Re: TI-H: What's wrong with hw2?
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: TI-H: What's wrong with hw2?
It isn't like TI has deliberately been thinking "now we should stop grayscale"
and changed the hardware because of that. It is more like they have done certain
changes to among other things, increase security, (for them), for flash apps and
stuff, and as a side-effect, grayscale became hard/impossible
What you do, when you do grayscale is that you hook an interupt that occours
quite often, preferably in sync with the screen, and then changes from where the
lcd-controller reads its data for what to display on the screen. So if the pixel
isn't set in any "plane" as the two datapositions is called, the pixel seems
white, is it set in both, it seems black, and if it is set in one of them, it
will become gray. If you then let the lcd-controller fetch the data more often
from one of the planes, then if the pixel is set in that plane, it will appear
darker on the screen.
The problems, as I have heard, is 1. You cant change the place where the lcd
controller fetches its data, as you want, only on specific positions. This is
not a big problem though. and 2. You have to, on hw2, do some special thing and
copy the screen to it self or something, to trigger the lcd controller to
update. I don't know the details of this, but it slows down quite a lot, so
instead of greyscale, the screen will flicker.
but yes there is possibly a way to do it.
It is not possible to do as it was done before. the routines must change quite a
lot.
I myselft don't own any hw2 calc, nor do I know anyone that live close, that
does. So I can't perform any tests on it.
Most good programmers already have a hw1 calc, so they can't either.
Or they don't care much.
We'll just have to wait and see :)
//Olle
Jeff_C wrote:
>
> I'm absolutely agree with you when talking about the programming on the
> motorola 68k processor itself. In fact, I shouldn't emphasize on the
> "syntax", I should have mention "algorithm" since we view the circuitry
> + microprocessor that make up this calc as a whole (it was my fault
> though).
References: