[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference hydra::amiga_v1

Title:AMIGA NOTES
Notice:Join us in the *NEW* conference - HYDRA::AMIGA_V2
Moderator:HYDRA::MOORE
Created:Sat Apr 26 1986
Last Modified:Wed Feb 05 1992
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:5378
Total number of notes:38326

2888.0. "Atari news" by BAGELS::BRANNON (Dave Brannon) Sat Sep 02 1989 00:35

The following is a condensed version of a recent conference on Genie
with Sam Tramiel of Atari, I just edited it down to the news items
of Amiga interest (for the full thing read note 583.1 in BOLT::ATARIST
notesfile).  Looks like this could be an interesting Christmas if the
vapors becomes real.     
    
      Items of interest:
      1. the 1040 STE with a palette of 4096 colors and 8 bit PCM stereo
         sound  (this is the rumored "Amiga killer")
      2. the TT, a 68030 system with same as above + more + a single
         VME expansion slot
      3. TOS 1.4 ROMs for $100
    
-Dave         
          
==========================================================================
(C) 1989 by Atari Corporation, GEnie, and the Atari Roundtables.  May
be reprinted only with this notice intact.  The Atari Roundtables on GEnie
are *official* information services of Atari Corporation.

To sign up for GEnie service, call (with modem) 800-638-8369.  Upon
connection type HHH (RETURN after that).  Wait for the U#= prompt.  
Type XJM11877,GEnie and hit RETURN.  The system will prompt you for your
information.
==========================================================================

<JEFF.W> Good evening.  Welcome to the GEnie Atari ST Roundtable's
real time conference featuring Sam Tramiel, president of Atari
Corporation.

<JEFF.W> Mr. Tramiel has just returned from Germany where Atari made
some announcements and displayed, among other things, the Atari TT, a
68030-based system.  He is with us tonight to discuss these
announcements and to answer as many of your questions as time permits.

....

<STRAMIEL> As you all know, we just got back from Dusseldorf.

<STRAMIEL> There, we introduced the STE, TT030/2, and we showed the
Lynx game machine.  There were 35,000 attendees at the three day Atari
Fair.  There were 145 third party software and hardware suppliers
there as well.  It was one hell of a show.

.....

<STRAMIEL> We plan to ship the TT in 4th quarter, 1989.

<STRAMIEL> We are shipping STE to Europe in September.  The US should
see STE's in October.

....

<STRAMIEL> Incidentally, I'd just like to say that TOS 1.4 ROMs are
now available to your dealers.  If you would like the upgrade, go to
your dealer and request it.  If he doesn't have it in stock, he can
get it from Atari.  Cost for the upgrade is up to the dealer;
suggested retail for parts is $100.

....

<[John Hileman] J.HILEMAN1> Hello Mr. Tramiel.  I'd like to ask about
the STE that you mentioned in your opening remarks.  Could you please
tell more about this?

<STRAMIEL> The machine is a 1040 STE, it has a palette of 4096 colors,
8 bit PCM stereo sound, and hardware fine screen scrolling, and support
for light guns, paddles, and extra controllers.  Also Genlock is
supported without the need for internal modification.
....

<STRAMIEL> At the Dusseldorf fair, we saw a lot of serious software,
particularly graphics software.  This runs on all ST products today.
There is no question that in the personal computer market, games are
very important.  The better they are on your machine, the more you
sell.  The STE definitely can be used for great games and other
serious graphic applications.
....

<[Steve] S.JOHNSON10> Should we call you Mr. Tramiel or Sam...or Mr.
President?  The STE has a 4096 color palette, but is it still limited
to 16 in low rez, 4 in med rez and 2 in high rez?  Also, are the new
sound chips in the TT and STE 8 channel? ga

<STRAMIEL> Sam is fine, Steve.  You are right about the STE color
palette.  The sound in STE and TT are 8 bit stereo PCM.  The number of
channels depends on the software.
.....

<K.BRICK> Mr Tramiel,is the STE a 16MHZ Machine with improved
resolution or the same as now and will there be any upgrade path
(special deal) for upgrading a 1040 ST to STE?

<STRAMIEL> The STE runs at the same speed as the ST.  The upgrade path
is to buy an STE.  We do not find it economical for us or for you to
charge a fortune for upgrade boards, like some other "A" companies I
know of.

