Zane H. Healy skrev:
>> >There are MP3 players for 68k Amiga's?!?! That's either rather gutsy, or
>> >pathetic, I'm not sure which. What do they do, decode them to another
>> >format and then play them?
>>
>> Keep in mind that I'm running a 25 MHz Amiga as my main (only) machine.
>> That doesn't mean I don't enjoy MP3s. =) They decode in real time. A French
>> bloke named Stephane Tavenard deserves most of the credit for his tight
>> assembler-coded MPEGA.library, which most players use.
>Now that is *impressive*!
>> Since my stock A4000 is probably the absolute low-end for getting moderate
>> quality playback, I usually use a command-line player and a lot of
>> buffering. A faster '040 or an '060 won't be so limitated. An '060 may even
>> replay several MP3s at once, and there are pretty, skinnable programs such
>> as AmigaAMP or AMPlifier. =)
>Ah, now I see, you're running a A4000, which should mean a 68040 processor.
>Well, there is more than a little difference in speed between a A3000/25 and
>A4000/25 since I've got a 68030 and you've got a 68040. I'd love a faster
>CPU, but I can't justify it for a machine that I quite honestly have no real
>use for. I just like it :^)
The A4000 has gotr Commodore's pathetic 68040 board, though, so any third-
party board should fare much better, particularly the 40 MHz ones.
>Out of curiousity, what else can you do on your 68040 while playing MP3's
>and how does it effect playback? I've got to admit to being curious about
>that one.
Not much, I'm afraid. That's why I use a lot of buffering, so that I might at
least read some email, but surfing the net at the same time is asking for
trouble on an 040/25.
>> >The monitors I've got would probably crush a A3000! I might be able to
>> >put it in the wooden rack next to the desk, but the PDP-8/m sits where it
>> >would need to go, and I'm going to need to find more room in the rack for
>> >a PDP-8/e and Papertape reader/punch.
>>
>> We're running a 17" Compaq monitor on top of ours. A friend of mine runs a
>> 19- incher on top of his, IIRC-
>I'm talking either a 19-20" IBM P200 or a 21" Viewsonic P815. Those are
>*very* heavy monitors, and my A3000's case is already in bad shape. About
>the only system I'd consider setting under either of them would be something
>like my Sparc 20/712, which is built a lot sturdier.
All right.
>> >Don't need a backup system, and I've no desire to run Linux on anything
>> >but a fast x86 box. So I'm still trying to come up with a use for it.
>> >That was one of the reasons I bought it a Catweasel, however, the board
>> >didn't function as advertised thanks to the lack of software for it. Of
>> >course the Catweasel board is also why it's sitting in a monster ALR
>> >Server Tower at the moment!
>>
>> What software are you lacking?
>The Catweasel board (at least when I bought mine had the software to read
>Amiga, PC, C-64, and maybe Macintosh floppies. It was advertised as being
>able to read a lot more different formats. The problem is, it doesn't (or
>at least didn't) have any software to do that.
That's odd, according to the review I read it could read Amiga, PC and ST
formats, as well as transferring C64 disks into images.
>> Amiga: (noun) The most technologically advanced computer that hardly anyone
>> cares about. Use in sentence: "I wanted to buy an Amiga for its low price
>> and great color graphics, but everyone else seems to be using IBMs or
>> Macintoshes. So, to remain compatible with the rest of the world, I spent
>> three times as much on a Macintosh and got only half the graphics
>> capability of an Amiga."
>Unfortunatly, this is no longer remotely true. If Gateway had followed
>through it might be, but they didn't. Which is why most of the Amiga
>comunity has moved on to either the Mac, BeOS, Linux, or Windows. Times
>change, what the Amiga did with style, modern Mac's and PC's do with brute
>force.
You're just fantasising.
>Though as I was cursing this morning, even with MacOS 9.1 a Mac can't format
>a floppy and do something else. I love my G4/450, but that's just plain
>pathetic. I think that's the real reason Apple dropped the floppies from
>thier systems, they didn't want to write decent software to work with them.
>A 68k based system will blow the socks off of any Power Mac when it comes to
>doing anything floppy related! And I'm serious, I've tested it! I've no
>idea how pathetic Windows might be at this, as I try to avoid it.
Windows is equally pathetic. Of course, the PC floppy system is pathetic in
itself. It doesn't even detect disk insertion.
--
En ligne avec Thor 2.6a.
"But software which OpenBSD uses and redistributes must be free to all (be
they people or companies), for any purpose they wish to use it, including
modification, use, peeing on, or even integration into baby mulching machines
or atomic bombs to be dropped on Australia."
- Theo de Raadt
Received on Fri Jul 20 2001 - 20:07:06 BST