PC still playing Amiga catchup

[alexatkin]

The highest audio  tone that can be captured is very slightly less than one-half the sampling rate of an analog-to-digital convertor.
So the 22khz rate will not save sounds much above 10kHz and will result in music missing the highest harmonics,whereas 44(actually 44.1kHz) sampling will save all the sounds even the best human ears can hear,that is up to 22kHz.Most people  lose the hearing of higher pitched sounds as the person ages,especially if exposed to lots of loud sounds.

But how anyone can compare sampling a digital joystick to sampling analog audio, is beyond me.

With audio, its quite obvious that capturing as much accuracy as possible, especially during mixing/mastering, is useful.  The more accurate data you have, the more accurately you will be mixing it.  So that once you drop it back down to 44.1 or 48Khz, you are getting a better approximation.  Thats just plain maths, the more precision the better the more accurate the result.

Now a digital Joystick?  Nobody has yet explained how being able to tell what happened to the joystick between screen refreshes actually has any bearing at all on a game.  Yes sampling quicker is more accurate, nobody every denied that.  But accuracy is only any good when its actually useful.

A mouse its useful to sample quicker, the electronics can counteract any questionable result that way (especially led/laser mice, you could get a rogue reflection from dust, a crack, poor mouse mat) and most of all - there will be less lag from the mouse itself.

Just look at LCD TVs.  The biggest lag on an LCD TV is not the pixel response time, its how quickly the TV can process the signal and actually tell those pixels to change.  That is one reason why a cheap TV and an expensive one often can be really different, even if they are using the same LCD panel.

So yeah, the Amiga joystick port is fast, and it might be useful if you are using it for some custom purpose rather than a joystick.  But then if you are going that direction why use such old technology when you could just use a modern PIC using far far less electricity.  I mean its a silly argument as there are things the Minimig can do that neither the Amiga nor PC can do, but that does not mean PC is trying to catch up to it.

[Hammer]

I guess we're all screwed then, after listening to Amigaski's banter. :roflmao:

:roflmao:

[Hammer]

For a mouse that is totally relevant.  A mouse can detect your movements down to a really really small degree.  If you are playing a FPS and precisely controlling your movement it is perfectly possible that you might want to turn around quicker than the screen refresh rate can achieve smoothly, in fact its pretty much guaranteed.  
(SNIP)

Bought the gaming mouse for a WAN/LAN party e.g. America's Army 3.0 (using UnrealEngine3).

[amigaksi]

The great joystick man who denies signal bounce in his own data and talks about KHz this and Hz that and truck loads of stuff but never mentioned Nyquist.

FACT: I did talk about Nyquist in this thread.  Search it.

FACT: I never used the sub-millisecond readings to make my claim of 1Khz sampling being useful.  What you extracted from the data was sub-millisecond only data.

FACT: In my application, even signal bounce is relevant data.  You should mimic the exact behavior of the joystick in a joystick recorder.

[amigaksi]

But how anyone can compare sampling a digital joystick to sampling analog audio, is beyond me.

With audio, its quite obvious that capturing as much accuracy as possible, especially during mixing/mastering, is useful.  The more accurate data you have, the more accurately you will be mixing it.  So that once you drop it back down to 44.1 or 48Khz, you are getting a better approximation.  Thats just plain maths, the more precision the better the more accurate the result.

Now a digital Joystick?  Nobody has yet explained how being able to tell what happened to the joystick between screen refreshes actually has any bearing at all on a game.  Yes sampling quicker is more accurate, nobody every denied that.  But accuracy is only any good when its actually useful.

A mouse its useful to sample quicker, the electronics can counteract any questionable result that way (especially led/laser mice, you could get a rogue reflection from dust, a crack, poor mouse mat) and most of all - there will be less lag from the mouse itself.

