CompuServe Thread

Board Master, which uses a 16-color, high-res interlace display, can update the every pixel on the entire display with literally thousands of CAD objects on my 2500/030 (old chips, old 16-bit bus) literally faster than you can see it happen. On the 4000, it's like lightning. This a a rewrite of pixels, recalculated and redrawn from lists of objects in fast memory, not a bitmap update by block. This condition is highly bottlenecked or "a bleeding dog" as you put it. Updating 8 bitplanes instead of four is only twice the work; and you've got considerably more than twice the horsepower to do it with, and ALSO twice the buswidth to do it *through*. Predictably, on the 4000, Board Master updates the display so fast it's shocking. I submit this is proof that the access to the display isn't the exact source of the bottlenecking that we see. Further it is proof that the botteneck can be avoided with the right approach. Pointing at Board Master again (which I wrote) as evidence, I'll tell you that I believe I have a very good understanding of why some display uses are slow and some are not, and having (hopefully) inspired some confidence in my opinion, here are the problems: 1 – The forced use of bitplanes instead of byteplanes. That has killed most apps abilities to be efficient in data handling. pixels take 8 times the accesses to write that they would in a chunky architecture. Solution: The amiga needs a hardware corner-turner, and badly. We have one on the shelf; the performance increase is astounding in my 2500/030. 2 – The lack of intelligent queing of drawing operations. Since the display memory is not, in fact, accessable a great deal of the time under heavy load, one should NEVER try to write bulk data to it during those times, or you WILL hang like wet laundry. Drawing operations need to be done to fast memory, and then the fast memory needs to go in during the open windows – and at NO other time. Drawing software needs to stop trying <continued>

to draw and go back to building draw data in fastram BEFORE the chipmem bottneck re-closes. If anyone has any doubts, just look at how fast Board Master is. –Ben …via AutoPilot

Well said, John. –Ben …via AutoPilot

John, I've been working on a the staff of a professional magazine(s) for almost seven years now. In all that time I have never, ever, I repeat never had a publisher or advertising type try and force any opinion of any product. Don't get me wrong – if the ad guys had their way we wouldn't write about anything that wasn't advertized. But its exactly because they think like this that they have no control over the editorial process. As for placement of ads – there are 'premium' positions in a magazine that advertisers pay extra for. Covers 2-4 (the inside of the cover plus the back), as well as near certain columns or sections. But in general editors – managing editors that is – work very hard to make sure that no ads appear anywhere near any edit that discusses the products in the ads. It still happens sometimes – but by chance, not on purpose. For example, I just got in the first issue of DTV World. Much to my displeasure I found an ad near an article on the Toaster a mail order ad that specializes on Toaster products. My first action on seeing it was to show it to my managing editor and said I don't like this. He replied that it only happened because in the dummy (where the magazine is laid out on a positional grid that represents teh different folios of the magazine) he merely saw the words mail order ad – and didn't knwo it was Toaster specific. Lou

Jerry writes about what he finds useful and interesting around his place. His business is writing. Things that foster that get tried first. He is sent things in incredible bulk. (You really have no idea how much bulk.) It is to some extent random chance that he will talk about any product that crosses his threshold. (I hesitate to say desk as if that volume of "stuff" were deposited daily on his desk the poor piece of furniture would collapse.) If someone sends him something they think there is a good chance will be interesting enough to him to talk about they will often independantly take out an ad in BYTE. Pioneer already knew Jerry is into CDROMs as a convenient storage media. A changer is a logical extension of a single CDROM drive. They gambled, and won, that he'd talk about it. In fact he liked it so much he DID do a product endorsement for it. He accepts no compensation for the endorsement. He only endorses things he uses and particularly likes. I suspect there is an element of this timing gamble in Commodore's advertisement in BYTE. David Archambault knew when that A3000 was shipped to Jerry and may have made some guesses regarding article lead times. OTOH I understand from David Archambault that they had planned a rather agressive targeted advertising campaign about that time anyway so it may have been pure coincidence given article lead times etc etc. Making the accusation that he was directed to write about the Amiga and responded to such direction by the people who market ad space in BYTE is a direct insult to him and to BYTE magazine. BYTE is very heavily compartmentalized such that this DOES NOT HAPPEN. And if it is discovered that it IS happening the offending party is dropped forthwith. The writers and editors of BYTE find such accusations particularly loathsome because of the strictures they are operating under. I do not know what all magazines you have worked for. I do know BYTE since I was on their payroll <continued>

for awhile. They are quite strict. I also know a large body of writers in the closed writers.pros conference on BIX who would take extreme umbrage with your "on the take" remark. Maybe this tells us something about your writing style more than theirs? {@_@}

