Oh, yes there is also computers which can't run FG 2.00 , i have
inherited a computer with nvidia 6200 AGP which run only FG 1.00.
But you will say i (we) am (are) not representative of the FG users
world only an exception, ... anybody is an exception.
I guess the professional you are has done statistics about the FG users
world, thus you are able to be more precise about those unfortunate users
who are getting only "the single frame per second", which hardware? which
operating systems ?
Since, sorry at the moment your feeling ( only feeling ) does not convince
me.
Regarding ALS i never said we must have the entire ALS pack with Rembrandt
, we should be able to split it in order to choose which part is good and
working for the user.
We had at the beginning ( 2 years ago) a nice sky which was working for me
and for the others friends.
Unfortunately, along these running months (2 years) up to now the
features which were introduced have broken any possibility to use it.
The last significant was to break some models effects ( mostly those with
shaders and rivets bumping) , when we can run it.
( refer to the last ALS topic i gave example ).
Best
Ahmad
On 20 June 2013 16:46, Renk Thorsten <thorsten.i.r...@jyu.fi> wrote:
> > Referring to my poor experience with these two computers , i conclude , i
> > can accept a decrease of performance, without loosing any FG facility.
> > I'll be far from "the single frame per second" your are talking about.
>
> First of all, there are people who get a single frame per second with
> Rembrandt and have said so on this list or in the forum, the fact that you
> get decent performance doesn't mean that everyone does so as well. We're
> not developing FG for you personally, there are other users as well. Kindly
> take note of that.
>
> Second, according to what you wrote here on this list, ALS is unusably
> slow for you. That won't change when you run it under the Rembrandt
> rendering framework because you have to run pretty much the same
> operations, just inserted into different stages of the rendering process.
> Thus, if the algorithms of ALS are unusably slow now, they will remain so
> if you run them under Rembrandt. Despite of what you may think, Rembrandt
> is not a magic tool making everything run faster - deferred rendering has
> specific advantages over the default (e.g. for multiple light sources for
> instance) and specific disadvantages (e.g. no acceleration due to
> interpolation across triangles for a coarse mesh as for terrain).
>
> Please go back and read what I wrote and try to understand how deferred
> rendering works before continuing this discussion, otherwise it's a waste
> of everyone's time.
>
> > Hum, Given your answer, you have probably some personal memory leak.
>
> I'd appreciate if you could refrain from any more insulting language if
> you want to continue this conversation.
>
> * Thorsten
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows:
>
> Build for Windows Store.
>
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev
> _______________________________________________
> Flightgear-devel mailing list
> Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows:
Build for Windows Store.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