<[Robert] R.GLOVER3> According to the translated brochure by Ms.
Brumleve, the TT has only one VME slot, and pretty poor graphics
(640x480 in 16 colors), compared to the Amiga (640x400 in 4096 colors),
and Mac II (640x480 in 256 or up to 800,000 colors depending on video
card).  Why only one slot and no easy upgrade path for better graphics?

<STRAMIEL> The information on the nets is not altogether correct.
Seems that some mistakes were made in translation in Dusseldorf.
Comparing the 640x400 Amiga mode to the 640x480 TT mode is misleading.
To get 4096 colors on the Amiga, you need to use HAM mode.  The
equivalent can be done in software on the TT.  Plus, that one slot
you mentioned can take a video card.

<[Robert] R.GLOVER3> Anyway, why not have an internal STE upgrade for
the Mega owners, rather than buying a new machine...?  It couldn't
be that expensive.

<STRAMIEL> The TT has six built in graphics modes:  the three ST modes,
with 4096 colors, and three new modes:  640x480 16 colors, and 320x480
256 colors, both using the 4096 color palette, as well as a very high
1280x960 monochrome resolution.  As well, in the VME slot, we will have
future video boards which will knock your socks off.
.....

<STRAMIEL> Regarding the ATW, we have shipped the first 300 machines
to  Europe, and plan to bring this machine into the US some time
before the end of the year.  I also think it is a great product, but
we must focus on getting the ST going in the US, and if we do too many
things at one time, we will not succeed.

<STRAMIEL> The TT has three chips for serial IO.  Two 68901's, and 
an SCC, which can go much faster than the 68901.

....
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
2888.1BAGELS::BRANNONDave BrannonSat Sep 02 1989 01:1024
    
    I posted .0 not to start a flame war over the "Amiga killer" or
    the TT, but rather, to start a discussion on what features they
    have that the Amiga could be enhanced with.
    
    What is this 8bit PCM stereo sound?  How would it compare to the
    Amiga stereo?
    
    Expanding the palette from 512 to 4096 seems like a good idea to
    me, but limiting it to the same number of color registers (16,4,2)
    seems like they are targeting the Apple IIGS (Sam also mentions
    the "A" company later on in a reference to expensive upgrade
    boards).  Hmmm... how does the 8bit PCM compare to the Ensoniqs
    stereo in the IIGS?
    
    I kind of expected that they would try for a palette greater
    that 4096, maybe something like VGA's 256,000 or TI's 16mil.
    Guess that would have raised the price too much.
    
    I didn't see any mention of a native multitasking OS, did see a mention
    on usenet that they are working on UNIX for the TT, but then
    so is CBM for their 68030 board.
    
    -Dave
2888.2LEDS::ACCIARDISat Sep 02 1989 04:2434
    
    Re: The STE
    
    I don't think this machine qualifies as an Amiga killer.  They've
    enlarged the color palette to what is now an acceptable range for a
    home computer.  The sound chip sounds like the long-awaited 'Amy' chip
    that was promised four years ago.  Even with these improvements, I
    don't see it as offering more value or usefullness than an Amiga 500,
    given the Amiga's edge in sophisticated built-in multitasking system
    software.
    
    As far as targeting the Apple IIGS, the current ST already IS far
    superior to the GS (IMHO) in price, speed, display quality, software
    base, aesthetics, etc.  In order to steal sales from Apple, they'll
    have to advertise, advertise, advertise, advertise.  Atari has a large
    image problem in the US (probably even worse than Commodore's) and will
    have to work very hard at building a distribution and support network. 
    The ST has always been a nice system for the money, and it's pained me
    to see a pile of shit like the IIGS (again, IMHO) get all the press.
    
    Re: The TT
    
    I think this may be a case of too little, too late.  Any new machines
    from Atari or Commodore that would compete with the Mac IIcx or the
    386/VGA machines needs to go above and beyond what is considered the
    lowest common denominator; ie, 4096 colors can't cut it in a VGA world
    of 256,000 colors.  16 MHz is ho-hum with 33 MHz 386 systems shipping
    in droves, and '486 systems ready to go out the door.
    
    Price was not mentioned, but it might make a nice university Unix box.
    
    Ed.
    
