#HD Floppy & more
43 messages in this thread
I posted this as a new message because it seems that the old HD Floppy
drive thread has somehow become a computer package thread! 🙁
I wanted to put in my two cents!
I love my Amiga. I started with a A2000 and now I own a A3000. *BUT*, I
think that Amiga Users are missing an important point here. Why is it that
"Commode"-ore is shafting us (Amiga users). Why is it that I can't walk in
to my dealer and buy a HD Floppy drive when I know that they exist, are
being sold in A4000, and even some A3000s and that they do work in DF0:?
It has been possible to purchase HD Floppy drives for PCs for YEARS and
Macs have been shipping HD Floppy drives as standard for YEARS? Don't give
me that old "C= was having trouble with them" because I think that that's a
"losers limp". I might believe that if it weren't for the following:
1- Can't buy a HD floppy drive
2- Can't buy OS 2.1 (I'll not complain about 3.0)
3- 386 BB For about $800 I can get C= generous offering (No color VGA
support, even for 1950,1960 or multisync owners), no floppy drives &
no HD. Or, for under $1000, I can buy a 386sx 40MHz *WITH* 5.25 &
3.5 floppies, *WITH* 40meg HD & 1meg RAM, *WITH* SVGA monitor & card,
keyboard, mouse, etc.
4- Can't buy a A1200 that is being sold over seas as I write.
5- Marketing – HA HA cartoon HA HA adds HA HA
I'm sure that I'll catch flack for this posting. Like the guy that replied
last time I complained about BB. He told me to give C= a break because the
BB is so specialized! (All the equipment listed in 3 isn't specialized? Get
a life! I use PCs & Macs professionally every day but I'm still supporting
C= with my purchases & trying to introduce others to how powerful the Amiga
is.
So, before all of you start bashing me or telling me I should buy a PC
think about it. I want C= to stop treating all of their users & supporters
like second class citizens.
Mathew,
I'll try to respond to some of your complaints and may add some facts
to support Commodore's actions, although I'll be the first to admit that
there are some "gray areas". However, there are some mitigating factors
of which you may not be aware that make some of the issues you raise a
little less black-and-white.
First, concerning the HD floppy issue — you have to understand that
the "standard" HD floppy drives used in both Macs and Klones will NOT work
on the Amiga, due to the initial design of the Amiga floppy drive
interface going back to the A1000, and which continues today through and
including the A4000. While the Macs and Klones use standard "off the
shelf" controllers to talk to their floppies, the Amiga floppy drives are
controlled by the "overworked" custom chipset. The Amiga chipset does not
provide the bandwidth needed to read the data off of standard HD drives
fast enough.
Because of this, Commodore has had to have some CUSTOM floppy drives
designed and built to support the HD format – these drives basically spin
at half the speed of the "standard" HD floppies, so the Amiga floppy
driver can keep up with the data rate coming off of the disk. Since these
drives are single-sourced (as far as I know), Commodore is at the mercy of
the supplier – if they can't get them fast enough to meet production
demands (for the 4000's), they surely won't have any available to sell
through Parts.
There have also been some problems discovered with the HD drives and
AmigaDOS 2.04 that have been fixed in later versions, which leads to your
number 2 complaint. If 2.1 isn't yet available in the consumer channels,
then it really doesn't do any good in making the HD floppies available,
except on 3.0 machines (the 4000).
As to why 2.1 isn't readily available, I really have no idea. The only
thing that I can "guess" is that Commodore, having limited resources, is
spending all of their "production effort" getting 600's, 1200's, and
<continued>
4000's built and shipped, and has little manpower remaining for other
items. Simply a guess on my part.
The problem with VGA support on the bridgeboard is tied to the basic
architecture of the interface design of the Janus system, utilizing
"dual-ported" RAM to provide the graphics display. The difference between
supporting MONO- and CGA-mode displays is minimal, and CGA is programmed
quite simply (and ugly) by most programs. It's not hard to emulate
CGA-compatibility. However, VGA systems are a lot more complex, and most
programs in the PeeCee world support VGA graphics, not by going through
the BIOS, but by banging on the hardware registers directly. This is not
the case with CGA, because there really aren't any hardware registers to
speak of in CGA systems. Providing hardware register-level emulation is a
LOT harder to do, especially when we're talking about a multi-processor
system (the 80×86 and the 680×0). In addition, the dual-ported memory of
the architecture is limited, and doesn't fit the memory-space requirements
of the VGA architecture. Trust me – it is not a trivial problem to
solve!