Just look at LCD TVs.  The biggest lag on an LCD TV is not the pixel response time, its how quickly the TV can process the signal and actually tell those pixels to change.  That is one reason why a cheap TV and an expensive one often can be really different, even if they are using the same LCD panel.

So yeah, the Amiga joystick port is fast, and it might be useful if you are using it for some custom purpose rather than a joystick.  But then if you are going that direction why use such old technology when you could just use a modern PIC using far far less electricity.  I mean its a silly argument as there are things the Minimig can do that neither the Amiga nor PC can do, but that does not mean PC is trying to catch up to it.

Yeah, you can build customized hardware on PC or Amiga or Minimig, but we were talking about using standard PC (what most people have out there).  So that if you wrote a game, you can estimate that joystick reading will take 1.8 microseconds or something like that.

[amigaksi]

roflmao so my machines don't prove anything nor does the the motherboards i linked but your 10-12 do? seriously your idea of proof is lost somewhere.

 ...

Okay, great they may have gone back to serial ports, but they did produce machines with parallel ports w/o serial ports.

>yea because someone cared about keyboard interfaces more. besides ps2 ports were still compatible with AT ports(with a pin adapter) so really all that changed was the packaging.

AT keyboards with DIN5 are gone for good and they went a long time before joysticks for gameports or gameports.  Joysticks for gameports are still being sold.

>what is that supposed to mean??

They got rid of the gameport knowing people can still use USB so they had some thought about it but still playing catch-up to Amiga with its superior joystick interface.

[amigaksi]

i see so efficiency = hogging the hardware. sorry but in the world of multitasking this don't have a place. the os determines what software gets priority but does not let anything hog the hardware.
...

No, there's no multitasking needed if application runs going directly to hardware.  Application can take over the timer interrupt that OS is using for multitasking so OS won't be multitasking.  As I stated, see Amiga as an example of a computer that does this.  OS supports multitasking applications but it also supports single tasking applications that can use hardware fully to get the task done most efficiently.

>the programmers chose the version of the api they are going to program to. as such if they decide to progran to 9.0c then that is what they state as the required version. microsoft also includes compatibility for all versions in the latest version. well except windows 7. windows 7 comes with directx 11 but dx9 is not included that i can tell but it can be installed seperately tho.

But normally, there's conflict when people have newer versions verses older versions of some software.  I know there some DLLs (for borland C++) where fixing things made some older applications non-functional.

>look if the app directly controls the hw. This when this app crashes an os friendly app will try to access the same hw it might lock the os. or if two programs attempt to access the same hw they may cause a crash. instability abounds in this situation.

As I said, there's no multitasking when application takes over hardware but even in multitasking, you can have applications go directly to hardware as long as they know they're the only ones accessing it.  You can corrupt things even using API.  A good application that goes directly to hardware should be able to restore hardware to its normal state.  I do it for parallel ports-- I use them directly and then restore them to the state they were in.

[Hammer]

No, there's no multitasking needed if application runs going directly to hardware.
.

Audio devices usually needs to be shared e.g. browser (e.g. multiple Flash FLV), Mediaplayer/DivX/WinAMP (e.g. MP3, AVI, WMV), PowerDVD (e.g. Blu-Ray), system alerts/effects, Game for Windows, Skype, WinUAE, VirtualBox, Windows Remote Desktop and 'etc'.

 Application can take over the timer interrupt that OS is using for multitasking so OS won't be multitasking.  As I stated, see Amiga as an example of a computer that does this.  OS supports multitasking applications but it also supports single tasking applications that can use hardware fully to get the task done most efficiently.
.

Hit-the-metal applications breaks on Windows Remote Desktop or Windows Terminal environment.

[Marcb]

Hi, you may or may not know about DisplayPort, it is designed to replace the DVI and the analogue VGA display interface. Here is a link to an article explaining it:

http://www.bit-tech.net/bits/2007/10/22/displayport_a_look_inside/5

The best part is, it allows you to do picture-in-picture and split screen displays.
If Amiga was still running things we would have had that ability from the get go.

