🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <11419@uqcspe.cs.uq.oz.au> warwick@cs.uq.oz.au writes:
>No.  I told you MY opinion of what resolutions were applicable to
>games.  **{\em WHOEVER}** said TrueColour 640x480 was for games
>simply didn't know what they were talking about.

While I'm WAY beyond caring about this whole thing from a technical
standpoint, you really DID say (approximately), "No, Dave, don't lie,
they couldn't have said that because that's ridiculous."

>Dave used this statement (by Atari) to demonstrate that a 1Meg machine
>was insufficient.  I demonstrated that this statement (by Atari) was
>incorrect, thus neutralizing Dave's argument that 1Meg was insufficient.

The stupid thing about this whole stupid debate is that it's Atari HQ
that was stupid in the first place!  I NEVER said 1 meg was
insufficient EXCEPT in reference to Atari's stated (to me) desire to
see games written for their whiz-bang 640x480x16bit color mode.  Jeez,
give me a break here; I couldn't care less whether the Falcon has 1 meg
or 50 -- that's hardly the deciding factor.

Howard jumps on my case about video bandwidth, Warwick moans that I'm
making stuff up.  Sheesh!  I'm just telling you:

	1. What they told me to my face.  (I WAS listening when
 	   they listed off their ludicrous pie-in-the-sky
	   "requirements for GW;" the best one was "we should
	   be able to write Steel Talons with it out of the box --
	   on a stock ST")

	2. Based on what ATARI HQ SAID THEY WANTED, the amount of
	   RAM they put in the baseline model was insufficient.
	   I told them that and got only blank stares, YES, DESPITE
	   MY MATH BEING CORRECT.
  
Let's try it once again: I AM NOT MAKING THIS UP.  Regardless of what
the "Atari Falcon User's Manual" says, I AM NOT LYING.  Sorry if this
is hard to believe, but I have NO INTEREST in hurting Atari or the
Falcon.  I simply DON'T CARE about either.  Both are doing a perfectly
adequate job of nose-diving on their own; I don't need to waste my
energy shoving them into their graves.

If people post things that I think are obviously factually incorrect
(e.g., I don't know what I heard when I met with Atari employees,
closed architectures are great, the Falcon is the best machine in the
universe, the world would be a better place if all software were
copylefted, etc.) I may feel compelled to respond.  Call me a nut, but
I find virtue in argument, EVEN IN THIS GROUP!  It's crazy, I know, but
hey, we all have our little eccentricities.

But this is NOT me vs. Atari or me vs. the Falcon or me vs. the Atari
party line slaves.

If *you* want to buy a Falcon, great!  Have fun with it.  I'd never buy
one in a million years, but hey, that's just me.  Maybe as far as
you're concerned I'm an ultra-capitalist slimebag who finds the lure of
100,000,000 potential buyers of my software too hard to resist any
longer.  You're certainly entitled to your own opinion.

>Sure, 2M would be lovely, but I'd hardly call 1Meg "insufficient", when
>it is equivalent to 1000 32x32 256 colour sprites, or:

In my personal opinion (which I'm sure you will ignore since you don't
want to hear it), the Falcon has no chance in hell of succeeding, in
the U.S. market at least, no matter what RAM configuration they baseline
it with.  Since I live in the U.S. and probably will for quite some
time, I hardly find it worth *my* while to argue the point.

However, if *you* do, then feel free.  But don't put stupid words in my
mouth and then call me a liar because of your (pl.) inability to pay
attention to what I *actually* said.

(BTW, I'm not mad here, just *incredibly* frustrated.)

Dave Baggett
--
dmb@ai.mit.edu           MIT Artificial Intelligence Laboratory                  
ADVENTIONS: interactive fiction (text adventures) for the 90's!
dmb@ai.mit.edu *** Compu$erve: 76440,2671 *** GEnie: ADVENTIONS