Re: High Resolution With 16 colors?

["Mark Cummings" <NOTfigjams@primus.com.au>]

do you ever stop complaining about the Apple design ?
geez, the Trash-80 of similar vintage had no colours, and huge block
graphics at best.
I sold my Trash-80 to upgrade to a colour hi-resolution Apple ][. (well
hi-re at the time).
The CBM Pet was just about as bad, and looked more like a cash register than
a computer.

Mark


"Bryan Parkoff" <BParkoff@satx.rr.com> wrote in message
HoOdnWmgfap_svmjXTWQlg@giganews.com">news:HoOdnWmgfap_svmjXTWQlg@giganews.com...
>     I would like to ask why Steve Worniak designed Apple II to restrict
only
> 4 colors on high resolution 280x192.  Later, he fixed a bug to add two
more
> colors.  He should add 16 colors instead of 6 or 8 colors on high
resolution
> (Not Double High Resolution).
>     Is it because the single byte is very restricted?  No excuse to use
two
> bytes to combine colors together.  What is the difference that he designed
> low resolution 40x48 to provide 16 colors first before high resolution?
>     Think about the earliest resolution on IBM PC.  IBM PC had only
160x100
> resolution with two colors.  It had 4x4 pixel font for 40/80 columns.
> Please correct me if I am wrong.
>     Why did IBM PC only show 4 colors (black, white, blue, violent) on
> 320x200 resolution and another 4 colors (black, white, yellow, green) on
> another 320x200 resoltuion.  Apple II's high resolution allows to combine
8
> colors together.  What is a problem with IBM PC?
>     Please explain how Steve Worniak designed low resolution and high
> resolution.
>
> --
> Yours Truly,
>
> Bryan Parkoff
> BParkoff@satx.rr.com
>
>