddled a la Tierazon. Otherwise
I'd be using with DOS Fractint.

Personally, if I had a choice between DOS and Windows Fractints, I'd be
picking the DOS version, unless the Windows one was significantly superior.
For a start, a Windows port would have to be able to take over the entire
screen; without any real estate being taken up with distracting window
frames and menu bars (or mouse pointers) - but this shouldn't be too
difficult. Care would have to be taken to minimise clutter; it would be
nice to have separate dialogue boxes for each of the menu screens Fractint
offers open simultaneously - but it would have to be necessary to be able
to remove them and rearrange them at will (I'm thinking of Photoshop's
palettes here).

And I wouldn't be using Winfract at all unless I can do everything via the
keyboard including hitting 'z' and switching focus to (or opening) the user
parameters screen and (say) shift-Z to close it. If everything was mousy
you would need sliders for entering numeric values (including decimals -
and you thought sliders for integer values was icky!) And a combination
keyboard-and-mouse interface is just downright annoying.

"archaic help system"? Personally I prefer Fractint's help system to almost
all the online help available with Windows applications.

This has been a mildly interesting debate: without a doubt Fractint will
undergo fundamental changes in the future (one such which I do _not_ hope
to see would be its extinction!) and it does pay to discuss such matters so
as to avoid painting oneself into a corner.

But may I add in conclusion that Terry Gintz could have presented his case
somewhat better. I caught a distinct odour of arrogance from his posting
(was it just me?) and to come as close as he did to slandering Fractint's
dozens of authors over the years (66 at last count) was just plain
uncalled-for.

Morgan



- --------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 02:57:57 EDT
From: HGtotheG <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) Filtering images with Fractint

 On Sat, 2 May 1998, Weldon Morgan wrote:
 > Part of the reason I became interested in Fractint had to do with the
 > possibility of improving the resolution of photographic images through the
 > use of fractel technology.  As I understand it, one can use the fractel
 > algorithm to simulate the pixel information that does not exist in the
 > original image.  Does anyone on this list have any information on this
 > process, or can point me in the right direction

and Kragen responded.

 I haven't heard of the idea.  Sounds interesting.

 There's going to be a finite limit to your improvements, though, even
 if it's possible to do this at all, on information-theoretic grounds.

 Kragen
 >>

Wendel,

What you are looking for is discribed in the video, 'Colors of Inifity,' by
Michael Barnsley and Auther C. Clark.  The video was made in 1995 and Michael
Barnsley shows how and why the improving of resolutation by computer imaging
works.

Michael Barnsley has a company, Iterated Systems, in Alanta, GA and has a web
page but I don't have the address at hand.  Someone on this page posted it at
one time so maybe they can give it to you.

As to Wendels thought that, 'There's going to be a finite limit to your
improvements..."     The computer, like zooming in on fractals, will
constantly zoom and project, by its programing, its best image of its model.
You will hit a point where there is only black or white but that is way down
in the image.

If you can find a copy of the video, it shows on the PBS stations every so
often, it will ansewer a lot of your questions.

Walt Bishop

- --------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 00:08:16 -0700
From: "Terry W. Gintz" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) fractint v20 and beyond

Morgan L. Owens wrote:

> At 07:39 11/05/98 -0700, Wizzle wrote:
> >Jack...
> >
> >I think your comments were right on!!!
> >
> >I'd like to add that when I'm going to seriously work on fractals, I'm always
> >going to choose the DOS version of Fractint. But there are often times
> when I'm
> >in "mess around mode" and a Winfract that could at least "see" all the new
> pars
> >would be my choice......even with it's other current limitations.
> >
> >Angela
> >
> I would agree with this as well - so long as Winfract can update its
> rendering in realtime as parameters are fiddled a la Tierazon. Otherwise
> I'd be using with DOS Fractint.

Morgan,Claims have flew that laziness was not an issue here, but I fail to see the
point that doing in a Windows program what you can't do in Fractint is so
important to reduce a program's usability to nil.  Like I said, you either like
Windows or you don't.  Everything you say in this letter is with the latter
emphasis.  If I was being heckled by you in a computer store(as a pc salesman), I
would be strongly tempted to tell you to seek out a used-computer store, than
waste time trying to describe the merits of today's super personal computers or
software.  There's nothing "arrogant" about what I've said and meant, though
through colored glasses it might seem that way.

