🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <4it9j2$151@alterdial.UU.NET>, Erik J. Russell
<ejr@bahamas.net.bs> writes:

>A few questions for those of you who are either Scala staff or likely
>beta-testers:

>1.  I noticed mention of some "new features" not available in previous
>versions of Scala. What kind of features are these?

As listed on the Website, some of the "new" features include the new
"PictureWipes(tm)" and "ScriptWipes(tm)".  Picture Wipes use 256 level
gray scale images to create a wipe.  Script Wipes use Scala's new
"ScalaScript(tm)" language to create wipes that now work in the "Z-axis". 
These wipes include "FlyOns", "Zooms" and other "scalable" wipes, not
possible on the Amiga and/or the Amiga versions of the Scala products.

Since ARexx is not available for MS-DOS or any of the Windows based
environments, we compensated for this by adding more robust programming
features to Scala's scripting language, ScalaScript.  Its now possible to
create games and other interactive kiosk applications with greater ease,
from the Scala GUI, HumanTouch(tm), than the current Amiga version.

Other enhancements include easier and more robust interactive "buttons"
features, more text/element wipes that use PictureWipes and ScriptWipes,
EXes to control audio cards, CD-ROM drives, hardware based MPEG Decoders,
etc.

>2.  How much more/different are the included clip art and images with the
PC
>version and the recent Amiga versions?

The CD-ROM includes at least four times as much content than the Amiga
version.  Also, there is a greater variety of images, animations, sounds
and music.  Images includes our exclusive ScalaToons(tm), a library of
buttons for interactive use, and much, much more. 

>3.  How different or similar is the PC version to the Amiga version? I
have
>read that the HumanTouch interface will be standard, but how "standard"?
Will
>it be more Win95 or look just like the Amiga versions? Is there anything
NOT
>in the PC version that IS in the Amiga version?

From an interface and function point-of-view, the PC and Amiga versions
have similarities.  But if you look "under the hood", you'll see that they
are very, very different.

The PC version is based on our all new "BackBone(tm)" software technology.
 BackBone is a modular, platform independent, binary independent,
scalable, multimedia environment.  This means it can run in a small
environment, like an interactive television set-top box, all the way up to
a workstation.  It means that most of the software code can be ported from
one environment to another, without a complete rewrite to suit the
delivery platform.

Unfortunately, this means there is little compatibility between the
current Amiga version and the BackBone version.  Indeed, it means that you
cannot run an Amiga based Scala script on the PC and vice versa.  In order
to make a better product, we had to sacrifice some compatibility.  This is
not say that everything can't be transferred to the PC version!  We have
included an ILBM (IFF) loader into the PC version and you can convert
Amiga ANIM files to FLC and IFF images to BMP, using the included
utilities that come with "ScalaMultiMedia MM400" and "InfoChannel IC500". 
You will, however, have to rebuild the script, adding new text, wipes,
timing, etc.

HumanTouch will look like, well... HumanTouch, but there will be, of
course, enhancements to the interface.  While it may get some getting use
to, I'm confident that Amiga users of the software will find the new
features a welcome change.  Especially since they are features Scala users
have been asking for, for years!  Some Windows/DOS centric hotkeys (i.e.
Ctrl-X to Cut and Ctrl-V to Paste) and file requester functionality will
make it different than the Amiga version, but not much.  Also, some wipes
will not be in the PC version, like the "Crawl" and "Scroll".  These wipes
are easy to do on the Amiga, but hard to do on the PC.

>4.  What about the future of Amiga development for Scala? We currently
have
>one master and one player (both A4000Ts) and I need to know if we should
make
>any further investment in Amiga technology (no pun intended).

I don't have an answer for this question.  Ideally, it would be great to
port the BackBone technology back to the Amiga platform.  The question is,
which one?  ECS/AGA or the new Power Amiga?  This is something that will
have to be worked out between Amiga Technology and Scala.

In closing, consider this.  The Amiga is a television compatible delivery
platform.  While PC hardware is less expensive, it is off-set by the cost
of a broadcast quality VGA Genlock/Overlay Device or VGA to Composite
Encoder (Actually, this affects you RTG/EGS card users too).  If you want
a broadcast quality unit, expect to pay at least $1,000 USD or more.  Want
24-bit?  Add another $500 to $1000 on top of the base price.  So, $2,000
USD for the PC and and $1,500 for the genlock/encoder, that's $3,500. 
Hmm, all of a sudden that A4000T with genlock doesn't sound so bad at
$2,500.  Something to consider.

If you or anyone else would like to respond to this message, and it is not
Amiga related, then please, post it in comp.multimedia, in respect to the
Amiga users here.  Thank you.



Regards,

John Chang
____

John Chang, Technical Support Manager, Scala, Inc. USA
Multimedia by SCALA.  Why Make It Harder?
Website: http://www.scala.com


____

John Chang, Technical Support Manager, Scala, Inc. USA
Reply to: john.chang@scala.com, Scala Computer Television
Websites: http://www.scala.com or http://www.scala.no
"Multimedia by SCALA.  Why Make It Harder?"

>>any further investment in Amiga technology (no pun intended).
>
>I don't have an answer for this question.  Ideally, it would be great to
>port the BackBone technology back to the Amiga platform.  The question is,
>which one?  ECS/AGA or the new Power Amiga?  This is something that will
>have to be worked out between Amiga Technology and Scala.

I've been looking for some kind of authoring system simular to the Director on the Mac/PC, I'm hoping that Scala can provide this.
As far as I'm concerned, I'd like to see a version of Scala/Backbone that was really optimised for PowerAmiga, rather than try to get more out of AGA or even ECS, both wich I feel are out of data and it makes more sense to look towards PowerPC than trying to keep compatable with the older Amigas at the expense of innovation.
Just my 2cents worth,
Zoltan Hunt
Ontario, Canada

On friday the 22nd, my degree course class and I were treated to a 
demonstration of Scala for the PC. Running on a bare p75, all I can say 
is that it was INCREDIBLE! It basically dumps dos and windows and 
initiates its own OS. The wipes etc are VERY smooth, but best of all you 
can create your own. The Interface is just about Identical to the amiga 
version ( even the colours! ). This program is going to blow everything 
else away! ( especially when released at only 150 pounds! ).

Ben Thomas

In <Pine.SUN.3.91.960329172625.8505A-100000@altair.herts.ac.uk> Ben
Thomas <ssam2ck@herts.ac.uk> writes: 
>
>On friday the 22nd, my degree course class and I were treated to a 
>demonstration of Scala for the PC. Running on a bare p75, all I can
say 
>is that it was INCREDIBLE! It basically dumps dos and windows and 
>initiates its own OS. The wipes etc are VERY smooth, but best of all
you 
>can create your own. The Interface is just about Identical to the
amiga 
>version ( even the colours! ). This program is going to blow
everything 
>else away! ( especially when released at only 150 pounds! ).

Sure.. but what is the cost of getting it to video? I use Scala MM300
for video titling (retired BT2 SHR ages ago) and tying in animations
along with photo stills. Works great and no problem outputting it to
tape with the SuperGen. I also have a PC sitting here (using it now)
and am totally confused on what to get and from who (or even if they
will be around in the future. All of the companies arent going to make
it selling vid cards). I just hope that the Amiga will not be left
behind for the 'greener' PC pastures.