Jump to content

Photo

JagCF last news before the before the launch of final proto.


464 replies to this topic

#76 spiffyone OFFLINE  

spiffyone

    Moonsweeper

  • 292 posts

Posted Mon Sep 17, 2007 5:17 PM

All this stuff (games) supposedly coming out for CF, in my mind isn't even what I would consider software for the Jaguar, but software for some other completely different system that happens to use the Jaguar as some kind of pass through device.


Like a CT60 on a Falcon, if you shoot this kind of thing on an Atari computer forum, i think a lot of Atari fan will want to kick you, or perhaps try to mail this guy here ( http://www.czuba-tech.com/ ) and tell him what do you think of additionnal cards.



That's exaclty what I thought reading these comments, today the Falcon community would be really, really sad without the release of the CT60 :)


There's a bit of a problem, though, comparing JagCF and Jag to CT60 and Falcon:

Jaguar is a home video game console. Falcon is a PC.

It's normal for PCs to have add-on cards that vastly change the features of the machine. Very different for home consoles.

On some level it isn't a new thing, perhaps, as 32X did pretty much the same thing for Genesis/MegaDrive. But even that comparison
is problematic on a philosphical level as Sega didn't add something to the console that was completely out of the realm of possibility at
the time. JagCF, with a 96 MHz RISC processor (the DSP), is, on some level, something that would have been outside of the realm of
possibility at the time Jaguar was still "alive" (officially supported by Atari).

Then again, even that is questionable, as I myself am now questioning it.

Nintendo did, after all, release N64 in '96, which itself had a 90+ Mhz RISC CPU (a MIPS 4300i). And, as I stated before, there were RAM
expansions for N64 and Saturn. So JagCF, which adds another powerful processor and additional RAM, wouldn't have been outside the
realm of possibility at the time technologically, perhaps...but it would've cost a pretty penny. And that's why I think a less powerful DSP
and less RAM would have been more feasible.

Again, it is still highly questionable. I can see Atari releasing and add on with 4 MB of additional RAM (as this was the norm during that gen -
see N64 RAM expansion pack and Saturn RAM carts) more than I can 8 MB. And I can see them adding maybe a 30 MHz RISC with this
add on.

But 96 MHz and 8 MBs is a bit much, in my view. Yeah, developers don't have to support all 96 MHz and all 8 MBs, but, c'mon...who are we
kidding here? If that's the max specs, they'll try to use the max specs and won't short themselves. And that's my tiny philosophical issue with
the power of the device. It seems, on that level of power, to go against the spirit of developing for older consoles, which is to work within the
limited parametersof said consoles. Now, that doesn't mean that one can't or shouldn't develop add-ons to get more from the console, but, to
me at least, it does mean that, perhaps, one should at least make these add ons with that "working within the limited parameters of the time"
mindset.

Then again...I recall Atari was going to release Jag "II" in 2 configurations: a stand alone console, and an add on to stock Jaguars. So, who knows?

#77 JagChris ONLINE  

JagChris

    River Patroller

  • 2,290 posts
  • Location:Oregon

Posted Mon Sep 17, 2007 5:37 PM

Third, it's a fact that JagCDs are picky, that's something Jag fans and developers have been worriying about for years. Sadly nobody opens their mouth in discussions like this.

Regards, Lars.


Probably because no one has ever heard of these widespread Cd problems before. All my stock original Jaguar CDs run fine, except Vid Grid because I scratched it.

My JagCD is so picky I can burn the JagCode 500 image on the crappiest CD-Rs imaginable and it still runs.

I have no idea what the problem with your software was Lars, but I got to stick up for the JagCD player and this message you give of its flawed design.

#78 Gorf OFFLINE  

Gorf

    River Patroller

  • 4,633 posts

Posted Mon Sep 17, 2007 8:04 PM

Then again...I recall Atari was going to release Jag "II" in 2 configurations: a stand alone console, and an add on to stock Jaguars. So, who knows?


The add on to stock Jaguars to turn it into an Oberon and Puck based
Jaguar II does not even sound possible, never mind make sense. No
doubt a crock of doo doo from the sound of it. I think you might have
that backwards. There was the Jag duo that was a CD and Jag I in one unit.
I dont think there ever exsisted plans for a upgrade for JAg I's to Jag II's.
Just from what I know of the cart port, it would be senseless. Then again,
this is Atari we are talking about. Never can tell what these guys will do next.

Edited by Gorf, Mon Sep 17, 2007 8:06 PM.


#79 Gorf OFFLINE  

Gorf

    River Patroller

  • 4,633 posts

Posted Mon Sep 17, 2007 8:14 PM

From what I understand conerning Lars Cd issue, there was software bug issues that caused the
title not to work and was repaired by Matthias. The poitn I am making is, once this repair is made
and you still have people complaining, you should make good. I can se a harmless bug that is not
detrimental to the game or the play, but one that wont even allow operation is inexcusable.

Lars...I not picking on you...Im trying to help you understand the value of doing business and
making your customers happy. Sometimes this is not always easy or possible but you need to
do all you can other than tell folks thier equipment is faulty. shoot. Im sure a replacement in a
simple white CD sleeve would have settled it and Im sure most jag fans would have been more
than understanding. I say these things foryour own benefit and not mine. The cost of doing
business can suck sometimes but doing the right thing will pay off sooner or later.

#80 GT Turbo OFFLINE  

GT Turbo

    Moonsweeper

  • Topic Starter
  • 485 posts
  • Location:Alsace, France

Posted Tue Sep 18, 2007 11:44 AM

There's a bit of a problem, though, comparing JagCF and Jag to CT60 and Falcon:

Jaguar is a home video game console. Falcon is a PC.

It's normal for PCs to have add-on cards that vastly change the features of the machine. Very different for home consoles.


Hi Spiffyone,

Please don't say Falcon is a PC, i love my Falcon not my PC.

My Falcon boot in less than 20 secondes with a clock of 95 Mhz, my 2 Gigahertz PC need something like 2 minutes for booting ;)

My Pc need some seconds for compiling 100 lignes of C, my Falcon only need 0.6 seconds for assembling 25 000 lines of code.

No blue screen with my Falcon, with my PC a lot :'(

Even if the Falcon has been designed for supporting add-on cards, i don't think Atari has thinked to a 68060 card at 100 Mhz instead this little 68030 at 16 Mhz.

I only use my PC for mail and forum reading nothing else, if the PC is ok.... Because with this machine that's not you who decides what you have to do but the PC.

I think we can compare JagCF to the CT60 card, that's the same thing, a new processor a new clock. The Jaguar has been designed for that, see the JagCD it's an extension, like the JagCF.


GT Turbo ;)

Edited by GT Turbo, Tue Sep 18, 2007 1:29 PM.


#81 T2KFREEKER OFFLINE  

T2KFREEKER

    Dragonstomper

  • 594 posts

Posted Tue Sep 18, 2007 11:58 AM

My apologies to T2KFreeker, it seems I mixed people in this very, very long flamewar thread on JSII. Someone just explained me that you had obtained pirate copies of other games from Omf first, so if this is true, it doesn't change much : a pirate is a pirate, isn't it ? And please, stop your usual crap AA vs JSII, nobody talked about this in this thread, and all this "we know more than you"... that's just... childish.



I didn't say that we know more than you. At least learn how to read man. As for the Pirating thing? Bite Me dude. Until you know all of thefacts of the situation, which will be never, you can shut up on that because all you are doing is standing on the outside looking in and have no idea what really went down.


Next.


Now, onto the CF side of things. Jagware; I have to agree here guys, the Jag CF seems to be yet another add on for the Jaguar that the system doesn't need man. Why not use just the stock Jaguar? You can't just say it's absence of dev tools either as they seem to be popping up like crazy these days as well as Libraries. Plus add in the fact that you seemed to go out of your way when you started designing this thing to alienate the Jaguar developers useing just a stock Jaguar. I know you are irritated with the reception that you are getting right now, so I have to ask. Why would you do what you did innitially and then be surprised by certain people's reactions?

