El Tue, 8 Aug 2006 14:09:48 -0400
"Timothy Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribio:

> On 8/8/06, Dieter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Since then, I have remembered a problem with using a TV as a temporary
> > console.  A NTSC TV takes 720x480, but most TVs can't really resolve
> > that, and 80x25 text is likely to be unreadable.  IIRC, early personal
> > computers that used TVs as displays only output 40 chars or so per line.
> 
> I agree that this is a problem, but what system is going to handle
> this?  Probably very little since the original IBM PC will handle
> 40x25.  Most things are going to expect 80 columns, and few will
> likely handle more than 80 either.  I bet the BIOS boot screens expect
> very specific properties and won't handle anything else.

If we need to support this we can duplicate each line pixel or use a double 
width font. I do not see a big problem.
IIRC EGA or CGA have a tv out and can do 80x25.

> >
> > I assume PAL and SECAM TVs have the same problem, just with slightly
> > different numbers.
> >
> > Of course there are also lots of computer monitors that don't really
> > resolve what they claim to.
> 
> I think we're going to have to try to address this later, if at all.
> OGD1 will be the basis for our products for a number of months, so
> nothing is etched in stone (or silicon).
> 
> What's worse about TV in general is that, with a 3.57MHz subcarrier
> for color, you cannot get more than 160 columns of color on the
> display (based on 640, assuming 1:1 from the viewable 480 scanlines,
> with a horizontal total of 704).  Moreover, although the luma is

Is it possible to shift that 160 color columns from 0 to 3 pixels each 4 frames?
If yes we can have 640 color columns each 4 frames. So we can have 6.25(PAL) or 
7.5(NTSC) 640 color columns per second.

> analog, most TVs blur the heck out of it, bringing the usable
> resolution down to something between 160 and 320.  So, basically, your
> resolution on the display is roughly half the width of a character.
> The only recourse we have is to design a really clever font, and even
> then, it'll still be just about useless.

ROARG, :P
If it is TV fault we can correct it. I hoppe that modern TVs do it better.

> We could, perhaps, implement some sort of panning, but how do you
> indicate to the card the viewport?
_______________________________________________
Open-graphics mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics
List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)

Reply via email to