It makes you wonder what other things we missed out on in a PC (and console) dominated world...

If Amiga were still running things , we'd all be on Ibm.org wondering what could have been... I love the Amiga but sometimes I take off my rose coloured glasses to rest my eyes. ;-)

[persia]

[the_leander]

AT keyboards with DIN5 are gone for good and they went a long time before joysticks for gameports or gameports.  Joysticks for gameports are still being sold.

I'm sure that gameport joysticks are being sold, look hard enough and you'll probably find niche venders supplying AT keyboards too. Hell, you can still buy megadrive 9 pin pads if you look around. That does not however change the fact that no PC has shipped with such a port for the better part of half a decade or more.

They got rid of the gameport knowing people can still use USB so they had some thought about it but still playing catch-up to Amiga with its superior joystick interface.

Oh lawdy, where to start...

First off, you have yet to prove your own claims about the Amiga's 9pin port. I'm sorry to say, but until you do that, everything else is null and void.

Second off, USB is more flexable, faster in every sense of the word then the Amigas joystick ports (not withstanding your claims thus far) and more capable then all of the Amiga's expansion ports combined - none offer the flexability that USB does.

And finally: You have been shown how to provide the backup to your speed claims, are you going to actually test them or just keep on repeating the same old debunked rubbish?

[Marcb]

:confused:


C'est un Cochon?

[jkirk]

Okay, great they may have gone back to serial ports, but they did produce machines with parallel ports w/o serial ports.

so what? i never claimed that serial or paralel ports didn't exist anymore-you said serial didn't. what i did say was that the joyport was the easiest to replace and as such is not included in the vast majority on motherboards available. there are some people who like you believe the joyport is the ultimat interface for the pc so they will pay for an adapter to use the joysticks they currently have. despite this the joyport is a dead technology and has been for a loooooong time.(aka i bought a microsoft sidewinder2 force feedback joystick USB circa late 90's and 3 gamepads USB)

AT keyboards with DIN5 are gone for good and they went a long time before joysticks for gameports or gameports.  Joysticks for gameports are still being sold.

you give joyports too much credit.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=40000123&Description=joystick&name=PC%20Game%20Controllers
yep joyports are really dominating.

They got rid of the gameport knowing people can still use USB so they had some thought about it but still playing catch-up to Amiga with its superior joystick interface.

/facepalm

[Methuselas]

I'm starting to think this guy spends a little too much time playing with his joystick and inserting objects into his joyport......... o_O

[jkirk]

No, there's no multitasking needed if application runs going directly to hardware.  Application can take over the timer interrupt that OS is using for multitasking so OS won't be multitasking.  As I stated, see Amiga as an example of a computer that does this.  OS supports multitasking applications but it also supports single tasking applications that can use hardware fully to get the task done most efficiently.

you you want to go back to the dark ages of single tasking huh? let's see how far this gets us today. load ie to browse web. plugins won't work since they are additional tasks. k also while ie is running you can't listen to music since that is not the primary task either. single tasking has not only broken windows but also amiga os,linux, and any other os that employs multitasking. single tasking died a long time ago. i propose we leave it there.

But normally, there's conflict when people have newer versions verses older versions of some software.  I know there some DLLs (for borland C++) where fixing things made some older applications non-functional.

?? we are talking api not programming languages. get back on track.

As I said, there's no multitasking when application takes over hardware but even in multitasking, you can have applications go directly to hardware as long as they know they're the only ones accessing it.  You can corrupt things even using API.  A good application that goes directly to hardware should be able to restore hardware to its normal state.  I do it for parallel ports-- I use them directly and then restore them to the state they were in.

and as i said previously this is a multitasking os environment NOT a single tasking environment. an api allows multiple programs to play nice with the hardware.

[gazgod]

A good application that goes directly to hardware.....

Am I the only person who thinks that this is an oxymoron?

Gaz