> There is _strong_ rumors that the Hades will get an DSP/sound card soon and I guess it will be
> a PCI one so it should fit in all the new TT clones making them Falcon clones (almost).
Well, as long as it's possible to run CUBASE AUDIO, since this the piece of
that keeps the Falcon alive in the music-business.
> The VIDEL in the Falcon isn't very usefull anyway so demos will probably no > work.
No, but I can`t see why it shouldn't be possible to make a kind of hardware
emulator (switchable by software) that gives the possibility of Falcon-ViDEL
compatible resolutions from a software-programmer point of view.
Of course, this is only for compatibility, and not for the future, and
this hardware emulator (Falcon-ViDEL) should only apply for the first 14 MB of RAM space (separate ST-RAM) and of course not for FastRAM.
If it's possible to make an ST-Compatible I/O and Video-card for the
TT-clones, I really can't see why it shouldn't be possible to do a Falcon-
compatible Video-card or emulator.
> What we need
> is a TT clone with a falcon compatible DSP/Sound card and a 060. This will make most program for the
> falcon to work except the ones that uses the strange graphics modes on the falcon (demos,
> games, Aepx :-( etc.) mut well written programes like WinRec (if you can call that 'well'
> written...), Zero-X, Supersam etc. to work (GEM-programs). Who needs a crappy VIDEL when you can
> get a _sppeeeddyyy_ PCI graphics card with 4MB of video-RAM? :-)
Yes, but you have to remember that the Falcon can do something, almost no
other PC can. It can be connected to a TV and/or a Video via. SCART for
broadcast effects and Genlock.
Shame if that ability should dissappear.
> And I bet that Doug and the boys at BSS have made clever display code making> it easy for then to replace the display code for new one when a new power
> full falcon 'clone' arrives.
Well, they will have to do thier display-routines though the VDI then
(which is slower than thier own), since
it's quite a hazzle to make an individual display routine for each and
everyone of all those hundreds of different PCI-graphic cards.
> We must
> walk into 'graphics card land' sooner or later.
Yes, you're right. But there must be some good guidelines and methods for
supports old Falcon-software also. Whether it should be in the form of an
software emulator or a hardware emulator (Falcon I/O).
> > Get the drift ?
> >
> > Anyway if the companies can't make a proper Falcon-clone, there's always the possibility of
> > buying a C-Lab Falcon and plug an AfterBurner+NEMESIS in it.
>
> One of the main problems with 'compatibility' is that we will lose something else on the way.
> Just look at the crippled Falcon becuase of ST-compatibility. Do we realy
> want another falcon?
The ST is an extreme case, because it's so terrible outdated. The
Falcon maybe have a partly 16-bit architecture, but it's not that difficult
to do a Falcon-compatible pure 32-bit machine. Since the Falcon's external
data-BUS, which is 16-bit, actually acts like a 32-but BUS and hence from the
programmers view looks like a 32-bit BUS, just a bit slower.
Anyway, I care more for Falcon-compatibility than ST-compatibility, I don't
mind loosing ST-compatibility.
> And you will not come near a TT clone with a 060 with that piece of kit. Did you see the MIPS
> for the 060 compared with the 040? :-))))) Speeeedddyyyy...
Yes, I did and it was impressing. But don't forget, it shouldn't be too
difficult to plug an 68060 into the AfterBurner-card. After all, these
