Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

SVGA?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • SVGA?

    Hello

    I've been using the uVGA for a few years now and the SVGA 800x600 mode has always been on the way. Is the SVGA mode still going to be implemented? if so can you give a date for when we can expect it to happen? This is now an urgent requirement for my project .

    cheers
    Simon

  • #2


    If 4D doesn't intend to make good on the "coming soon" claim, then please remove it. The last firmware release was 2007, according to the store, and there is still no sign of the promised 800x600 firmware upgrade.

    4D has some great products, don't spoil the MOJO by broken promises. If you can't get the 800x600 mode to work, then tell us. Please stop blowing sunshine up our backsides about a feature that was advertised as "coming soon" and it's already been a third of a decade since that promise was made.

    Comment


    • #3


      I love the 4D hardware and overall concept, but it is pretty painful waiting for that "one" firmware feature you really need to come out.....
      I always thought that 4D would do much, much better by open-sourcing the firmware, and letting the users improve the functionality of the product......Look at the parallax propeller forum.....some of the best features to be implemented have come from users.
      4D could always maintain an "official " PMMC, with the understanding that company support (ie resources) are only available for said PMMC. Internally, 4D could pick and choose user submitted code to incorporate into the official PMMC.
      _______________
      Best Regards,
      Howard

      Comment


      • #4


        Hi Howard, I'm sure if you have any ideas for functions that are not implemented that are a 'must have' that 4D and other forum users would be very interested to hear your suggestions? The whole idea of 4DGL/PmmC concept is to have the basic graphics functions and language framework, and let the users build their own functions. Of course there will always be cases where the performance may be increased or 4DGL code size reduced by having other key function internal to the PmmC, so any input is most welcome.
        Regards,
        Dave

        Comment


        • #5


          Hi Meldavia,
          I think that is the issue...... What User 1 considers "must have" is not what user 2 considers "must have"......
          For example, FAT file support. Personally, I don't use it since it is slower than raw reads, and for me performance is key. But I'm sure other users think it is the best thing since sliced bread.....
          In one thread we had discussed being able to set the uSD sector size such that sectors smaller than 512 could be written / read. As you know, doing a full sector read is much faster vs doing a byte per byte once you exceed a few bytes. What would I love to be able to do? Set the sector size to some arbitrary value (even if word or 4 byte aligned), and read the uSD data into a small (not 256) array. Read a screen area into an array, modify the array, then dump the array back to the screen.
          Can these be done already? Reading / writing the screen can, using get/put pixel, but are fairly slow. Sector size? Not that I know of.....
          Are these features that people are scrambling for? Probably not. Except for me. Which is my point. But where one user finds it useful, you can be sure others will as well. The point is that there are many users who are willing to add value to the 4D product line.
          _______________
          Best Regards,
          Howard

          Comment


          • #6


            I think most of what you have mentioned can be achieved, but not by changing sector sizes. And i'm not sure that this would be such a good idea as all the new HC cards are sector aligned, and there is now no byte addressing methods other than reading linearly from the start of a sector, and sectors are now a fixed 512 bytes. But if you prefer RAW uSD mode, I agree that Goldelox has some real nifty functions like that which were inherent to its simplicity, so good suggestion for Picaso to have the same low level ability added the the media_ function group. But as far as screen capture / modify / replace goes, these sort of functions are available using FAT16 and when using HC cards these functions are are quite fast, and probably only about 5% slower than rolling your own direct sector accessing methods. Have a look at the demo video and watch the AVIDEMO part of it and it will give you an idea of speed of playing simultaneous video's etc. Also the TETRIS game demo's the way a popup can save the screen underneath, and replace when finished which gives you an idea of screen save/restore access times. But yeah, good idea to port the raw blitting functions that Goldelox has over to Picaso for people who prefer using RAW uSD methods.
            Regards,
            Dave

            Comment


            • #7


              Does a sector read have to read in an entire sector? I wouldn't mind a sector size of 512, and filling my data into the first 40-50 bytes of each sector and throwing away the rest. Space-wise inefficient, but hey SD cards are cheap.....
              uSD_RdSector(Dest, Length)uSD_WrSector(Source,Length)
              Perhaps even better, would be:uSD_ReadArray(Dest, Length, Offset) : The PMMC code begins reading the sector data from the start of the sector as required. But only the data from Offset to Offset+Length is returned.......
              As for HC cards, what is the upper size limit we can use? Is it still 2 GB?
              Nice rotating gears on the AVI demo......Didn't I do that?
              _______________
              Best Regards,
              Howard

              Comment


              • #8


                Could we please get back to the original topic?

                I'd really like this SVGA question answered. Why don't we have 800x600 by now? Is it REALLY coming? What's the hold up? When can we expect it?

                Comment


                • #9


                  We are very sorry, 800x600 is/was not feasible on the original uVGA.

                  The uVGA II has 800x480 as one of its default resolutions.

                  You can configure it as high as 800 x 519.

                  We hoped to be shipping in January, but we are STILL waiting for one of the main chips from a supplier.

                  We really and truly hope to be shipping, at the latest, in 4 weeks.
                  Mark

                  Comment


                  • #10


                    OK, thank you for the honest reply. Now I must ask, "so how come it is still being sold with the following claims?":

                    1> "Tiny VGA Graphics Controller for QVGA, VGA, SVGA" (no, not SVGA)

                    2> "Intelligent and fully integrated VGA/SVGA Display Graphics Controller." (no, not SVGA)

                    3> "800x600, to be implemented in the near future" (No, apparently not, that's the next model, not this one, and only 800x519)

                    4> "512K bytes of onboard SRAM for video memory allows 8 pages for QVGA, 2 pages for VGA and 1 page for SVGA resolutions" (not entirely true here either as there is no SVGA for this model. In fact, the next model will only do a maximum of 800x519 so all of these SVGA claims are wrong)

                    Once again, this sort of deceptive advertising goes completely contrary to my experience with 4DSystems. I do hope 4D does the honest and honorable thing and come clean on their products page and not just here in the forums.

                    I, for one, wanted 800x600, expected 800x600, as it was promised for years, (under the idea of a firmware upgrade) and got nothing but 640x480. The only way I am going to even approach that number is to buy a new chip that can only almost do it.

                    I am not trying to be a troll, but I am hoping you get my point here. 4D does make great stuff, I am just perplexed at this.

                    Comment


                    • #11


                      Rich,
                      It's not meant to be deceptive and that is not what we practice, the product page has been up for a long time and it should have been revised, which it is now. The User Manual will be updated in the next couple of days.
                      Atilla

                      Comment


                      • #12


                        Once again, thank you for your honesty. I had a feeling that 4D wasn't trying to be deceptive, but it was deceptive nevertheless. I am satisfied with the resolution to it though.

                        Comment


                        • #13


                          it is very great if 4D systems made the resolution to 800 x 600 ,I am waiting for the stuf


                          thank to 4d Systems made the stuf


                          Regards


                          Herru

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X