Amiga.org
Amiga News and Community Announcements => Amiga News and Community Announcements => Amiga Hardware News => Topic started by: Kronos on July 16, 2002, 08:36:12 PM
-
There are a number of new VFD CyberGraphX V5 driver projects in the works. One such project has been with ATI. The CyberGraphX V5 driver has been working with the Radeon range of cards from ATI for a few months now. Most all of the real work is now done by the CGX drivers not externally.. such as display setup/init, 2d, ect. This means in time that the driver can be back-ported to run on any PCI adaptors such as the G-Rex PCI adaptor. The Radeon VE and Radeon 7500 models, along with a few others have been tested and are working great. Currently the driver supports the PC based BIOS Radeon cards out of the box. Here is a snapshot of MUIScreenMode running under CGX V5 on a ATI Radeon: Radeon Snapshot VE (http://www.meanmachine.ch/~vgr/cgx/CGXV5-RadeonSnap19.jpg)
Source: VGR (http://vgr.com/cybergfx/)
-
CGFX5 will be MOS only. Don't expect an AOS version.
-
Theres no point in CGX for AOS, because AmigaOS4 will have retargetability built in. No need to patch one in after.
Interestingly Elbox have announced that their 2D drivers for the GeForce 2 are nearing completion.
-
Theres no point in CGX for AOS, because AmigaOS4 will have retargetability built in. No need to patch one in after.
but won't you still need the driver?
-
Theres no point in CGX for AOS, because AmigaOS4 will have retargetability built in. No need to patch one in after.
I disagree but for different reasons. People who shelled out $40USD+ for CGFX4 shouldn't be shafted with no future upgrades. I mean if you pay good money for a RTG system you shouldn't be left out in the cold.
-
People who shelled out $40USD+ for CGFX4 shouldn't be shafted with no future upgrades
CGX4 is being consantly updated, so I don't see your problem, and this
driver will be working in a G/Rex, which only run when connected to
a PPC-system (you can connect it to a CS-MKIII, but I ahven't heard of
anybody doing this).
The other PCI-solutions use P96, so no prob here.
-
One thing I must say I like about MorphOS is that it is using MUI as the default GUI throughout the entire OS...where as AOS is gonna have a mixture of ReAction, Updated GadTools (?? Not sure about this, is this classed as ReAction now?) and PPC MUI...
I hope Amiga Inc. release the specs of the new prefs formats so people can design some MUI prefs for AOS 4. :-)
-
Wow another post from the MOS camp that makes little to no sense . So basicallly your saying theres readon drivers for CGX5 , here a screenshot , all the rest of the scrambled words were to make it seem like some great thing like your ppc mobo usb camera pics.
the window in that screenshot looks damn nasty too
-
Wow another post from the MOS camp that makes little to no sense .
It makes just as much sense as all the "new OS4-screenshots"-threads.
I don't know whats your problem is ?
They say they got Radeon-drivers -> news
They say they got an USB-stack -> news
They try to "hype" it a bit up -> so does everybody else.
(done it :-D )
-
>It makes just as much sense as all the "new OS4->screenshots"-threads.
Last os4 shots post (osnews) made complete sense with no hype. and why are we compairing os4 with this here? why does it have to be brought into the subject.
>I don't know whats your problem is ?
I like my new non misleading and medium-good english.
>They say they got Radeon-drivers -> news
They also say alot of other crap with it to make it sound like *great* work.
>They say they got an USB-stack -> news
Yes and they tried to tell us they were the first ones to take pictures with a usb camera and a ppc motherboard which was clearly misleading.
>They try to "hype" it a bit up -> so does everybody else.
Theres hype and then theres down right lying
-
CGX4 is being consantly updated, so I don't see your problem
The problem is that someone who has committed themselves financially to what is basically a set of hardware drivers with bells on, could quite rightly be entitled to think - "hey I contributed to the development of this software and now I can't upgrade to it!"
