Re: What Apple II comp is best?

[pubpc1@library.ucla.edu]

spec@vax2.concordia.ca (Mitchell Spector) wrote:
>In article "Tom Zuchowski" <tjz@mindspring.com> writes...
>
>>Mitchell Spector <spec@vax2.concordia.ca> wrote in article
>><23OCT199610102215@vax2.concordia.ca>...
>>>     I'd quicker compare IIgs graphics with standard PC VGA.  It does,
>>> afterall, have limited 8-bit color capabilities in the 320x200 mode.
>>> It makes up for this limitation with small, round pixels, while on the
>>> PC pixels in this mode are large and square (blocky). :)
>>
>>Just my opinion, but I think you're reaching a bit to compare 320x200x8 to
>>640x480x16.
>
>    No, I'm comparing 320x200x256 to 320x200x(limited)256. The limited
>bit is that you cannot place those 256 colors anywhere on screen,  you
>have to use multiple scanlines and palettes. Essentially, it is sixteen 
>16-color pictures, split vertically down the screen. Of course the other
>limited aspect when comparing, is the total palette size. Perhaps I'm
>thinking of the video mode called MCGA (wasn't that 320x200x256?).
>
>Mitchell Spector
>spec@vax2.concordia.ca

You are thinking of standard VGA.  Standard VGA was 640x400x16 and
320x200x256.  The GS could, with its video hardware, display 320x200x256
with some limitations (16 palettes of 16 colors).  It was MUCH better than
EGA because EGA is digital: it has a 64 color range.  GS video has a 4096
color range, palettes being drawn from that range.

Using the CPU, the GS could circumvent its 16 palette memory limit by
swapping palettes in synchrony with scan line interrupts for one palette
per each of the 200 scan lines for 3200 possible colors per screen.
This mode is useful for displaying still graphics and looks pretty cool.

The 320x200x256(limited) mode requires no excess processor power and can
be used by games.  In well designed games, you can't tell it from regular
VGA.  It looks nice too because, as you pointed out, the GS uses round
pixels instead of boxy ones.

The GS also has a 640 mode, of course.