🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <9102160028.aa18849@ICS.UCI.EDU>, milne@ICS.UCI.EDU 
(Alastair Milne) writes...

> 
>    To network people:
> 
>    The project my group is working on is creating a highly interactive
>    set of programs using IBM's new (a few months old, anyway) M-Motion video
>    adapter for microchannel PS/2's.  It is intended, or so I understand
>    to replace InfoWindow.  (For those who haven't heard of it, I describe
>    it below.)  However, a few things about this arrangement concern me:
> 
>    - I have seen nothing mentioned about this system in the journals
>      I follow, even though IBM has already released version 2 of its
>      control software.  Am I simply looking in the wrong places, or is
>      it really being generally ignored? 

I haven't seen much about it either, but I think it is more because 
these technologies are generally ignored except in specialized 
publications. There was a review in PC Magazine in September, and a 
review of the ISA competition (VideoLogic, Matrox) in a recent PC Week 
(sorry I don't have the date and page, the magazine is at home). You 
don't see much about InfoWindow, either.



>      As far as I can discover, the M-Motion video adapter is being
>      issued for microchannel only.  

Count on it--we're talking IBM.

       But microchannel seems to be gaining
>      only very limited acceptance, at least on this side of the Atlantic.
>      
Which side? Can't quite tell for sure.


       (Having had to shepherd a couple of PS/2's -- model 80 and 70 --
>      for some months now, I am sympathetic to those who prefer to avoid
>      the complications of MCA).

I used to feel the same way about MCA, but having the system take care 
of configuration and arbitration is rather nice, once you get used to 
it. Also, the capability of bus-mastering is potentially important. For 
example, XGA is much faster because of the coprocessor design. 
> 
>      Does anybody know if MCA is starting to look like a moderately
>      realistic target environment, or is it remaining a small pool?
> 
Most seem to agree that MCA will turn out to be pretty much "IBM and 
friends." But since there's not currently much EISA installed, it could 
go either way, particularly if some "must have" technology comes along 
which REQUIRES an advanced bus.

>      Does anybody know if versions of M-Motion for none-MCA architectures
>      are planned?
> 
>    - What other realtime video boards, whether for XT/AT-bus or for MCA,
>      are competing with M-Motion?  The name VideoLogic has been mentioned
>      to me, but I've heard no more of it than that.
> 


I've heard that IBM's overlay solution in Canada and Europe is OEM'ed by 
VideoLogic. The VideoLogic board is available in both ISA and MCA 
versions. We recently acquired both MCA and Macintosh versions, but 
haven't had time to do much with them yet.

VideoLogic's home office is at Unit 8, Home Park Industrial Estate, 
Kings Langley, Hertfordshire, WD4 8LZ, UK. Their US office is 245 First 
Street, Cambridge, MA 02142.

I think it is likely that video on computers eventually will be entirely in the 
digital domain, especially when symmetrical compression/decompression 
becomes a reality and mass storage becomes cheaper and masser. But in 
the interim, overlaying video from an analog source on the computer 
screen is often more effective than having the video on a separate 
monitor beside the computer screen. As standards emerge and costs come 
down, I think we'll be seeing much more of it in instructional 
applications. In the development stage, I'd be less concerned about the 
specific platform (M-Motion, VideoLogic, other) than about protyping an 
effective design. The design can always be converted or adapted 
later. Whichever you choose, you'll count some users in and others out. Or 
some device independent layer will be developed making which overlay 
card irrelevant to your program. (VideoLogic's MIC System makes some 
claims to device independence--probably why IBM decided to roll their 
own ;-)   Also, choosing VideoLogic at least allows 
you to cover both ISA and MCA solutions. BTW, VideoLogic sells something 
called an "InfoWindow Emulator."

InfoWindow went away because it was cumbersome and dreadfully expensive. 
Why spend $5000 on an InfoWindow display when you can spend $2500 on 
M-Motion and a touch screen. Also, while video is on the InfoWindow 
screen, graphics can have only CGA resolution, in itself making M-Motion 
a big step up.

Hope this is helpful and my facts are mostly straight. Feel free to 
contact me if you want to know more about how the VideoLogic works out.


Doug Hamilton					hamilton@macc.wisc.edu
Instructional Technology Support		hamilton@wiscmacc.bitnet
Academic Computing Center			(608) 262-5667
University of Wisconsin-Madison