Re: Grandson of Flame-O-Rama

[philip@labtam.oz.au (Philip Stephens)]

DANIEL PERLBERGER wrote:

>Also, the IIGS coul never handle the Video output of such PC programs.

  No, that's true, the super hi-res mode sucks when compared to VGA.
But hopefully the TurboRez board will put that argument to rest.

>But most Pc's are upgraded very cheaply to much much much superior sound
>than a IIGS.

  If you're talking about the 16-bit sound cards, then yes.  But the
sound cards for the GS produce pretty darn good stereo output nevertheless.

>Fm Sound production like the IIGS is obsolete.

  Errrmmm?  FM synthesis?  I don't think so!  The Ensoniq chip uses
digitised sound samples to generate the waveforms.

>THe IIGS has this one single MONO (don't even claim Stereo cause I know it
>isn't!) sound chip...

  HaHaHaHaHaHa!  Little do you know!  The headphone jack on the back of
the GS is only mono, but the sound connector on the front right hand corner
of the motherboard most certainly provides a stereo signal...you just need
a stereo card to decode and amplify it.
  Please make an effort to get your facts straight, otherwise we will never
take you seriously.

>Get you facts straight...your IIGS, like I said, is nothing more than an
>upgraded 8-bit computer.

  Once again get _your_ facts straight--it isn't.  It may only have an 8-bit
bus, but the processor itself is 16-bits internally and _that_ is a fact.
Plus the architecture of the GS is radically different to the 8-bit Apple //
line; don't be fooled by the fact it can emulate an Apple //.

>For instance, the 8086 had a mere 29000 transistors on it...the
>486 today has 1.2 million..and the pentium has 3.1 million.  The more
>transistors it has, the more functions it can perform.

  The more transistors a chip has, the hotter it gets.  Little wonder the
first releases of the Pentium overheated until they decreased the micron
size. :-)
  Anyway, judging processors on the number of transistors is ridiculous.
The PowerPC 601 runs faster than the Pentium, and has fewer transistors.
So where is your argument now?
  Furthermore, it is become more commonly accepted that the RISC architecture,
which aims to reduce the number of transistors AND the number of fundemental
processor functions available is the way to go, particularly in regards to
running compiled high level languages.  As far as I'm aware, the Pentium--
in an effort to remain backward compatible with the rest of the 80x86 line--
is rather an unwieldly implementation.  I'm sure if they were to dump
emulation of the 286, 386 and 486, the Pentium would be a much leaner
processor and run a lot quicker.
-- 
=========== Philip Stephens, Systems Programmer, Labtam Australia ============
====== Owned by Motor (Mo for short), the power-purrer from Down Under =======
=== DS (B+S)t Y 2 X L  W C+++ I T+++ A+ E H+++ S+ V+ F Q+ P++ B+ PA+ PL+++ ===
"Many views yield the truth.  Therefore, be not alone." -- Viggies' Prime Song