                                                                        
2888.3Think twice before buying atariCIM1NI::POWERSI Dream Of Wires - G. NumanTue Sep 05 1989 13:3317
    RE: < Note 2888.2 by LEDS::ACCIARDI >

      I agree with you Ed, especially on the TT end of things, 16Mhz is just
    ho hum these days.  I would also like to point out that these were just
    announcements, you can't buy any of this yet, and who knows when you will
    be able to.  I point out that atari is well known for announcing things
    and never delivering.  You might actually see the TT, but I wouldn't
    count on buying it expecting atari to release u**x for it.  In my opinion
    it will never show.  It has taken 4 years to get an upgrade to fix a
    couple bugs in the ST O/S.  How are they ever gonna support an O/S that is
    much more sophisticated than TOS.    

    Bill Powers

                                                                        

2888.4life has been too easy for CBM latelyBAGELS::BRANNONDave BrannonTue Sep 05 1989 16:1828
    
    re: .2
    
    according to the claims I've seen on Usenet, Atari is going to make
    a big push in the US this fall.  And the technology used isn't rocket
    science, so it is possible they could ship this fall.
    
    I'd love to see them go after the IIGS, but I suspect the target
    for the 1040STE will be the Amiga 500/1meg.  Remember the old battles
    vs. the ST?  That didn't have stereo or a palette of 4096.  Ever
    try to explain the value of a multitasking OS to a first time computer
    user?
    
    That TT will give the A2000 serious competition if it is priced
    cheap.  Running a single tasking OS on a 68030 w/2Meg is almost
    a sin.  But then again, think about how many 80386 systems with
    2Meg are still running MS-DOS.
    
    re: the u**** word
    Atari has already got a sort of unix for the ST line, something
    called IRIDUS (or something spelled close to that).
    But the rumors so far sound like Atari is working on their own
    unix.  That reminds me, Commodore seems to be taking a long time
    to get their unix out the door.  The 68020 boards have been shipping
    for a while now.... Doesn't sound like it is easy to port unix and
    also add support for custom hardware.
    
    -Dave
2888.5??LEDS::ACCIARDITue Sep 05 1989 22:285
    
    I thought you could just 'buy' Unix from AT&T or whomever is holding the
    license these days??
    
    Ed.
2888.6UNIT from ATT....Yes and No.......AV8OR::GERBERFor more info, call: 800/555-1212Wed Sep 06 1989 15:373
	Yes you can buy UNIX from ATT, however, if the machine you want it for
is not supported by ATT, it does you no good without a lot of programming.  This
is why many companies sell variants of UNIX.
2888.7atari never supports thier computersGUCCI::HERBThu Sep 07 1989 01:294
    WHen is the amiga 3000 coming??? It will blow them all away!! right??
    
    mat
    
2888.8Photon torpedeos, FIRE! ;-)FRAMBO::BALZERChristian Balzer DTN:785-1029Thu Sep 07 1989 06:3717
    Re: .7
    
    If the new CBM management is any good, the next Amiga with a new
    motherboard design (32 bit) will not see the streets until late
    1990. Why? Very simple, they can't possibly design such a thingie
    including a new 32 bit custom chip set in less time without including
    some major gotchas, like a revision A vs. B evolution...
    An Amiga 2000 with a 68030 card like GVP's or the A2630 is if it
    comes to processing power completly sufficient to blow any Apple
    or Atari machine of the near future out of the water.
    
    But since CBM management usually sucks dead gerbils thru a dirty
    garden hose, be prepared for a completely messed up A3000 or A3500.
    
    Regards,
    
    <CB>
2888.9LEDS::ACCIARDIThu Sep 07 1989 11:2510
    
    Just out of curiosity, how difficult would it be to increase the Amiga
    color palette in a compatible kind of way?  I assume all those nifty
    palette tools built into application software wouldn't work properly...
    
    For that matter, can Atari expect major incompatibilities with an
    enlarged palette?
    
    Ed.
    
2888.10ya BetFRAMBO::BALZERChristian Balzer DTN:785-1029Thu Sep 07 1989 11:5710
    Re: .9
    
    If done properly (there's been a discussion of this on UseNet recently)
    an old palette tool wouldn't be sufficient, but still functional.
    
    Ya can bet that old Atari software will face the same or worse 
    difficulties.
    