#82 GT Turbo OFFLINE  

GT Turbo

    Moonsweeper

  • Topic Starter
  • 485 posts
  • Location:Alsace, France

Posted Tue Sep 18, 2007 12:20 PM

Now, onto the CF side of things. Jagware; I have to agree here guys, the Jag CF seems to be yet another add on for the Jaguar that the system doesn't need man. Why not use just the stock Jaguar?


Because we don't want to sold games at a very high price because doing cartridges come to be very difficult and expensive, we don't want that only JagCD owners can play games, it's too hard to understood ? The first thing was the JagCF has been designed is for having a cheaper way of dealing games.

You can't just say it's absence of dev tools either as they seem to be popping up like crazy these days as well as Libraries.


If i need a tool, i write it that's all, i needed a map editor i wrote it that's simple.

Never forget i have started to code an a single 520 Stf and i always code for 8 Mhz 68000, see here :

http://pouet.net/groups.php?which=915

So using a 13 Mhz 68000 and two risc at 26.6 Mhz is easy for me especially when you have yet done some code for the Falcon DSP.

I know you are irritated with the reception that you are getting right now.


T2Kfreeker i'm only surprised by some people who don't want to see the JagCF be released, it's all. Why are you shooting everywhere no JagCF ? Sometimes i'm thinking some people are jealous it's all. And at this time i'm laughing because if you see the lot of private message i got from people writing :

i support the JagCF when it will be available ?
i don't want to post because some people only make trolls and flamms but be sure continue like this.


So all this posts here make me laughing harder all days, so i have only one thing to tell if you want to continue to talk before doing real things, it's your choice but be sure the JagCF will be release.


GT Turbo Posted Image

#83 Pocket OFFLINE  

Pocket

    Dragonstomper

  • 941 posts

Posted Tue Sep 18, 2007 12:45 PM

All is said again, those who are not interested in the CF, just don't buy it. The people who really don't want the CF are known, they are repeating the same thing again, again and again, in every topic they can, since the first day. But you won't change people's mind this way :)

#84 spiffyone OFFLINE  

spiffyone

    Moonsweeper

  • 292 posts

Posted Tue Sep 18, 2007 3:13 PM

There's a bit of a problem, though, comparing JagCF and Jag to CT60 and Falcon:

Jaguar is a home video game console. Falcon is a PC.

It's normal for PCs to have add-on cards that vastly change the features of the machine. Very different for home consoles.


Hi Spiffyone,

Please don't say Falcon is a PC, i love my Falcon not my PC.

[...]

I think we can compare JagCF to the CT60 card, that's the same thing, a new processor a new clock. The Jaguar has been designed for that, see the JagCD it's an extension, like the JagCF.


GT Turbo ;)


You can think of Falcon in any way you wish. The fact is, however, that it is a PC. Is it an IBM compatible PC? No. But it's a PC nonetheless. So were Amigas, so were STs, Commodores and so too are Macs. PC = Personal Computer, and at the end of the day, that's exactly what Falcon is, and thus the design philosophy is very much different from home video game consoles. Are there similar and, indeed shared, components? Yes. But the overall design philosophy is different. PCs are made to be upgraded. Consoles less so, and when they are upgraded the upgrades themselves are usually not supported that well due to the original design philosophy. That's pretty much the reasons add-ons don't sell well for consoles. And even when they are made, they are made with the idea to make them as inexpensive as possible to allow better market penetration.

As for JagCF being like JagCD, they are similar in that they are add-ons, true. But JagCD, to my knowledge, really didn't change the stock Jaguar much at all. JagCD is like TG-16 CD, in that it added CD capabilities and a bit extra. JagCF is really like 32X, but even more of a leap. At the very least Sega added something that was feasible and somewhat inexpensive for what it did to Genesis. This JagCF, this DSP and the amount of RAM available is feasible nowadays, but at the time Jag was alive it would have been much less feasible.

And that's my issue with it: the entire point of developing on older home video game console hardware (again, not PC hardware) is to make do with what was available at the time. So, yes, there can be add-ons, but in my view they'd have to be add-ons that were feasible at the time. A CD unit was feasible for TG-16, Genesis, and Jaguar. Expensive at the time, but feasible. Add-on RAM was feasible during the Jag's generation (N64 and Saturn add-on RAM). Add-on power was feasible from the Atari 2600's SuperCharger to the extra chips in Genesis and SNES carts, to the System Cards for PC-Engine and DUO, to the 32X for Genesis. All were feasible because all upgraded the machines based on what was feasible at the time both technologically and economically.

Now, I know JagCF itself would have been pretty unfeasible for Jaguar at the time Jag was officially supported based on the use of Compact Flash alone. But it's the add-on DSP and amount of RAM I'm focusing on here. 96 MHz and 8 megs would have been pretty unfeasible for Jaguar at the time. Would Atari themselves have released such a vast upgrade? I don't think so. Not in the 4-5 or so year lifecycle the console would've had ('93-97/98) or the 2-3 year life cycle it actually did have. Speculative on my part though it may be, there is a grounding of reality there.

Again, it's a different philosophy than yours. You simply want to upgrade the Jag as much as currently possible. Nothing wrong with that. I'd rather that if it were upgraded it be upgraded with the philosophy of making do with what was or would have been available and feasible at the time Jag was still alive. To me, 96MHz and 8 megs of RAM wouldn't have been used. At most 30-40 Mhz and 4 MB of additional RAM would have been, and, lo and behold it was used in the form of CoJag.

And again I must point out that my philosophical views on the matter don't mean that I won't buy the product. Especially if good games are made for it.

#85 Gorf OFFLINE  

Gorf

    River Patroller

  • 4,633 posts

Posted Tue Sep 18, 2007 7:13 PM


PC = Personal computer.....the Falcon030 applies.

IMB compatible PC , now that is another story.

#86 Gorf OFFLINE  

Gorf

    River Patroller

  • 4,633 posts

Posted Tue Sep 18, 2007 7:18 PM

the time, but feasible. Add-on RAM was feasible during the Jag's generation (N64 and Saturn add-on RAM). Add-on power was


RAM was not so cheap at that time. Not only that, to add RAM via the cart would be
slower and only 32 bits. If any RAM expanding were to be done, the best way would
be to probably do it by piggy backing the exsisting RAM on the motherboard. Then
you would have 4 megs of 64 bit wide ram. I think it would help a lot in the way of
better sound quality.

#87 Stephen Moss OFFLINE  

Stephen Moss

    Dragonstomper

  • 721 posts
  • Location:Cambridge, United Kingdom

Posted Wed Sep 19, 2007 3:18 AM

I'd rather that if it were upgraded it be upgraded with the philosophy of making do with what was or would have been available and feasible at the time Jag was still alive. To me, 96MHz and 8 megs of RAM wouldn't have been used. At most 30-40 Mhz and 4 MB of additional RAM would have been, and, lo and behold it was used in the form of CoJag.

I don't think those upgrades would be possible, for a start the the CoJag PCB is 2 to 3 times larger than that of the Jaguar so where would you fit all that stuff into the Jaguars case. Although the only Jag circuit diagrams I have seen are those on the internet and they do not appear to be entirely complete AFAIK there are no spare address lines for the additional RAM even if you could find the space for it so basically any improvements would have to require scrapping the original PCB and design and starting from scratch.

Provided that software loaded onto the the CF requires the Jaguar to output the AV, read the controllers and run the game code then any game code, graphics or sound loaded onto the CF whether preprocessed by the DSP or not has to be compatible with and is limited by the capabilies of the original hardware and so essentially you still have to make do with and program for what was available at the time thus you still have a Jaguar and not a new console.
For example Space Wars 2000 shows us that the Jaguar is capable of texture mapping however it only displays a couple of ships at a time, if you tried to apply it a large network game with 12 players and therefore had 12 ships to render at once the frame rate would probably be dire. If by using the DSP on the CF to pre-render each frame much faster than the Jag could alone and then have the Jag download and display it means that we get the same graphics that the Jaguar is capable of but at a decent frame rate is that really providing so much more than your suggested "at the time" technology upgrades would have allowed?