Item number 4 – the A1200. Patience! it will be here soon, although
quantities may not be as abundent for a while. Again, would you rather
Commodore keep things secret until they have enough machines built and
stockpiled to meet the initial demand? (I'm not sure on this one myself,
but I think I prefer things as they are.)
Finally, number 5 – "Marketing". What's that? <grin> Actually,
Commodore is doing better in that department, although their focus is
still primarily some key target niches rather than the mainstream. I
think it's a question of playing to your strengths and trying spend your
marketing $$$ in areas where they have the highest chances of reaping
benefits.
I'm not going to give you flak, as I do understand the feelings. I
hope I've added some reason to the emotion.
– BobR
Bob,
Thanks for your explaination. I have to admit that having read your
message helps me understand some of the issues which I had either not
considered or not heard. It is still a *VERY* frustrating situation to be
in. But hey! My Amiga is still better than the "others" and besides, my
dealer just called and told me that the EMplant that I ordered HAS COME IN
!!!!!
Matt
Matthew,
Actually…I agree with most of your comments. The only thing I'd
say about the HD issue…is that the HD that works with the Amiga isn't a
normal HD that you could pop into an IBM or Mac. It's a special dual speed
floppy and reportedly it was a cooperative effort between Commodore and
Chinnon. And at this point in time, there's only enough of them to keep
the 4000 (and 1200) production lines going so they're not available
separately..yet.
As to the 1200 not being sold here, I can think of 2 possible
reasons:
a. It's not passed FCC clearnace yet, so can't be sold until it
passes those tests and gets certified.
b. All production is being sold right away in Europe, and they
don't have enough production capacity to expand sales to the US. Europe
represents something like 70% of the Amiga market…so initial efforts
would be concentrated there.
Don
Another possibility is that they're waiting to announce it at Comdex.
Steve
1200??…..what the heck is that??
Dave
Elite MicroComputers 908-541-4214 – via Whap!
Dave,
What's a 1200? It's an Amiga that's currently for sale in Europe.
It's similar to the A600 in configuration but based on the AGA chipset.
Reportedly it's going to be released here in the US later this month.
Don
Sounds stupid…..typical C= move….good chips, but no where to plug stuff
in to use them.
Dave
Elite MicroComputers 908-541-4214 – via Whap!
It isn't stupid, there is a place to plug stuff in (Actually 2 places, 1
PCMCIA and 1 150pin trapdoor type expansion connector for accellerator ram
and SCSI stuff…) This just might be my next Amiga 🙂
Bob Comer
The 1200 is now in the stores here. We're talking ordinary consumer
electrical shops, not just specialist computer stores. The really amazing
part is that although it's 2meg chip ram, 14Mhz 68020/AGA based, it's
retailing at 399UKP, which is not far off what the A500 was this time last
year (359UKP). It has a passing resemblance to the 500, too.
Steve the G (Steve Goddard 100014,674) [BEDFORDSHIRE, UK]
Still don't like the idea of…..Amiga will never out live the idea of it
being an expensive C=64 if they keep putting out machines similar to the
A500.
Dave
Elite MicroComputers 908-541-4214 – via Whap!
I love the idea of the Amiga 1200–it is a wonderful advance and will sell
very well. I believe in many ways the A1200 is more significant than the
A4000.
-mark=
MATHEW: Can't buy a HD floppy drive
RON: The Amiga has a major problem with HiD drives — the controller. The
Paula chip handles the data transfer from floppies, and it is limited to a
max of 300Kb per second (250Kb is average). This is fine for DSDD drives,
which transfer at 250Kbps at 300rpm, however, the HiD ones transfer at
500Kps at the same 300rpm. The Amiga needs a new floppy controller. The
PCs controllers have been updated, and they can be replaced easily.