    Regards,
    <CB>
2888.11Standardize!LEDS::ACCIARDIThu Sep 07 1989 12:535
    
    Maybe that's a good argument for a standard palette requestor included
    in the system software, like the rumored file requestor.
    
    Ed.
2888.12I hope they didn't start two months agoTLE::RMEYERSRandy MeyersThu Sep 07 1989 20:1518
RE: .8

>    If the new CBM management is any good, the next Amiga with a new
>    motherboard design (32 bit) will not see the streets until late
>    1990. Why? Very simple, they can't possibly design such a thingie
>    including a new 32 bit custom chip set in less time

Actually, I think that "late 1990" is impossible if they only began
during the management shakeup.  However, there have been hints that
they began the process a while back.

>    But since CBM management usually sucks dead gerbils thru a dirty
>    garden hose, be prepared for a completely messed up A3000 or A3500.

I've been afraid of a 68030 machine with interfaces to the current
custom ship set.  That qualifies as messed up to me.  (A new 32 bit
chip set with 16 million colors, 256 color registers, support for 
1200 by 1200 pixels seems about right, though.)
2888.13BAGELS::BRANNONDave BrannonFri Sep 08 1989 17:4915
    re: futures
    
    why a new chip set?  How about evolving the OS to support graphics
    boards so that it isn't tied so tightly to one chip set design.
    By the late 1990s the Amiga will be dead unless they upgrade the
    graphics long before that (I regard the Enhanced Chip Set as a
    bandaid, not a fix for this problem).
    
    That 32 bit custom chip set could be put on an A2000 graphics board.
    (32 bit wide access to it's own memory, 16 bit wide access to the
    A2000 memory.)
    
    -Dave
    
    -Dave
2888.14Because other graphics chips wouldn't work...TLE::RMEYERSRandy MeyersSat Sep 09 1989 00:2619
Re: .13

>    why a new chip set?  How about evolving the OS to support graphics
>    boards so that it isn't tied so tightly to one chip set design.

The problem is that the Amiga OS and Amiga programs have been written
with the promise that certain graphics operations must be available.
There's a reason why Mac and Clone owners don't grab the screen
drag bar  and pull it down to reveal the screen underneath: the hardware
doesn't support a screen underneath.

Imagine explaining that some program doesn't work because the fancy
blitter miniterm stuff used by the application isn't supported by
your graphics board.

The Amiga people built a machine with some fancy graphics processors
and then designed their system to make full use of them.  This tied
the Amiga to a specific graphics architecture just as choosing a
68000 tied them to Motorola for CPU design.
2888.15NOTIBM::MCGHIEThank Heaven for small Murphys !Sat Sep 09 1989 09:0714
    I  thought it was a fact of life in the computer industry that sooner
    or later any particular system etc would become obsoleted. Just look at
    our own product range over the last few years.
    
    On the other hand, there are a number of smaller systems (like the MAcs
    and PCs etc) that have been around a number of years and will be around for
    sometime yet. I am hoping the Amiga will fall into that category. IF
    you want the latest and greatest in advances graphics or otherwise I
    suspect it will require system replacement. I bought an Apple II+ back
    in '81 and eventually 'upgraded' to the Amiga.
    
    Regards
    	Mike
                                    
2888.16No CHIPS, no trips... ,-)FRAMBO::BALZERChristian Balzer DTN:785-1029Mon Sep 11 1989 06:2213
    Re: .13, .14
    
    Yeah, as stated in .14, an Amiga without a set of custom chips that
    supports all the features that we have today, won't be an Amiga
    anymore...
    If CBM doesn't fail to develop new version of that stuff (or
    supplementary chips for use with "common" graphic chips) the Amiga
    will be able to keep it's competitive edge WHILST remaining compatible.
    Anything else will be a disaster....
    
    Regards,
    
    <CB>
2888.17Multi user?CAM::ARENDTHarry Arendt CAM::Mon Sep 11 1989 12:2416
    
    
    Hi y'all,
    
    	It would seem that given that this machine is a multitasking
    and possibly multi-user machine wouldn't it be neat if you had a
    plug in board which would provide the graphics output, keyboard
    handling and task handling for another user?  This way one hardware
    platform could handle multiple users.  Each card would have it's
    own graphics memory and chips as well as keyboard handler chips,
    and possibly it's own processor.
    