John, I don't care much for Pournelle's attitude myself, but the system pretty much works. Yes, companies give journalists free software and deals on hardware, but since everybody does it, the journalists stay fairly objective. If the top three companies in a field all give you free product, you're not particularly obligated to any of them. Advertising and editorial are generally kept separate. The bosses are conscious that while the advertising may pay off in the short term, it's their credibility with consumers that pays off in the long term. Though I admit that a magazine once held a bad review I wrote of a program (no, it was a GOOD review, of a bad product) until the product's introductory period was over. They could say they printed criticism without really affecting the sales of the product. Of course, it may have been coincidence! Marion CROSSINGS Newsletter for Amiga/PC compatibility

My, thou has a dark outlook. Y'know, most hardware comes for a 30-60 day review period. 90 at the most. It's not like I call up, ask PP&S for an 040, and then sell it to my neighbor. And if the priveledge of using all this hardware and software made all the writers gushy and positive, then how do you explain negative reviews? Consumer Reports makes a big deal about buying everything. But their computer reviews are often laughably incomplete. There's some truth in what you say, especially in the videogame magazine arena. And I know two Amiga reviews (whose names I no longer see) who fit your description perfectly. But the industry is nowhere near as bad as you think it is.

In addition to that, it's common for the writers in auto magazines to be employed by auto companies on the side. Remember that when you see one of those magazines review a car … the writer may have worked for them! I do know that one magazine (other than Consumer Reports) says their writers don't have any affiliations. —–> Brian Simmons, Denver, Colorado. – via Whap!

Dunno about other writers but I have known Jerry for about 10 years now and I have NEVER known him to SELL anything he has received. (And he receives more <junk> than he can feed on to family members to see if they will use it even if it is not of interest to him.) At worst it is round filed. At best it is passed along to other people with the proviso THEY do not sell it and if they use it to tell him about it. Sometimes if the vendor involved allows it he will feed it along to LASFS, the Los Angeles Science Fantasy Society, for their fund raising auctions. (LASFS is a 501c organization and Jerry gets nothing in return for this other than a possible feel good that he helped the club and its library, which is a part of the LA public library system.) Believe it or not Jerry makes most of his income off his novels and collaberations. The BYTE column is a nice piece of steady extra bread. But it is not his primary income. He makes zero off anything shipped to him in terms of reselling it. You are irresponsible to suggest otherwise. Or was this your practice? {@_@}

Definetly not all mags John. As you know very well. Lou

No doubt there's always super-hero crime-fighting journalists out there… hey, but we're never paid enough, are we? 🙂

Denny, I enjoyed reading your review in the January 1993 COMPUTE, pages 74 & 76, on the Hewlett-Packard DeskJet 500C. The comments on both "Windows and AmigaDos" clued that an Amiga user wrote it, and, of course, your name was at the end of the blurb. If you have any tips on configuring the DeskJet 500C for the Amiga 2000HD and various popular programs, it would be useful. The DeskJet seems to be a bit tricky to setup. I've bought the printer driver from Creative Focus. My dealer told me about it. On my bridgeboard, the HOME program from AutoDesk for designing houses did not have a specific driver for the DeskJet 500C. It is presently set for the HP Quietjet High Res (HP Mode). Have you used DiskMaster 2.0 by Greg Cunningham from Progressive Peripherals & Software with the DeskJet? I like to print out the occasional text file. Sincerely, (Mr.) Gayle Lee Fairless 'Perfessor Fearless' BTW, the MicroSpeed Amtrac is working just fine!