#88 Gorf OFFLINE  

Gorf

    River Patroller

  • 4,633 posts

Posted Wed Sep 19, 2007 5:56 AM

For example Space Wars 2000 shows us that the Jaguar is capable of texture mapping however it only displays a couple of ships at a time, if you tried to apply it a large network game with 12 players and therefore had 12 ships to render at once the frame rate would probably be dire.



Not if you code it correctly. BattleSphere actually runs more efficiently as you add nodes.

#89 spiffyone OFFLINE  

spiffyone

    Moonsweeper

  • 292 posts

Posted Wed Sep 19, 2007 9:50 AM

I don't think those upgrades would be possible, for a start the the CoJag PCB is 2 to 3 times larger than that of the Jaguar so where would you fit all that stuff into the Jaguars case. Although the only Jag circuit diagrams I have seen are those on the internet and they do not appear to be entirely complete AFAIK there are no spare address lines for the additional RAM even if you could find the space for it so basically any improvements would have to require scrapping the original PCB and design and starting from scratch.


I meant upgrading Jag with less powerful components in the same manner as done in JagCF.

Atari could have done that in a way, and indeed would have most likely looked at something like CoJag as a reference. It wouldn't mean making the Jag an actual CoJag, but adding some of the CoJag components (the 30 MHz or so MIPS RISC and 4 megs of RAM) onto an add on cart for a closer facsimile.

Genesis 32X wasn't exactly Sega's arcade hardware of the time that ran Virtua Fighter, as the arcade hardware wasn't bottlenecked in a way like 32X was due to being run through Genesis, but it could run a reasonable facsimile of Virtua Fighter because it had some similar components.

That's what I'm getting at. Not making it a CoJag, but if making an add-on cart that boosts power and RAM, make it in the way Atari themselves would have made it at the time. And it's very unlikely they would've added a 90+ MHz RISC and an additional 8 megs of RAM on such an add-on. Most likely it would've been something along the lines of the extra components in CoJag (the 25-30 MHz MIPS RISC and 4-maybe 6 MB RAM). Again, not making Jag a CoJag as that would require the type of work you're talking about, but making the Jag, with this cartridge add-on, as close to a reasonable mirror to CoJag as possible, similar to how 32X, while not Sega's arcade hardware, made the Genesis as close to that arcade hardware as was possible.

Provided that software loaded onto the the CF requires the Jaguar to output the AV, read the controllers and run the game code then any game code, graphics or sound loaded onto the CF whether preprocessed by the DSP or not has to be compatible with and is limited by the capabilies of the original hardware and so essentially you still have to make do with and program for what was available at the time thus you still have a Jaguar and not a new console.


Again, it's not the concept of an add-on adding power that I'm against. 32X for Genesis/MegaDrive was similar, as was Starpath Super Charger for 2600. The difference between those and JagCF, though, is that the extra power given by those first two add ons was reasonable at the time that the consoles were "alive" and officially supported. A 96 MHz RISC and 8 additional megs of RAM for Jaguar is in many respects unreasonable when thinking of whether Atari would have or even could have done that in 1993-6 (or even stretching to '97 or '98 if it had lived longer). Again, the norm during that gen was 4 additional megs of RAM (N64 expansion pack, Sega Saturn RAM carts). The norm for an add on for Jag might be unknown unless we look at related hardware. And CoJag shows us that if Atari had added onto the Jag it most likely would have been something that would attempt to bump up the power as close as possible to CoJag, and would most likely use the 25-30 MHz MIPS RISC and additional 4-6 megs of RAM used in CoJag.

Now, with the add on cart, this wouldn't make Jaguar the same exact thing as CoJag. CoJag removed the 68k as "master", and the add on cart would be straphanged, in a way, by the use of the 68k (Gorf, I know the GPU could be used, but that wasn't really known at the time). It would, however, make Jaguar as close to CoJag as possible. Again, same as how 32X made Genesis as close to the Sega arcade boards that powered Virtua Racing and Virtua Fighter at the time.


For example Space Wars 2000 shows us that the Jaguar is capable of texture mapping however it only displays a couple of ships at a time, if you tried to apply it a large network game with 12 players and therefore had 12 ships to render at once the frame rate would probably be dire. If by using the DSP on the CF to pre-render each frame much faster than the Jag could alone and then have the Jag download and display it means that we get the same graphics that the Jaguar is capable of but at a decent frame rate is that really providing so much more than your suggested "at the time" technology upgrades would have allowed?


At 96 MHz and 8 MB of RAM, yes, it is providing more than 25-30 MHz and 4-6 MB or RAM would allow, or at the very least providing it faster and making it easier.

Do you yourself honestly think that had Atari made such an add on cart in '95 or '96 (as was most likely had they the money) they would have made it 96 MHz and 8 MB or RAM?

Or do you think it more likely that they would've gone 25-30 MHz and 4-6 MB or RAM?

Which was more likely at the time?

Yes, it would essentially do the same thing, but it would make it a wee bit more difficult and, indeed, part of the philosophy of working with readily available and used technology of the time. A 90+ MHz RISC was used for N64, yes, but that was an entire console, not an add on. And if the add on for Jag were made at the time, it would not, in my view, have been clocked at 90+ MHz, and it would not have provided more than 4 to 6 (at the most) MB of RAM.

It's not that big a deal, obviously. It's not something that is going to make me not get the JagCF. But it is something that, on the level of extra power it provides, conflicts with my personal philosophy of support for older consoles making do with what would have been available at the time on a hardware level. The concept of adding on power isn't conflicting with that philosophy. It's the amount of add on power that is, however. It wouldn't have been feasible for the time that the console was alive.

#90 GT Turbo OFFLINE  

GT Turbo

    Moonsweeper

  • Topic Starter
  • 485 posts
  • Location:Alsace, France

Posted Wed Sep 19, 2007 1:09 PM

You can think of Falcon in any way you wish. The fact is, however, that it is a PC. Is it an IBM compatible PC? No. But it's a PC nonetheless. So were Amigas, so were STs, Commodores and so too are Macs. PC = Personal Computer, and at the end of the day, that's exactly what Falcon is, and thus the design philosophy is very much different from home video game consoles.


Hi,

I disagree. Falcon isn't a PC, if you use Pc like Personnal Computer, everybody here use a personnal computer, even it was a Mac. For me it isn't a PC because an Atari computer got a mind not like a PC, an history not like a PC. Everybody who got an Atari computer know who are the Carebears, the Replicants, the great days of the Atari, Amigas machines. People trying to get the best of their machines, using self-generating code, selfmodifying code, syncscroll, white night for giving a faster, a better code than the others, a state of mind, the 'Try to beat dis' was the onll goal !! Now for having a better code they only use faster machines not faster code, that's the difference for me, everybody bought faster PC, that's all. In my game Project Apocalypse, i have used a technic i have written in a ST demo, for synchronising the OP with my list for saving some cycles, i don't need to use a double buffered list, only one, i have spent some hours to optimize and make it running but now i've got a fast list manager.

I agree with you about video games consoles are different from computer, i haven't told that, i wanted to make a parallel between the JagCF and the CT60, for me it's the same kind of extension, when Rodolphe has seen the JagCF he has a nice discution with SCPCD about hardware, the JagCF is (with the new DSP) like a CT60 of the Jaguar.

Regards,

GT Turbo

#91 Deranged_desperado OFFLINE  

Deranged_desperado

    Space Invader

  • 21 posts

Posted Wed Sep 19, 2007 1:17 PM

Now, last but not least, you guys clain to be Jaguar fans, but now you try and say that you have never heard of Jag-ware? You also claim that you can't find it on Google? Are you sure about that? I can find it just fine, and hay, it is even the actual catalogs for them that shipped with the Jaguar system itself! Next thing I'll be hearing is that you have never heard of Cybermorph? Please guys, I notice you don't bring this stuff to JSII anymore because we all see through what you are trying to do. The Jaguar, as it stands, is alive and sell right now, and it may not be the most powerful system ever made, but it still has alot of breath left in her, and that's that. Atari lives through it and all of the other systems that were made by Atari, and you trying to make the system look bad and the developers that try and develope on a "Obsolete System" look bad, well it's gonna' back fire on you. You can bank on that.

Sorry about this all, but it's just my opinion is all. The facts are there too. You all said what you said and did what you did too and you can't change it.


