Re: Apple][VGA - finally available

["geoff" <geoff@a2central.com.remove-gn-this>]

  To: mdj
At least the IIgs fonts will look better at 640x480 instead of being stretched 
at 640x200 :)  I could live with everything else being squishy.

Geoff

 > On Jul 17, 2:45=A0pm, Mark McDougall <msmcd...@no.spam.iinet> wrote:

 > > Personally, I prefer the bus snooping approach because of the 
 > > "(dis)advantage of extreme versatility". Granted, it's more work and 
 > > perh=
 > aps
 > > even impossible to get *exactly* right, but I believe it's very doable 
 > > an=
 > d
 > > would produce acceptable results for most users who want a comparable 
 > > viewing experience in each video mode, but can't justify the space or 
 > > expense of a dedicated Apple II monitor.
 > 
 > Doable or not, it's using the proverbial sledgehammer to squash the
 > fly :-)

 > You can't get any information from the snooping approach that you
 > can't get more easily from the existing video hardware. Granted, the
 > only (easily) accessible point on the IIgs for the video signals is
 > the video port so there's an aesthetic argument for finding another
 > way. That falls apart when faced with the prospect of reimplementing
 > the *entire* IIgs video subsystem plus conversion when you can get
 > away with just conversion.

 > However, if we're going to go down the aesthetics path, there's an argument 
 > that the existing IIgs renditions of older Apple II video
 > modes is only passable at best. From that perspective, re-implementing
 > the original Apple II video subsystem and converting that might
 > provide more pleasing results. As far as the SHR modes go, re- 
 > implementation isn't going to provide any improvement over upsampling
 > the existing signal. It is after all only 12 bit RGB; a poor-mans ADC
 > can handle that with no quality drop and considerably less complex 
 > circuitry.

 > When it comes to considering extended modes, I'm surprised nobody has 
 > considered the "unsquareness" of Apple II pixels and the impact this
 > has on the existing software base. It's fun to play "what if", but
 > most IIgs software designed around 640x200 is going to look rather odd
 > at 640x480.

 > As is always the case, there are itches and there are scratchers. Our 
 > community is diverse but small, and unfortunately you need both to
 > occur in the same person in order to see a solution materialise, and
 > the probability of this happening is, alas, relatively low.

 > Matt