IMO that's more annoying than unjust. Anyway, considering that there are probably only around 10K active Amiga users these days, you'd think they'd want to keep their options open, and not shut out what is likely to be thought of as the mainstream Amiga market.
You know what, it's stuff like this that really p###es me off. Rivalry between 2 or 3 Amiga platforms? What TF is that about? Does anyone think there really is enough Amiga support out there to sustain more than one upgrade path, or are we going to see smaller and smaller splinter groups - all arguing with each other, while the world is blissfully unaware of their existance. After all why would anyone want to join a community that is busy stabbing each other in the back..
Sorry off topic there, but it does annoy the #### out of me.
-
The problem is that someone who has committed themselves financially to what is basically a set of hardware drivers with bells on, could quite rightly be entitled to think - "hey I contributed to the development of this software and now I can't upgrade to it!"
You can upgrade it, but you may not like the terms if you don't have a PPC
or are not interested in MOS, just like noone will be able to upgrade
OS3.9 while he is running on a 68k or x86-based emu.
Can you upgrade Win3.0 to WinXP using your 286 ?
Everyone who bought CGX_V4 did it to serve him on one job and that is
allowing him to run his GFX-card under OS3.x , and CGX_V4 does that,
and won't stop doing it just because V5 is released for a different OS.
-
but won't you still need the driver?
The driver would be pretty useless under AOS4, because AOS4 won't have CGX compatible RTG. Thats just life. Presumably as AOS4's RTG is based on P96, it wouldn't be hard for people who have written P96 drivers to convert them for AOS4 (if they need to at all, that is).
-
disagree but for different reasons. People who shelled out $40USD+ for CGFX4 shouldn't be shafted with no future upgrades. I mean if you pay good money for a RTG system you shouldn't be left out in the cold.
But they're not. They'll be able to go and buy MorphOS and use CGX5 on that, if they like. In fact, I'm sure CGX5 integrated into MorphOS will be very nice.
However, native AOS4 RTG would be much better than CGX5 patched-on to AOS4, for the simple reason that AOS4 RTG would be built into the graphics libraries. This is how it should be, and should have been in 1994 :-)
Also, people who bought CGX4 got just what they paid for, CGX4. They shouldn't expect to get CGX5 thrown in.
-
It's just like someone who paid the shareware-fee for P96 (if there is someone who did that)
protesting that he won't be able to use P96-V4 under MorphOS.
-
Also, people who bought CGX4 got just what they paid for, CGX4. They shouldn't expect to get CGX5 thrown in.
Well i never said free. My point is who would buy an app if they knew it was a dead end? It's kind of like "CGFX5 is for MOS only, but CGFX6 will be for TOS only", there would be some unhappy MOS customers.
-
It's just like someone who paid the shareware-fee for P96 (if there is someone who did that)
I did! I think I shocked him;-) They did an EXCELENT job fixing the SGRAM bug for the Voodoo3/Prometheus driver for me. Good software, more should register(Hello out there UAE people!!!!)
-
>Well i never said free. My point is who would buy
>an app if they knew it was a dead end? It's kind of
>like "CGFX5 is for MOS only, but CGFX6 will be for
>TOS only", there would be some unhappy MOS
>customers.
So what?
I buy a product because I need it now and want to
use it now (besides the fact, that CGX5 comes with
MorphOS as it is integral part and you can't remove
it).
-
Well i never said free. My point is who would buy an app if they knew it was a dead end? It's kind of like "CGFX5 is for MOS only, but CGFX6 will be for TOS only", there would be some unhappy MOS customers
Presumably people who bought CGX4 bought it to use their GFX card under OS3.x? They can do that quite happily from now till the end of time if they like!
But, I DO understand exactly what you are saying, i just don't see why anyone would want to install CGX5 on top of AmigaOS4 even if they could. Not because CGX5 is bad (i'm sure its lovely), simply because any patched-on system would be less efficient than the native one already there.