Commodore-Amiga found a work around. They commissioned a special HiD
drive from Chinon. This drive slows down to 150rpm in HiD mode, causing
the transfer speed to become 250Kbps at 150rpm.
CBM did state that there will be HiD drives for the A3000 & A2000, and
that future machines will support 4-meg drives. *I* believe the lack of
available HiD drives is due to all current HiD's being used in the A4000
where it is standard.
MATHEW: Can't buy OS 2.1 (I'll not complain about 3.0)
RON: Some has stated that it shipped in the A2.04 Upgrade kit, so I
appears to be shipping. My dealer received info about it shipping within
a month. AmigaDOS 2.1, was anounced for release only a month ago.
MATHEW: 386 BB For about $800 I can get C= generous offering (No color
VGA support, even for 1950, 1960 or multisync owners), no floppy drives &
no HD.
RON: You want the BB's to ship with VGA built into on the "motherboard",
and a set of floppy drives, and a Hard drive? I perfer the VGA left to a
card of the users choice (cheap VGA is only $80). I thought the BB's
shipped with a 5.25 floppy drive, and gave Hard Drive support throught the
Janus.device.
MATHEW: Or, for under $1000, I can buy a 86sx 40MHz *WITH* 5.25 & 3.5
floppies, *WITH* 40meg HD & 1meg RAM, *WITH* SVGAmonitor & card, keyboard,
mouse, etc.
RON: If a Clone works out cheaper and with more options, then the user
might be happier getting one instead of a BB.
MATHEW: Can't buy a A1200 that is being sold over seas as I write.
<continued>
No room for VGA on the 386SX boards in the first place….
the 286's come with a 5.25….the 386sx dosen't becuase it can use the
amigas drive.
Dave
Elite MicroComputers 908-541-4214 – via Whap!
The USA version of the A1200 is not scheduled to be announced until mid
November. A European Commodore-Amiga marketing & sales company/group
released their version they will be selling, only a month ago.
MATHEW: I'm sure that I'll catch flack for this posting.
RON: Not much (as compared to an USENET Advocacy post.)
Ron.
– ap'ing with AP. (Eagles may fly, but weasles aren't sucked
into jet engines.)
Ron,
Thanks for your insights. I can agree with some of your stuff.
I still am very frustrated with the BB problem. I don't really expect to
have all of the drives, VGA, HD, etc. built into the BB, but I would like
to be able to purchase a 386BB at a price that is to some degree comprable
with PC pricing. I would be happy to buy a VGA card and a seperate HD (I
would like high density floppy drives that I could use on both BB and
A3000. That's my major complaint about not being able to purchase a High
Density floppy) and come out at more or less a comprable PC clone price.
Matt
(Shooting for the stars…. I hope we get the moon)
Where do folks like you come from?
Do you realize that Commodore people read your messages? Do you realize
that is rude to call a company "Comode"? I think you need to learn a
little about your machine so you might understand why things are as they
are.
First off, on the high-density drive issue. When the Amiga folks (the
original team) designed the Amiga they decided to use the Paula chip to
handle the disk drive. The Paula chip can not handle the data rates of
the newer high density drives. Now you might ask–whoa, there are high
density drives for the amiga now. How is "Comode" getting around this?
Simple–they are using a specially designed drive that slows down to read
the high density disks.
I really hate it when people talk about Commodore 'shafting' them. Let me
ask you this–exactly why did you buy a second Amiga? Do you like being
shafted? Or could it be that Commodore is the only computer company
offering you something that you can't get anywhere else?
As far as the bridgeboard goes. I think that the 386SX bridgeboard is
reasonably priced if you want to turn your Amiga into an IBM compatible.
Considering the speed of the CGA emulation and the lack of a 256 color
mode on the ECS chip set–just what would you do with VGA? The
bridgeboard is not made of stock parts lying about. The board, it's
software are specialized components. This board has a limited market
appeal, thus the higher price.
You want a 386–buy a 386. It really is that simple. Watch out though,
WangFu PC Company probably has a shaft just waiting for you!
Commodore marketing? Dare I ask what you want Commodore to do that they
are not doing now. I talk to the people at Commodore marketing at least
once every couple of months. I would be happy to pass on your
suggestions.
-mark=
Mark,
I really had hoped that C= people read the forum messages. If they are the
company that I hope they are then they will respond to customers needs &
wants.
Did you bother to read my message? I bought an Amiga because it DOES
provide wonderful features that no other computer can offer. I don't see
why that should prevent me from expecting the finest hardware & software
around & at the best price.
Marketing – Simply give people the tools to be the best, most educated,
most creative computer users and they won't have a reason to buy anything
else(eg. Affordable BB, high density floppys). Amiga users will spread the
word if they have the ammunition.
I may have high expectations but I hope that you do too. I would complain
about the faults of the Mac & PC (eg "shafting") if I thought that they
cared.
Matt
By the way, relax a little bit. Not everything people say is literal!
"I talk to the people at Commodore marketing at least once every couple of
months. I would be happy to pass on your suggestions."
I suggest getting the top line DTP software packages like Pagemaker,
Photoshop, Corel Draw etc. ported to the Amiga. I love the Amiga, and
defend it staunchly at every turn – but I have to do a lot of DTP now, and
I'm finding it a real struggle at times.
It's not enough to have a great architecture – it's the software that
makes a machine. (Otherwise PC's would have sunk long ago).
I asked Jim Dionne about the porting of packages to the Amiga. His words
to me were:
Many of these companies want a large sum of money, in the millions, for
these ports. Commodore US doesn't have these kind of deep pockets.
Remember now, The Amiga in Europe is selling very well and it doesn't
require these products to be sucessful. WE recongize that there is a
problem, we feel that selling the Amiga better is what we can do to help
solve the problem. He added. Besides, we don't want a repitition of the
Word Perfect fiasco.
-mark=
"The Amiga in Europe is selling very well and it doesn't require these
products to be sucessful."
Yes, but primarily as a games machine, I understand. How long will that
last, with Nintendo, Sega et al breathing down their necks?
Still, I understand that if you don't have the money, you don't have the
money. It's sad. I wonder if Jim Dionne makes a point of telling the
business leaders I assume he addresses from time to time, that the company
he represents is undercapitalized to the point that it cannot satisfy
their software requirements?
If you feel you need PhotoShop, you should go to your Amig adealer and get
Imagemaster. In most ways, it outperforms PhotoShop hands down.
–Ben
…via AutoPilot
"If you feel you need PhotoShop, you should go to your Amig adealer and
get Imagemaster. In most ways, it outperforms PhotoShop hands down."
Really? OK, I'll try it. But, come on now, be honest – in which areas does
it NOT outperform PhotoShop?
Ok, good question. Thanks for the opportunity to address it.
Imagemaster is superb at image manipulation. As I mentioned, it can
outperform photoshop in many ways.
Photoshop is, however, highly directed at prepress operations, that is,
color separations and discrete operations upon color-separated materials.
We do very little of that, instead we're very heavy on image manipulations
such as special F/x: rippling, morphing… work like satellite image
processing… that kind of thing.
Photoshop is also a lot more polished, as the Mac OS provided a great set
of guidelines and tools for the UI when they initially designed it, while
the Amiga only recently obtained anything even remotely similar at the OS
level.
This latter item we will address shortly; the former, color sep
operations, we'll probably keep away from for the largest part.
That's a pretty complete answer to your specific question: "Where do we
NOT outperform PhotoShop."
–Ben
…via AutoPilot
Thanks for your reply, but it's exactly what I feared – prepress is a
central area to DTP and you're not interested in it.
Ok, glad I could enlighten you before you did something you wouldn't have
been happy with. Good luck with your search!
–Ben
…via AutoPilot
Ben,
"Imagemaster is superb at image manipulation . . .It can outperform
Photoshop in many ways . . . Photoshop is highly directed at prepress
operations . . . Photoshop is a lot more polished [re the user interface]
This latter item we will address shortly . . . the former we'll probably
keep away from for the largest part . . ."
All very accurate assements of the two programs. I use both every day.
(actually I use IP). IM is MUCH more powerful than Photoshop. But it is
extremely hard to use. Part of its difficulty is its sheer power. But much
too much of the difficulty is the user interface.
Then there are tools that are just lacking which make the power of IM (IP)
almost impossible to tap.