> Personally, if I had a choice between DOS and Windows Fractints, I'd be
> picking the DOS version, unless the Windows one was significantly superior.
> For a start, a Windows port would have to be able to take over the entire
> screen; without any real estate being taken up with distracting window
> frames and menu bars (or mouse pointers) - but this shouldn't be too
> difficult. Care would have to be taken to minimise clutter; it would be
> nice to have separate dialogue boxes for each of the menu screens Fractint
> offers open simultaneously - but it would have to be necessary to be able
> to remove them and rearrange them at will (I'm thinking of Photoshop's
> palettes here).

You're talking here of limitations that only a Windows programmer would make out
of preference, or lack of experience.  I've always had a full-screen mode for my
windows programs, and it's not that hard to implement.  On the one hand you say
you want to reduce clutter, then you say you want all the Fractint screens to be
open at the same time.  The reason I haven't gone to MDI for my fractal programs,
is the frame clutter.  Having several dialog boxes open at the same time makes
little sense, when they open and close so easily.  And you don't have to exit the
"graphics" window to see the dialogs in Windows.

>
>
> And I wouldn't be using Winfract at all unless I can do everything via the
> keyboard including hitting 'z' and switching focus to (or opening) the user
> parameters screen and (say) shift-Z to close it. If everything was mousy
> you would need sliders for entering numeric values (including decimals -
> and you thought sliders for integer values was icky!) And a combination
> keyboard-and-mouse interface is just downright annoying.

Nonsense.  Having a little of both(mouse and keyboard) gives your hands a chance
to exercise different muscles, and reduces fatigue.  You can talk all you want
about the merits of touch typing, but IMHO it's a pain to do for any length of
time.  Years of typing has convinced me that touch typing is just plain bad on
your hands and wrists.   Talk to someone with carpal tunnel syndrome.

>
>
> "archaic help system"? Personally I prefer Fractint's help system to almost
> all the online help available with Windows applications.

Have you used real Windows context help?  With Fractint you have to scroll through
the main index of the help file each time you want to find out about a command.
Every time.  There are links embedded in the help file to specific sections, but I
always forget what section to look in to get help about things like the palette
editor or zooming.  In my programs, each menu selection has a direct link to the
help section that pertains to that command.  You activate the link by pressing F1
when the menu item is highlighted.  Each of my windows also has a Help button to
access context help for that window.  If your Windows program doesn't have these
features, it's because the programmer chose not to implement them, not that
Windows has bad online help.  Many fractal programmers  who work with Windows
don't include much more than a status bar or simple help file.  They're not
getting paid for their efforts either.

> But may I add in conclusion that Terry Gintz could have presented his case
> somewhat better. I caught a distinct odour of arrogance from his posting
> (was it just me?) and to come as close as he did to slandering Fractint's
> dozens of authors over the years (66 at last count) was just plain
> uncalled-for.

Do you think I haven't worked long and hard to support my claims?  Just stating my
opinions.  I'm just one person, no genius, with probably as much fractal
programming experience as any one of Fractint's authors.  If it looks arrogant to
state that I think the Stone Soup group is lagging by not using Windows 9x, so be
it.  If I *was* to speak out of arrogance I would state for the record than any of
my true-color pictures(done in Windows 95) is more impressive than its Fractint
counterpart, if it had a Fractint counterpart.   But you would never believe that,
would you?  Check out my galleries, then try to duplicate the tc pics in
Fractint.  Try to make a midi or AVI file with Fractint, if you think it's so
great.

Regards,

Terry
- --
[e-mail]
http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Lofts/5601/
http://www.zenweb.com/pan/rayn/twg/
http://www.fortunecity.com/victorian/palette/31/



- --------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 22:28:38 -1000
From: "Shauna Jones" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) beyond the hype

On 11 May 98 at 22:18, Terry W. Gintz wrote:

> On my 233Mhz system, most

Gee, I wish I had that. Just a while ago, I finally got
up to a P133 from a P75. Before that, it was a 486/33.
Fortunately, I don't have to waste processor time on
Windows to generate fractals ...