Its like buying a car and strapping a new engine on top of the bonnet, and disconnecting the old one from the wheels :-D
-
@Red
I guessed he was shocked for a good reason, because the Prometheus
comes with a registered copy of P96, just like Amithlon, and not like another
polnish product I won't name here.....
Shame that so few were/are so honest when it comes to shareware :-x
-
But, I DO understand exactly what you are saying, i just don't see why anyone would want to install CGX5 on top of AmigaOS4 even if they could.
What I meant is people who use CGFX4 on 3.X PPC systems. I'm sure there are some who would like a PPC native V5(WOS). Also look at people who love Magellen as a WB replacement. But then again I see your point that these people will probably upgrade to OS4 anyhow.
-
who would like a PPC native V5(WOS).
Wouldn't make sense (context switches)
-
You can upgrade it, but you may not like the terms if you don't have a PPC or are not interested in MOS, just like noone will be able to upgrade OS3.9 while he is running on a 68k or x86-based emu...
I partially agree, which is why I said more "annoying than unjust".. but I still think that when you rely on a limited number of users for an income, it's better not to annoy them by forcing them down a particular upgrade path - that may or may not be the one they intended to take. Obviously buyers of the software may not want or (as you point out in other posts) need to upgrade - but for myself.. if I fork over the cash for a product, I like to think I can stay with it for the long haul - not just for my immediate needs.
For example it may not be needed under OS4, but it could be that it's a more efficient set of drivers, and have more options available for the card you're using (fully functional OpenGL for example), and therefore although you may not need it, it would be an improvement over the OS's generic RTG offering.
However you would be right in saying that just because you buy software it doesn't "entitle" you to an upgrade path - the only morally correct thing for a company to do is to provide patches for major bugs (which I see you say are available).
-
This is just what I found on the CGFX HP...
CGX V5 Directly supports the PowerPC under MorphOS. Integral part of MorphOS.
CGX5 is basically a real PowerPC version of CGX4 with even more graphics.library functions replaced to take full advantage of the PowerPC's speed.
AGA/ECS graphics renderings functions have been replaced completely, so there is no limitation on graphics memory anymore (only needs chip memory for display), amiga blitter is unused (This was necessary since AMIGA blitter seems too slow for PowerPC).
CyberGraphX V4 is being worked on and there are no plans to stop upgrading it. Many of the newer drivers and improved things will be remirated back to CGX V4.
So to me it seems like those drives will be made for CGX v4 also... so no prob there... BTW CGX v4 is not that expensive you know
-
Last I checked this was amiga.org - not morphans.org or such.
* MOS isn't AOS, sure it runs classic apps but thats where it ends.
* Isn't Amiga taking them to court ?
* More announcements b4 things materialise ? History is conveniently forgotten:
NOBODY GIVES A ^*&%^(&^% UNTIL THEY CAN GRAB IT FOR THEMSELVES!!!!!!!!!!
Ahhhhh - my opinion, might add some more laterz ;-)
-
Last I checked this was amiga.org - not morphans.org or such.
And still this site covers news on M$, Apple ......
MOS isn't AOS, sure it runs classic apps but thats where it ends.
And that makes it of interest, even if you don't want to use it yourself,
as I'm sure you want to informed about the competition too.
More announcements b4 things materialise ? :
In this case we would have to delete 90% of all news-items.
History is conveniently forgotten
What history do you mean ?
-
This is cool!
:-)
Although I myself will never buy/pirate MOS, CGFX is brilliant and has worked flawlessly for me for coming up to 3 years.
In fact I was VERY disappointed to learn that AOS wil not have CGFX but P96...I am sure there is some reason, probably due to lack of understanding between the parties involved.
Good luck to the CGFX team.
Allen
-
well i like P96 over cgfx so im very happy that AOs4 has p96 built in
-
Why are you so bitterly disappointed that AOS is using P96? Have you ever used P96?
Both RTG systems are very good, and both can use programs written for the others API.
Theres really not all that much between them, in their current versions.