Maybe you should get a little more educated about the graphics programs written for the TI & Geneve that use the bitmap graphics of the 9938/58. And you have admitted to knowing next to nothing about the Geneve. Your reply is your opinion,
It is my opinion, and I choose to base it on the fact that the Geneve is not a "TI" and I compare the lack of anything that takes advantage of the 9938/58 to what the MSX2 did do and does have. Actually, the Geneve should have blown the MSX2 out of the water.
which has done absolutely nothing to convince me to change my observation. 'Deficiencies' is the correct word - lack of vram and inability to support all the 9938/58 registers being the 2 main deficiencies of the F18A.
A deficiency? Compared to what? The F18A is a 9918A replacement, not a 9938 replacement. The F18A actually does support the same number of registers as the 9938, but I chose to implement them in a better way. I look at all of the 9938's hacks and shortcomings (the mode complexity, limited sprites, limited colors, fixed instructions instead of a GPU, no horz scroll, limited scroll, no video pages to support scrolling, no tile attributes, no tile over sprite priority, no counters, no random number generator, no sprite linking, etc.) as deficiencies.
I'm sure it's a neat little device, and many people will use it and enjoy it, but it's not for me - I'm too used to the 9938's in my TI & Geneve to take a step back.
I'm sure the Geneve is a neat little device too, but I'd be willing to bet there are now more F18As out there than there are Geneves. And the F18A is available for those who want one.
In fact, I was considering buying one just to check it out, but have nothing to plug it in to.
Then you don't have a "TI".