Well, their name is "Jagware" not "Jag-ware" so it's not that strange that they couldn't find it when they tried to look it up. Also i don't know about France but when the Jaguar was released in Sweden there was no "Jag-ware" stuff to buy. Maybe this was exclusive to america? Ofcourse in this day of age when everyone has a broadband connection and acces to all the information one can need, it is most likely that Jaguar fans from all over the world would have read about Jag-ware. But it's still understandable that people don't take that much notice to the name of old Jaguar merchendise that was never available for them to buy back in the days.

Edited by Deranged_desperado, Wed Sep 19, 2007 1:19 PM.


#92 JagChris ONLINE  

JagChris

    River Patroller

  • 2,290 posts
  • Location:Oregon

Posted Wed Sep 19, 2007 1:58 PM

You can think of Falcon in any way you wish. The fact is, however, that it is a PC. Is it an IBM compatible PC? No. But it's a PC nonetheless. So were Amigas, so were STs, Commodores and so too are Macs. PC = Personal Computer, and at the end of the day, that's exactly what Falcon is, and thus the design philosophy is very much different from home video game consoles.


Hi,

People trying to get the best of their machines, using self-generating code, selfmodifying code, syncscroll, white night for giving a faster, a better code than the others, a state of mind, the 'Try to beat dis' was the onll goal !! Now for having a better code they only use faster machines not faster code, that's the difference for me, everybody bought faster PC, that's all.

Regards,

GT Turbo


Then I don't understand why you're wanting to add a 90mhz chip to the Jag. :?:


There's a bit of a problem, though, comparing JagCF and Jag to CT60 and Falcon:

Jaguar is a home video game console. Falcon is a PC.

It's normal for PCs to have add-on cards that vastly change the features of the machine. Very different for home consoles.


Hi Spiffyone,

Please don't say Falcon is a PC, i love my Falcon not my PC.

My Falcon boot in less than 20 secondes with a clock of 95 Mhz, my 2 Gigahertz PC need something like 2 minutes for booting ;)


GT Turbo ;)


I know! WTF is up with that? My 200mhz box with Windows I use to tinker with Jag and BJL takes about 30 seconds to load. It sometimes takes like 3 or so minutes for this 1.5ghz machine with Windows 2000 on it to boot. What the hell is up with that? And its slower to open windows when I click on my drive. OH wait, gotta stop and let the internal fan come on, do a bunch of other stuff...wait for it...wait for it.... ok open root of hd window.

#93 Gorf OFFLINE  

Gorf

    River Patroller

  • 4,633 posts

Posted Thu Sep 20, 2007 11:40 AM

Then I don't understand why you're wanting to add a 90mhz chip to the Jag. :?:



You just dont need all that. It's a new system. Code the Riscs instead of that 68k.

Here...another hint...... stop #$2000

it works wonders....

#94 Pocket OFFLINE  

Pocket

    Dragonstomper

  • 941 posts

Posted Fri Sep 21, 2007 3:47 AM

Now, last but not least, you guys clain to be Jaguar fans, but now you try and say that you have never heard of Jag-ware? You also claim that you can't find it on Google? Are you sure about that? I can find it just fine, and hay, it is even the actual catalogs for them that shipped with the Jaguar system itself! Next thing I'll be hearing is that you have never heard of Cybermorph? Please guys, I notice you don't bring this stuff to JSII anymore because we all see through what you are trying to do. The Jaguar, as it stands, is alive and sell right now, and it may not be the most powerful system ever made, but it still has alot of breath left in her, and that's that. Atari lives through it and all of the other systems that were made by Atari, and you trying to make the system look bad and the developers that try and develope on a "Obsolete System" look bad, well it's gonna' back fire on you. You can bank on that.

Sorry about this all, but it's just my opinion is all. The facts are there too. You all said what you said and did what you did too and you can't change it.


