To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Screen hardware was still emerging at that time, there’s no reason not to believe that had Amiga been the No.1 hardware platform to dictate the future then TFTs would have been designed differently with the necessary resolution switching built in (all modern TFTs have built-in stretching capabilities) and I’m sure as heck that any TFT with a suitably complex enough controller could achieve raster effects during the ‘scan’.
Think beyond just the hardware we have now _because_ of IBM, and instead at the hardware we could have had without IBM. There’s no way to say if it would have been better, but it would have been ever so different—and that’s interesting.
Edited 2010-05-15 14:22 UTC
I suppose you could fake this with a graphics system that did the resolution downscaling for you in software- it would know what the actual resolution of the screen was (say, 1680x1050x24-bit), scale other-resolution material (or windowbox it), and always output a 1680x1050x24-bit signal. On the plus side, it would never flicker while switching resolutions...




Member since:
2005-07-06
The fact that different resolutions could be displayed on the different screens was a hardware trick that was only physically possible on CRTs. And only on fixed frequency CRTs at that, ie TVs and old fixed frequency monitors.
Multisync CRTs precluded playing with raster effects to mix different frequencies in different parts of the screen.
That was a cute hack but it had no future.
Nowaday you could achieve the same effect if you wanted by scaling up the lower resolution desktop to fit on the screen, making it a "low res" desktop. You can't physically mix and match different resolutions on a LCD, you know?
Edited 2010-05-15 14:14 UTC