home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: news.icon-stl.net!usenet
- From: wmaddock@icon-stl.net (William F. Maddock)
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.misc
- Subject: Re: TRUE ABOUT VISCORP AND AT
- Date: 19 Apr 1996 00:15:16 GMT
- Organization: iCON, a service of St. Louis Internet Connections
- Message-ID: <1441.6682T1122T896@icon-stl.net>
- References: <4l50rb$4b4@freenet-news.carleton.ca> <Dq2AMp.G2M@cix.compulink.co.uk> <4l5s2m$9f3@freenet-news.carleton.ca>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup-109.icon-stl.net
- X-Newsreader: THOR 2.22 (Amiga;TCP/IP)
-
- On 18-Apr-96 21:53:42 de351@FreeNet.Carleton.CA K. C. Lee wrote:
-
- >"Jolyon Ralph" (jralph@cix.compulink.co.uk) writes:
- >> Cost-reduce the chips and maybe add a few new features (minor 'tweaks').
- >> Perhaps Fabio should suggest his AGAExtender device to them, that's
-
- >Sorry NOT the AGAExtender hack. :( It is pretty lame IMHO. If Coder
- >were to support it, they might support something with a better specs. The
- >AGA Extender still suffers from the lack of bandwidth that it fails to
- >address.
-
- In my opinion, the only *realistic* ways to *tweak* AGA would be to add two
- or three address lines and increase the clock speed. Anything more and you
- really should be designing a whole new chip set.
-
- My older brother is an electronics engineer that has been trying to get me
- to switch to PC's for years. That all stopped when he saw AGA at work. I'm
- not saying that AGA is good enough. It clearly is not. It also clearly is
- not as bad as some people here have implied. A tweaked AGA chipset would be
- perfect for a low-end Amiga *personal* computer. Not everyone wants or
- needs their machine's graphics capabilities to be on a par with SGI.
-
- >K. C. Lee
-
-
-
- William F. Maddock www.icon-stl.net/~wmaddock wmaddock@icon-stl.net
- THOR #1621 GAC FLAK Editor in Chief
- The Newsletter of the Gateway Amiga Club, Inc.
- The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the GAC or its members
-
-