Another blast of bits from David
Visit our not-so-boring web page: http://www.aloha.net/~shauna/
Visit the Hawaii Astronomical Society: http://www.hawastsoc.org/
For the best Hawaii & Pacific Basin surf forecast: mailto:[e-mail]

Random Thought for this Nanosecond
If you can't see God, maybe you have an 'I' problem.



- --------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 22:28:37 -1000
From: "Shauna Jones" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) beyond the hype

On 11 May 98 at 22:18, Terry W. Gintz wrote:

> Having a functional Windows version of Fractint also
> eliminates the need to support a hundred different
> graphics modes and boards.

It would also limit the modes available, in my experience
with Windows. Fractint supports a lot of modes that no
version of Windows does.

Another blast of bits from David
Visit our not-so-boring web page: http://www.aloha.net/~shauna/
Visit the Hawaii Astronomical Society: http://www.hawastsoc.org/
For the best Hawaii & Pacific Basin surf forecast: mailto:[e-mail]

Random Thought for this Nanosecond
Manual (man' yOO ul) -n Doorstop included with software.



- --------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 22:28:38 -1000
From: "Shauna Jones" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) beyond the hype

On 11 May 98 at 22:18, Terry W. Gintz wrote:

> IMHO, touch typing is not a necessary skill for using
> a fractal program, or any computer program these days.

I guess you don't do much wordprocessing or data entry
work, do you? <G>

> Anyone who advocates gearing a program solely around a
> touch typist is out of touch with ergonomics.

And anyone who advocates gearing a program solely around
a mouse or other pointing device is also out of touch
with ergonomics.

> I suspect mice and GUI were invented just to replace
> the awful burden of touch-typing on a person's wrists

I beg to differ. I never had any RSI problems until I
encountered a mouse. Now I cannot use a mouse at all,
but I wouldn't if I could, anyway - I like my
graphics tablet much better, thank you!

Other people at my office can report similar things with
mouse-obsessed programs.

FWIW, a friend of mine who has been a transcriptionist,
and touch-typist for over 50 years(!) has never had any
RSI problems whatsoever. She is living proof that proper
touch-typing - with proper hand positions and the proper
*touch*, instead of the hammering a lot of people use -
doesn't cause RSI.

I can also state that the GUI wasn't invented to save
touch-typing. It was invented so that people didn't have
to remember program commands, and (as you mentioned)
make it easier to work with multiple programs.

Just my humble opinion. YMMV. Anyway, this has probably
wandered a bit far from the main interests of most
Fractinters on the list ...

Another blast of bits from David
Visit our not-so-boring web page: http://www.aloha.net/~shauna/
Visit the Hawaii Astronomical Society: http://www.hawastsoc.org/
For the best Hawaii & Pacific Basin surf forecast: mailto:[e-mail]

Random Thought for this Nanosecond
No problem is so formidable that you can't just walk away from it.



- --------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 22:28:39 -1000
From: "Shauna Jones" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) fractint v20 and beyond

On 11 May 98 at 7:16, Angela Wilczynski wrote:

> Now...I also like to run Fractint under
> DOS...but....there are times when I'd prefer to stay in
> true Winders and multi-task. Why....I could let
> Winfract render in the background while chatting!!!! or
> posting all those pars and frms!!!!

Gee, I do that with DOS Fractint - but I run OS/2. Glad
I'm not running "Winders" <G>

Another blast of bits from David
Visit our not-so-boring web page: http://www.aloha.net/~shauna/
Visit the Hawaii Astronomical Society: http://www.hawastsoc.org/
For the best Hawaii & Pacific Basin surf forecast: mailto:[e-mail]

Random Thought for this Nanosecond
Does fuzzy logic tickle?



- --------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 22:28:39 -1000
From: "Shauna Jones" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) Isn't DOS Dead?; Was fractint v20 and beyond

On 11 May 98 at 14:22, Dave Kolasa wrote:

> The DOS version seems to be the preferred route but it
> seems that we are all ignoring the fact that Microsoft
> will not be releasing any more versions of DOS. At
> least that is what I recall reading sometime ago.

So? IBM still provides PC-DOS, which is much more stable
than the last MS offering. And there is also the
excellent *freeware* DOS (formerly called OpenDOS, now
called something else) from Caldera software.

> Does it make sense to continue developing something
> for a dead OS?