Well, their name is "Jagware" not "Jag-ware" so it's not that strange that they couldn't find it when they tried to look it up. Also i don't know about France but when the Jaguar was released in Sweden there was no "Jag-ware" stuff to buy. Maybe this was exclusive to america? Ofcourse in this day of age when everyone has a broadband connection and acces to all the information one can need, it is most likely that Jaguar fans from all over the world would have read about Jag-ware. But it's still understandable that people don't take that much notice to the name of old Jaguar merchendise that was never available for them to buy back in the days.


There was no Jag-Ware in France either, I think it was the same for Europe

#95 GT Turbo OFFLINE  

GT Turbo

    Moonsweeper

  • Topic Starter
  • 485 posts
  • Location:Alsace, France

Posted Fri Sep 21, 2007 1:05 PM

Then I don't understand why you're wanting to add a 90mhz chip to the Jag. :?:



If for the same price we can give you more power, why saying no ?

If you want to buy a car, and you can get a free option, you tell to NO to the seller ? because it's free ?


GT Turbo Posted Image


(Another pm for supporting the JagCf ;) Thanks ....... )

#96 JagChris ONLINE  

JagChris

    River Patroller

  • 2,290 posts
  • Location:Oregon

Posted Fri Sep 21, 2007 4:51 PM

Then I don't understand why you're wanting to add a 90mhz chip to the Jag. :?:



If for the same price we can give you more power, why saying no ?

If you want to buy a car, and you can get a free option, you tell to NO to the seller ? because it's free ?


GT Turbo Posted Image


(Another pm for supporting the JagCf ;) Thanks ....... )



I can get a Dreamcast for about $30 and an Gamecube for about $100. But those wouldn't be Jaguars anymore.

Your statement makes no sense. You were just berating people for slapping new gfx chip and cpu's in their PC's instead of doing better code. They could make this same argument you make.

#97 Gorf OFFLINE  

Gorf

    River Patroller

  • 4,633 posts

Posted Fri Sep 21, 2007 6:14 PM

Why add power to something that has not been fully tapped?

#98 Atariboy OFFLINE  

Atariboy

    River Patroller

  • 4,986 posts
  • River Raider
  • Location:North Country

Posted Fri Sep 21, 2007 7:41 PM

Why not?

You could expand that argument to anything from larger 2600 cartridge sizes to virtually anything.

I think it's safe to assume that if the Jaguar was ever going to be fully exploited, it would've happened during it's commercial life. Plus, this device won't stop those that want to fully exploit the Jaguar's own power, just because this exists doesn't mean everyone must develop for it.

Why are you against options?

#99 JagChris ONLINE  

JagChris

    River Patroller

  • 2,290 posts
  • Location:Oregon

Posted Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:12 PM

Why not?

You could expand that argument to anything from larger 2600 cartridge sizes to virtually anything.

I think it's safe to assume that if the Jaguar was ever going to be fully exploited, it would've happened during it's commercial life.


Well no, not really. Not at all safe to assume that. But you can if you wish. :)

Was just curious as to why GT expounded on a philosphy he believed in that contradicted his entire push of the CF player as an add on for the Jaguar. Then he contradicted himself yet again in explaining his contradiction.

Why are you against options?



I'm not against it at all. I really don't care. For me personally that add-on is no longer really a Jaguar, and defeats the purpose of owning a Jaguar, unless of course it becamse a fully featured development system for a STOCK Jaguar.

If you're going to program for something like that why not just program for the DC that already has a whole range of development options.

Edited by JagChris, Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:13 PM.


#100 JagChris ONLINE  

JagChris

    River Patroller

  • 2,290 posts
  • Location:Oregon

Posted Fri Sep 21, 2007 10:14 PM

Guys, don't loose your time answering T2Freeker, he's trying to troll this topic with a question wich has already been answered a long time ago. Nothing new. Funny to see him concerned by rights, when you know he has been searching a pirate copy of Gorf.

If you're a real Jagfan, you enjoy when someone brings life in the system. If you don't like it, you just don't buy it. Badmouthing people are not welcome here on AA (spiffyone, I think you weren't concerned by Starcat words)

Back to CF discussion please :)


Hmmm, upon further research, it does appear that the Jag-Ware logo and the JagWare logo are the exact same graphic except with the '-' removed in one. Whoever thought up the name JagWare obviously er, um, borrowed it intentionally.




0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users