home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: cdc2.cdc.net!orb!giannini
- From: giannini@vianet.on.ca (Vince Giannini)
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.graphics
- Subject: Re: CyberGraphics for RetinaZ2???
- Date: 15 Mar 1996 12:26:26 GMT
- Organization: CDC Internet - 423/842-5709
- Distribution: world
- Message-ID: <4ibnli$fjc@cdc2.cdc.net>
- References: <4hv84f$c9r@cdc2.cdc.net> <19960311.79B5638.881D@scott.net> <judas.0io2@tomtec.abg.sub.org>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: orb.vianet.on.ca
- X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
-
- Th.Huber (judas@tomtec.abg.sub.org) wrote:
-
- : >Yes, CGfX is in development for the Z2 (or so I was told by a MacroSystems
- : >representative. I have heard of EGS, but I have also heard that it is slow
- : >compared to CgFX, but still better than RetinaEMU.
-
- : What are you talking about ?
-
- We are talking about Cybergraphics, a replacement interface/WB emulation
- for most of the popular graphics boards, that offers a main standard in
- retargetable graphics. So 24bit programs etc. written in compliance
- with CyberGFX, will run on a variety of cards (with CyberGFX emu) since
- the programs will not be hardware dependent.
-
- : RetinaEMU is real great, as it is very stable.
- : My friend, who runs a RetinaZ3 tried Cgfx. Now he uses RetinaEmu as it`s faster
- : and there are rather no crashes of the Gfx.Emulation.
-
- My main reason for wanting CyberGFX is for greater compatibility with
- software because of standardized rtg. There is alot more software
- available via CyberGFX than with the RetinaEmu. And AFAIK,
- CyberGFX is indeed faster than most of the emul software already included
- with graphics boards.
-
- L8r, Vince.
-
-