For instance, the gamma correction curve and the associated curves under
the USER TRANSFORMS option are the heart and soul of image manipulation of
scanned continuous tone originals (on their way to becoming halftones).
Using the gamma correction curve alone, I could apply every bit of needed
tone and color correction and control of dynamic range of _any_ scanned
image.
The problem is, the tool provided to draw the correction curve is so poor
as to make a smooth curve impossible, even _with_ the smoothing function
provided. There are no x or y scales at the edges of the drawing area nor a
'read out' of x/y values to aid the user while 'drawing.' The tool needs to
be that of a rubber-banding action instead of the present 'sharp' action.
True, you do provide access to the resultant curve which is an ASCII file
(.TFM) of 256 gray scale values which can be edited. However, editing this
file is tedious at the very best. It is NOT the kind of activity that is
easy for the user or even intuitive. It is a programmers kind of solution.
Worse it is a classic case of making the user work for the computer, when
the opposite should be happening. Even if the user is inclined to carry out
this activity (as I obviously have), it is almost impossible to make the
curve smooth. Any
[ MORE ]
[ continuation ]
discontinuities in this curve result in obvious irregularities of the
contract transfer function of the final image (posterization).
Even your automatic gamma generating slider tool generates a choppy curve –
especially in the shadows.
I have written a little Basic program to generate an ASCII file with the
256 values needed in the .TFM file. It uses the following equation to
manipulate 'gamma:'
x = y^n/255^n-1
This results in a family of curves starting with n=1 where the equation
becomes x = y (no gamma change). N can be any integer or fractional value
from 1 to a practical limit of about 5. N can be empirically determined,
but should be the result of measuring input densities (sample densities of
the original being scanned) and output densities (samples of either the
electronic image or of the finished, printed piece).
This equation (or something like it) should be part of the IM user
interface. Photoshop has such a tool. It is wonderful, but it is limited by
the underlying limitations of Photoshop itself. IF IM had such a tool, and
if the user interface were more polished, IM would surpass software on high
end proprietary machines which presently cost in the $100K range!
Please don't ignore our needs for better color separation software. Again
IM has enormous power, which is almost impossible to use in any meaningful
way. Presently, I must leave color separation of my images to Pgs or
ProPage. Those programs do not allow me to control the separation process,
as IM does, but they _do_ allow me to place the image on the page without
losing my sanity. If I color separate the image in IM, I have four
resultant files (CMYK) all of which must be placed in exact register on the
page, and then grouped into a single unit. Even then, the results are
unpredictable and chaotic.
What we need here is a solution similar to (or exactly the same as) a
de-facto standard that has developed in the MAC world. Everyone doing color
separation on the Mac uses Photoshop to manipulate and color separate
images (or to import
[ MORE ]
[ continuation ]
already manipulated images from another source and convert the imported
file into an EPS file) and Quark express to put the images onto a page and
output to an imagesetter. The marriage of Photoshop and Quark in this way
is magnificent. Photoshop can generate a five-file set of CMYK color
separated EPS files plus a 'master' EPS file that is used by Quark for
placement on the page. This is called the 5 file DCS ('desktop color
separation') format. It is truly wonderful. Each of the separate CMYK EPS
files is about one fourth the size of the original composite CMYK image.
The master EPS file is much smaller. Quark loads only the master file and
displays the low resolution image contained in it. The process is very fast
and transparent. Also, Quark can output a properly prepared DCS set very
rapidly.
It seems to me that Black Belt is in a position to create just such a file
standard right now with very little effort. Pgs and ProPage could benefit
from adopting the standard. I could see no reason for them objecting to it.
As a matter of fact, if they accepted it, they could use files output from
Photoshop in the 5 file DCS format.
One more comment (plea). Could IM be made to load an 8 bit gray scale image
without generating a 24 bit internal file? A great deal of graphic art
industry image manipulation still is and always will be of monochrome gray
scale (black and white) photos. The computer overhead that IM places on
black and white images is unnecessary. I appreciate the fact that the
program was conceived as a 24 bit image manipulator from the very
beginning, but I hope that you can see the need for manipulation of
high-resolution black and white images.
BTW, I haven't downloaded the latest version of IP in several weeks now.
That probably means that I am working with a hopelessly outdated version!
8)
Rich
We can certainly do this – I've printed off your comments, and I'll have
'em in the heap Monday.
–Ben
…via AutoPilot
Ben,
I really appreciate the kind of response you give to us. You really do
deserve some kind of award.
The formula I posted for doing gamma correction got a little corrupted.
Here's the correct version:
y = ((x)*(255)^(n-1))^(1/x)
This results in positive values of y which brighten the image (what is
usually needed). Negative values darken the image.
This reduces to y = x when n= 1. All curves above the y/x line (n>1) are
parabolic until y = x = .707 at which point the curve is a quarter circle
with the center at x= 255, y = 0. Then all curves above the circle are
mirror image parabolas of the lower curves until the curve essentially
becomes the y axis and the line defined by y = 255.
If you put a graph on the screen with the y/x line going from 0 to 255, and
allow the user to click anywhere on the y/x line and then drag (upwards or
downwards), you can produce the necessary 'rubber-banding' display by
solving for n with the cursor position supplying x and y in the following
equation,
n = (lnx-ln255)/(lny-ln255),
and letting the first formula produce the (changing) curve. Of course,
displaying the x and y coords on screen during this process would also be
nice.
8)
Rich
Ok, Rich, I'll pass this along. Thanks!
–Ben
…via AutoPilot
Pardon the complete non-sequiter, but here goes . . .
I just heard of your work with the Jakeboard.
Though I do not have any handicapped relatives or friends, I must say that
it is work like this that will help to keep the Amiga going.
Keep up the good work!
I just read the 'Last Word' column in the Dec. 92 issue of Amiga World,
and there was a lady pleading for a source of this kind of interface.
AmigaWorld made no mention of your product.
The woman's name was Marilyn Scott, St. Petersburg FLA (AW, Dec '92,
pg130). No further address given.
It sounds like both AmigaWorld and this woman need to find out about your
software.
(I know, I know. 'How come I can't pass on the info?' Well, . . .
I just don't want to get the description wrong.)
Thanks for your help.
Erik Flom
Rich,
Imagemaster v10 will load and handle 8 bit files; but that capability will
not appear in the v9.xx level of Imagemaster, it's not architecturably
feasable to crowbar it in. V10 is a different animal entirely.
As for EPS, we will eventually get to that – but it will be later rather
than sooner.
–Ben
…via AutoPilot
Ben,
IM v10.
When?
8)
Rich
Hard to nail down, exactly. Shooting for xmas, thereabouts, anyway.
IM V10 provides several major changes – first, it's totally retargetable;
that is, you can run it on top of any gfx environment it supports (of
which there will be a fiar number). Second, it's UI-configurable; that
means that a user can completely configure the UI, right down to how the
buttons look, how functions are arranged/available in windows, and so
on… a side effect of that is that if some cool artist-type makes a
really nice UI for it, they can give (or sell) it to you, and you can have
the benefit of their vision. Third, v10 is "flat", which means that you
can get at any function from anywhere, anyway you want to arrange it.
Fourth, it handles other data types besides 24-bit, 8-bit greyscale being
one of them, others to be announced later. Fifth, it's modular; it
supports the idea of "drag to drawer and drop-in" functions a 'la the
Mac.
As you can see, this isn't a small change – so the final target date is
quite uncertain as of now. We're trying to be sooner rather than later,
though. :^)
–Ben
…via AutoPilot
Ben,
Thanks. As usual, I can't wait for the new version!
Rich
Ah, once again . . .
'The Amiga is great . . . Nothing beats the Amiga . . .Who'd EVER use
anything else (SNEER)?'
H.M.S. Amiga – 'And the band played on . . .'
(Watch out for that iceberg!)
Erik Flom
I have NO idea what point you're trying to make here.
–Ben
…via AutoPilot
'Where do folks like you come from?'
I could echo that sentiment.
Get a life, and stop jumping on people that choose (or NEED to) use other
platforms.
Keep On Toastin'
Erik Flom
P.S. Amiga owner for over four years. First, A1000, now A3000.
That doesn't beat Bill, who has had an AMiga for the past 13 years! 🙂