The only meaningful definition of a "dead" OS is *when
nobody is using it anymore*. And those who use W95 are
still using DOS - the only thing that changed was the GUI
interface. W95's DOS underpinnings are both its
strength and its weakness. Strength in that it *can* run
software that wants direct access to the hardware -
unlike NT. Weakness in that we now have multithreading
piled along with "multitasking" on top of the same old
single-tasking core.

Another blast of bits from David
Visit our not-so-boring web page: http://www.aloha.net/~shauna/
Visit the Hawaii Astronomical Society: http://www.hawastsoc.org/
For the best Hawaii & Pacific Basin surf forecast: mailto:[e-mail]

Random Thought for this Nanosecond
Winston Churchill: 'We shall write to the ISVs, we shall flame the journalists, but we shall never surrender.'



- --------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 22:28:38 -1000
From: "Shauna Jones" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) beyond the hype

On 11 May 98 at 22:18, Terry W. Gintz wrote:

> Just having the program compiled on a 32-bit compiler
> would speed up the plotting 40 to 60 percent, based on
> my own porting experiences.

But which memory model would you use? W95? NT? OS/2?
UNIX/Linux? MacOS? Whatever you choose will no longer be
as universal as DOS. FWIW, Fractint could be done in
32-bit code that compiles and runs under one of the
common DOS extenders.

Another blast of bits from David
Visit our not-so-boring web page: http://www.aloha.net/~shauna/
Visit the Hawaii Astronomical Society: http://www.hawastsoc.org/
For the best Hawaii & Pacific Basin surf forecast: mailto:[e-mail]

Random Thought for this Nanosecond
Time passed, which, basically, is its job.



- --------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 22:28:38 -1000
From: "Shauna Jones" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) beyond the hype

On 11 May 98 at 22:18, Terry W. Gintz wrote:

> If I go down in flames, I have at least made the
> effort to rock the boat.

And blew lots of trumpets for your own programs as
paragons of ergonomic perfection and performance. <G>
What are these programs, and where can I find them to
verify these claims for myself?

Another blast of bits from David
Visit our not-so-boring web page: http://www.aloha.net/~shauna/
Visit the Hawaii Astronomical Society: http://www.hawastsoc.org/
For the best Hawaii & Pacific Basin surf forecast: mailto:[e-mail]

Random Thought for this Nanosecond
I think, therefore I am overqualified.



- --------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 22:28:38 -1000
From: "Shauna Jones" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (fractint) fractint v20 and beyond

On 11 May 98 at 1:48, Terry W. Gintz wrote:

> (Who today prefers the DOS command line interface to
> the clarity and elegance of Windows 95?

I would never apply the words "clarity" or "elegance" to
the ripped-off hodgepodge that is the W95 "interface," or
any other MS product I have encountered.

> Or it need not be compared to Windows 95, but any
> up-to-date windowing system, such as Macintosh or
> X-Windows...)    I

I would apply "consistent" to the Mac interface, which
puts it way ahead of W95.

Another blast of bits from David
Visit our not-so-boring web page: http://www.aloha.net/~shauna/
Visit the Hawaii Astronomical Society: http://www.hawastsoc.org/
For the best Hawaii & Pacific Basin surf forecast: mailto:[e-mail]

Random Thought for this Nanosecond
<Ctrl><Alt><Del> to read the next message



- --------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 11:29:06 +0000
From: [e-mail]
Subject: (fractint) fractint next generation

> >>Who today prefers the DOS command line interface to the clarity and
> elegance of Windows 95? <<
>
    I prefer the bash command line, and the clarity of twm :-)
    But the full-screen interface of fractint is the best UI
    I've never seen for a sophisticated software. Everything is
    here, no mouse-walk. If I remember, there was a projet
    about splitting the fractal engine and the UI... What's new
    in this area ?


        Thierry.


- ---
  Linux et Cassoulet  ;===)  http://savage.iut-blagnac.fr/
  Rien a dire ...     ;===)  http://www.mygale.org/08/oulala/

- --------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for using Fractint, The Fractals and Fractint Discussion List
Post Message:   [e-mail]
Get Commands:   [e-mail] "help"
Administrator:  [e-mail]
Unsubscribe:    [e-mail] "unsubscribe fractint"

------------------------------

End of fractint-digest V1 #198
******************************