And that's a problem totally non-existent on the Amiga...
...
Yes.
>So you're trying to tell me that decompressing an image and writing it to the frame buffer is faster than directly writing an uncompressed image directly to the buffer. That might be true if you are typing the data down by hand from paper.
You can time it yourself. If you move uncompressed frame to video area vs. decompress one to video area (as in anim format), the uncompressed frames can't achieve the speed of the decompression.
>Yes, I can agree with that. But that doesn't mean that all "ocs software" is compatible with any Amiga. There is more to it than the chip set, as I pointed out. I think you understand this as well as I do, but you are playing a fool to be able to dismiss my argument.
Hold it right there. The argument is ability to access hardware registers directly to produce tighter code and for better response time (as in real-time events). OCS software being incompatible has NOTHING to do with the hardware registers so those hardware registers can be used. Processor speeds changing and ROM versions changing don't involve hardware registers.
>Yes you can, if you know the exact hardware configuration.
No, we're talking about making the software work in general on PCs across the board-- that's why we're even talking about OCS/ECS/AGA compatibility.
>Yes, because the concept of kernel mode drivers exists in every operating system available for the PC...
At hardware level programming, the PCs are the same but nowadays you HAVE to go through APIs for much of the hardware.
>Data existing is not in itself an indicator that it is important to the end user. As pointed out, the sub-ms state changes are results of switch bouncing. Just because there are millions of magazines in the world doesn't mean that I am missing out stuff that is important to me by not reading them all.
You fell for that speculation that it's a result of switch-bouncing; nonetheless, I wasn't talking about sub-ms. I answered this in another message.
>Not in a computer game, when the screen redraw is sometimes the only feedback you get.
User can cause motion via joystick that is faster than refresh rate; he does not have to depend on feedback from display to make moves on the joystick.
>No, it's not bullcrap. YOU HAVE YET TO SHOW ME A GAME THAT USES AND BENEFITS FROM 1 kHz JOYSTICK SAMPLING. That's still true, as it has been since I first pointed it out. As far as I know, there are VERY few games in the River Raid era where even the game logic (all the moving, AI decisions, counting of score etc) operates faster than the screen update.
It's better to understand the LOGIC that millisecond state changes are there and not result of noise. Also, try to understand that noise is also considered input to machine.
>If you'd ever used joysticks for other things than measuring the time between state changes, you'd know that the values that the joysticks are precise enough, and no, while they are not usually exact they give you more precise control over direction than four on/off switches. You'd also know that in most games that utilize the analog sticks, the walking/turning speed/direction correlates exactly enough to the input.
I know that most games don't need analog sticks and it's a waste of time in reading such sticks for PCs since they end up using some threshold to make them act like digital joysticks do.
>If digital sticks with one button were superior for controllability, their market wouldn't have died out in the early 90s.
That's speculation. They still exist and are being marketed. You can market "garbage" and sell more of it than something valuable and more useful. Marketing has NOTHING to do with the product being superior/inferior.
>No, that was not what I was claiming. I said that developers are trying to move further away from hardware, which is why there are abstractions like drivers and APIs. If you think that the average software developer has as much use of accessing the hardware as before you are wrong.
I am saying it's more optimal to have both available. APIs and hardware access, but PCs are now getting more and more restricted to APIs so Amiga wins in this catagory.
>The Amiga can read four analog values at the same time and digitally convert them without hardware modification? The PC doesn't need any additional hardware besides what's in the joystick.
That wasn't the point. We were talking about timing things exactly not joysticks here.
>No of course, why would you want to teach them anything? Your kids are none like the kids I know. Either way your story is very anecdotal and not enough to support your argument. The truth is that most kids these days handle and enjoy far more advanced games and joy pads.
It doesn't have to be kids. I tried out some of the XBOX/playstation crap (sticks and games). You try a few of them and you quickly find out, you can't tell which button is used for what. And even worse, some of the games play by themselves as if they were demos. I played this baseball game-- very good graphics but couldn't figure out what I had to do in the game-- it just kept playing itself. So it's not just eenie meenie minie moe for the buttons.
>And you think that mp3 vs uncompressed audio is completely analogous to 100 Hz vs 1000 Hz?
Actual that's an example where a person can't tell the different although there is a difference. A better example is 44Khz sampling vs. 32Khz sampling of audio. A few frequencies may get added in the higher rate which hardly anyone notices.