    	I would think that multi user home machines would be nice.
    
    Harry
    
2888.18ULTRA::KINDELBill Kindel @ BXB1Mon Sep 11 1989 14:3113
    Re .17:
    
>   	It would seem that given that this machine is a multitasking
    
    Since when?  Did TOS 1.4 make some great leap forward that I missed?
    
>   ... wouldn't it be neat if you had a plug in board which would provide
>   the graphics output, keyboard handling and task handling for another
>   user?
    
    By the time you do all that, it strikes me as more reasonable to
    network a bunch of small (possibly heterogeneous) systems around a
    file server.
2888.19Bogus reference...FRAMBO::BALZERChristian Balzer DTN:785-1029Mon Sep 11 1989 15:2012
    Re: .18
    
    Uh, Bill, I believe Harry is refering to an non-existent A3000 which
    was discussed later in this note.
    
    I would like to see both options, a nice, fast and well supported
    network AND the ability to plug more CPUs into the main machine
    (a la transputer...)
    
    Regards,
    
    <CB>
2888.20BAGELS::BRANNONDave BrannonMon Sep 11 1989 16:1524
    re: tied to hardware
    
    Why assume only the Amiga chipset makes pull down screens
    possible?  The reason you see it so much on the Amiga is because
    they put in pull down screens as part of the OS.  Imagine how
    often you would see it if every application had to implement it.
    
    Of course, they could put it in the Amiga because they had hardware
    to support doing it with low system overhead.  But that was due
    to having a display list available, all they needed to do was 
    to manipulate the list.  Display lists aren't new, my Atari 400
    has one, other systems use raster interrupts on a per scan line
    basis to achieve a pseudo-display list.
    
    The point I'm trying to make is that the mapping of system graphics
    calls is a function of the OS.  If the hardware support doesn't
    exist, it is possible to emulate some particular behavior in software.
    Or by making that behavior do nothing (heard rumors that the some
    of the new graphics modes in the Enhanced Chip set do not allow
    pull down screens).  Each application shouldn't have to worry about
    what graphics board or chipset is attached.
    
    -Dave
    
2888.21The question is "How hard to emulate Amiga graphics"TLE::RMEYERSRandy MeyersTue Sep 19 1989 19:1555
Re: .20

>(heard rumors that the some of the new graphics modes in the Enhanced
>Chip set do not allow pull down screens).

I haven't heard any rumors to that effect.  However, Commodore has stated
that the Viking and Hedley monitors (1008 by 800 resolution) do not allow
pull down screens.  Since those monitors include a frame buffer that
pastes several (6?) normal Amiga screens together to display as one large
screen, I can understand the restriction.

>    The point I'm trying to make is that the mapping of system graphics
>    calls is a function of the OS.  If the hardware support doesn't
>    exist, it is possible to emulate some particular behavior in software.
>    Or by making that behavior do nothing ...

The problem is such a graphics board may support 60% of the current Amiga
graphics perfectly, and support 20% of the remaining Amiga graphics poorly
(slowly or with small differences), and fail to support the remaining 20%
of Amiga graphic capabilities at all.

Sounds like the machine is 60% to 80% of an Amiga to me.

Consider the following: suppose the next Amiga didn't support HAM mode
at all.  How many applications would now be useless?  How many picture
files would need conversion to a different image format?

>   Each application shouldn't have to worry about
>    what graphics board or chipset is attached.

I agree.  However, there are two ways of doing that: hardware compatibility
or software compatibility.  Commodore has already painted itself into
a corner by promising hardware register-level compatibility.

Commodore did get one major benefit from standardizing the hardware:
all Amigas support all modes (except for extra-halfbrite), and program
developers don't have to worry about "I can't use HAM because only 40%
of all Amiga graphics boards support it."

My point is this:  Even without the promise of register-level compatibility,
Commodore has provided a certain number of "weird" features: copper lists,
HAM mode, extra-halfbrite mode, etc.  I suspect that the requirement of
emulating all of these features well enough that the resulting machine
could be called an Amiga is very difficult, verging on impossible.

I certainly wouldn't mind being proved wrong, and seeing third party
graphics boards produced for the Amiga.  It's just that I am skeptical
that it would work as well for the Amiga as it has for clones and Macs:
Clones and Macs never promised much in the way of unusual graphics.

