home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: newshost.gu.edu.au!aissande
- From: aissande@kraken.itc.gu.edu.au (George Sanderson)
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.misc
- Subject: Re: AGA info came from C= ?
- Date: 8 Jan 1996 09:01:51 GMT
- Organization: Groom Lake Testing Facility
- Message-ID: <4cqmhv$79v@ngriffin.itc.gu.edu.au>
- References: <4ad8t1$10h@sinsen.oslonett.no> <peterk.0jr3@combo.ganesha.com> <4cgtn3$nfk@sinsen.sn.no>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: kraken.itc.gu.edu.au
-
- oddhs@sn.no (Odd H. Sandvik) writes:
-
- :Why did engineering give them the AGA info then ? They could easily
- :have said: 'There are sufficient support in the OS for what you
- :want to do. Use it.'
-
- :C= made a big mistake in not developing good lowlevel game libraries
- :when they developed the 3.0/3.1 OS. That's IMHO why they eventually
- :gave out the AGA info. ( Blame the C= management who probably kept
- :a very tight budget on ALL development. )
-
- You haven't seen lowlevel.library (mostly for input & output stuff, NVRAM),
- and specialfx.library which was/is fairly fast. If i can recall
- correctly, specialfx.library did some hardware banging and a mixture of
- OS calls to accomplish some nice features. The advantage of this was
- that the actual game didn't do the hardware banging. If some new
- hardware came along, a new version of specialfx.library would be written
- for that hardware.
-
-