(as of 04-10-2005)

Hello ASDT dhau> In short, according to this Lethargeek, everyone needs to sit down and in the name of blessed memory dhau> of the past quickly ` die. And don’t dare invent anything new and unorthodox, because our grandfathers and without ` these bells and whistles won the Second World War. Hurray, dear lethargic. Award Order of Honor Troll ` First Degree from the shelf to the chest hip-hip-hurray. Now get out my friend further away. ` They don’t like Orthodox Old Believers here. HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA!!!!!! LAUGHING I CAN'T! :D :D :D :eek: This means taking and attaching something ready-made “because it’s easy to implement” - this is a triumph unorthodox thoughts and unbridled flight of free creative imagination!!! A no chasing the “new” (which, with such a one-sided approach, awaits the fate of everything already good forgotten old) but think about how to eliminate the shortcomings that prevent the full disclosure potential of the Spectrum itself (without demanding too much from supposed users-coders) - it turns out that this is inertia, orthodoxy and backwardness. Some kind of twisted logic. Well, just dhau-from-the-looking-glass... :D Moreover, “get away, my friend,” they say, we have an advanced sandbox here, we here We create super-duper mega-devices, not some antediluvian Spectrum. If I were such an Old Believer, I would be satisfied with the existing Spec's characteristicsand the topic would not have arisen. And I didn’t forbid you to screw anything up and invent anything, I just spoke out against attempts to pass off hasty formal decisions as a panacea for all Spekovsky graphic problems. Apparently, for those who draw conclusions without reading the topic or trying anything understand you will have to type “summary of previous episodes” with comments in order finally me stopped attributing any nonsense. WBR, Lethargeek aka Dmitry Malychev

Hello Lethargeek Ronin> have you done a lot of programming yourself? ` from a certain point, everything you described simply becomes unimportant. Did you understand what you wanted to say? Ronin> good, where there are crowds of programs for flash color, hardware multicolor, etc. Ronin> - all ` does it simply adapt from the standard screen? icebear> The problem is that all of the above is wretchedness. Actually, I already spoke about this much earlier. Got stuck, or what? comrade? Ronin> the problem is that there is no OS! and not about who wants what Ronin> megaconnect. Hehe, what will the new axis give in terms of improving Spectrum graphics and making it easier her programming? Or will all output to the screen have to go through some DirectZX or even worse - through GDI (on the Spectrum it should be pronounced as "wait-and-and-and-and...") through separately installed drivers for each feature? :D On an eight-bit processor at 3.5-7 MHz! P.S. This PC needs a new axis... oops... before I had time to type these lines, a window immediately popped up with message from Microsoft press secretary. I was highly recommended replace words "new axis" to "next version"... :rolleyes:Be afraid, spektrumists, Big Bill is looking at you too! WBR, Lethargeek aka Dmitry Malychev

Hello Lethargeek And here again is criticism from scratch: Maksagor> Well, don’t rush to conclusions. A palette of 64 colors (with 16 Maxagor> at the same time) you can ` on ATM can also be used on a standard screen. And with 2BIT-plan images (blink once ` in interruption by screen pages) you can put your own on each screen own ` palette, obtaining a fairly significant number of color shades. Oho-ho. Well, what to do with you, I have to give the same quote from CHRV again. CHRV> (Although it is already possible to change the palette on the go, with ATM this is possible ` and this is already 64 colors on one screen - writers, why not use it). So, we are talking about changing the palette “on the fly”, that is, in the middle of the frame, which becomes completely it is clear from the further "64 colors on one screen". That is, it means actually an option software multicolor = static image that eats up all resources processor. In this regard, I ASK FOR THE ATTENTION of all zero-critics! This thread just gave birth to the first useful result, namely: THE FIRST LAW IS FOR THOSE WHO ARE LETHARGIC. If you want to kick Lethargic for “hasty” and “inattentiveness” - three times double check what are you writing about! Perhaps YOU YOURSELF were in a hurry and did not notice something. Research is currently underway to generalize this law, besides Lethargic, at other inhabitants of the forum. ;)WBR, Lethargeek aka Dmitry Malychev

Hello Lethargeek And so as not to be like the null critics, Maxagor’s statement is “not relevant” I'm not the same I’m less likely to give a detailed answer “to the point”: And what do we have if we combine the blinker with changing the palette “once per interruption”, how are you do you offer? Theoretically, a blinker on a standard palette gives 15*15=225 "flowers" right away remove those blinking “symmetrically”, we get (15*15+15)/2=120 “colors” at the same time (considering that the BRIGHT factor is not exactly two). If we remove the “identical” ones, but in different ways decomposed into “color” components, we end up with the number 102. In general, by changing the palette we get 16*16=256 colors, and with the same the most restrictions - 4 colors per familiarity. And this means that for those who have converted more pictures Smooth color transitions are possible only for very large parts. Yes on Speck just something 256*3=768 acquaintances! Surely in each individual case there will be flowers less than 256. The only plus is that the “general palette” of the picture will be slightly more "natural". Moreover all these beauties require that there be fewer identical colors in two palettes (ideally their should not exist at all), which means that the picture will again have to completely remake/reconvert, that is, again double work (and double consumption memory, even a disk one). This concerns static pictures - come on, who will mess around,inserting redundant data into "general purpose" toys and demos? Realistically, if what and what happens is that this is again machine-specific software demonstrating the capabilities ATM. For dynamic "blinking" graphics (like the one I described in the section "Games" in the topic "Preliminary Monty") you can actually actually use even fewer colors. In general, everything again comes down to using 8-16 colors from a palette of 256 instead of 64, who should be quite contrasting with each other. The effect is negligible - again, somewhat different color (no worse can be achieved by twisting the settings on the TV ;)). P.S. You see, unlike some, I don't just say "impossible" "difficult" or “It’s not worth it,” but I also specifically explain why (and not because “I’ve thought about it, so believe me"). I also try not to use such a cheap trick as refutation himself weak argument of the interlocutor (while prudently “not noticing” the others, stronger). WBR, Lethargeek aka Dmitry Malychev

Hello Lethargeek Here I was going to throw out the answer I had prepared for CHRV, but I changed my mind. Thoughts various fresh got into my head, and in general... In short, tomorrow or the day after tomorrow more will be ready efficient expanded version (and not a meaningless continuation of the argument between the blind and the deaf;) ). By the way, CHRV, why is it suddenly “you”, let’s continue with “you”, after all, it’s online under nicknames we communicate, and not at an official reception... And I wasn’t the first to start “poking.” ;) WBR, Lethargeek aka Dmitry Malychev