Personally, I think that Commodore took on a big job by going with 
proprietary graphics chips.  Is Commodore up to providing the next
several generations of graphics chips for the Amiga?  I believe that
they will be able to do a 32 bit version suitable for the next generation;
I don't know if they'll be able to do the generation after that.
2888.22AMIGA2::MCGHIEThank Heaven for small Murphys !Wed Sep 20 1989 06:359
    I remember reading about the Apple IIGS in byte and how Apple managed
    to get a very high level of compatiblity even with the fairly major
    change in architecture.
    
    Admittedly the Amiga is a much more complex system to start with but
    still...
    
    Regards
    	Mike
2888.23...FRAMBO::BALZERChristian Balzer DTN:785-1029Wed Sep 20 1989 07:018
    re: .21
    
    The Viking or A2024 monitors generate the picture from 4 640x400
    frames...
    
    Regards,
    
    <CB>
2888.24BAGELS::BRANNONDave BrannonWed Sep 20 1989 15:1019
    re:.22
    
    Computer Shopper has an article on the new genlock board for the
    ][GS, says that the board has the custom graphics chips on it (same
    as the ones in the GS), and wonders if IIe owners could somehow
    access those chips to get GS graphic modes.
    
    I wonder if CBM could do the same thing... there was talk a while
    ago about chaining together multiple custom chips to get more color
    registers, etc.
    
    re:.21 & .23
    So CBM has already declared that there is a graphic mode that doesn't
    support 100% of all the standard functions... What happens when
    a naive user assumes he can pull down the 1000x800 screen?
    Does it ignore him, give him a "nope, can't do that" message, or
    what?
    
    -Dave
2888.25Backwards CompatibilityTLE::RMEYERSRandy MeyersWed Sep 20 1989 23:5816
Re: .24

>    So CBM has already declared that there is a graphic mode that doesn't
>    support 100% of all the standard functions... What happens when
>    a naive user assumes he can pull down the 1000x800 screen?
>    Does it ignore him, give him a "nope, can't do that" message, or
>    what?

I assume that the user is just ignored: that's how I'd implement it.

Of course, this isn't a compatibility problem as new graphics modes
don't need to provide all the capabilities of old graphics modes, just
so long as the old graphics modes are still available.

The Hedley does support the old graphics modes.  It will even function as
a FlickerFixer when doing interlace.
2888.264 to 6 screens combined by the hedleyTLE::RMEYERSRandy MeyersThu Sep 21 1989 00:0513
Re .23

>    The Viking or A2024 monitors generate the picture from 4 640x400
>    frames...

It not quite so simple.  As I remember it, it supports different screen
rates (4 to 6) out of the Amiga, as to trade off screen update time against 
memory bandwidth.  There is a update the screen 15 times a second
versus 10 times a second mode (the video refresh is much higher, of
course).

As I remember, the 15 times a second mode uses 100% of the chip memory
DMA bandwidth.
2888.27Some more Hedley stuff..FRAMBO::BALZERChristian Balzer DTN:785-1029Thu Sep 21 1989 06:5413
    Re: .26
    
    Yup, you're absolutly right Randy. However it's much easier to figure
    a 1280x800 screen generated from four 640x400 frames than the wierdo
    other refresh rate the Hedley supports (I believe it was 12.5 Hz).
    While it's true that the faster refresh eats all that the Amy has
    to give, it's no more strain than a 640x400x4 hires interlaced screen.
    The effects when crossing a frame border can be (depending on the
    refresh rate) very, uh, interesting.. ;-)
    
    Regards,
    
    <CB>
2888.28I almost was going to get a GSGUCCI::HERBWed Sep 27 1989 00:105
    The reason that GS is soo compatible is cause It almost has a apple2
    built in!!
    
    matt
    
2888.29moving targetNAC::BRANNONvalue addedFri Oct 06 1989 14:1412
    re .-several
    Look at the all the baggage the IBM VGA has to carry along to be
    backwards compatible with the MDA, CGA, and EGA.
    Some clone VGA's even added backwards compatibility for Hercules
    graphics. 
    
    The IBM VGA claims to be BIOS and register level backwards compatible
    so the technology of how to support wildly different graphics standards
    on the same board seems to be fairly well understood.
    
    dennis