bsnes v0.039 released

kick · Post by **kick** » Sat Feb 28, 2009 7:31 pm

doktor_kris wrote:
Haneda wrote:This isn't solely a PC monitor. It's actually an LCD TV; it has VGA, HDMI, Component, S-Video, RGB, AV SCART and composite inputs. This image is one of my PC desktop (VGA).

I'm aware of that,but there's another type of Samsung computer monitors with the same connections being advertised as LCD TVs (i.e. the Touch of color T... HD series)

Haneda · Post by **Haneda** » Sat Feb 28, 2009 8:02 pm

kick wrote:Is this your display:

http://www.samsung.com/uk/consumer/deta ... A456C2DXXU

Yes, that is the one (or at least, I think; if I'm not wrong, there are actually different versions of the same model; looking at the specs on that page though, it certainly does seem to be the same one that I have).

Looks like a 768p LCD TV,not a computer monitor. It has a normal CCFL backlight.

LCD TVs are different kind of beast. They have higher-quality panels, intelligent dynamic contrast and additional image processing chips.

Please go back and read my previous comment 2 before this one:

I wrote:This isn't solely a PC monitor. It's actually an LCD TV; it has VGA, HDMI, Component, S-Video, RGB, AV SCART and composite inputs. This image is one of my PC desktop (VGA).

It's a HDTV that also sports one VGA input. Also, 768p? No, it just supports a maximum (VGA) resolution of 1360x768. It supports 480i, 480p, 576i, 576p, 720p, 1080i and 1080p inputs; it can output 480i, 480p, 576i, 576p, 1080i or 720p; everything is scaled to 1360x768.
That is via non-VGA adapter. Via VGA, it supports (if I recall) 720x400, 640x480, 800x600, 1024x768, and 1360x768.

Haneda · Post by **Haneda** » Sat Feb 28, 2009 8:17 pm

LCD TVs are different kind of beast. They have higher-quality panels, intelligent dynamic contrast and additional image processing chips.

This makes no sense to me. LCD TV --> LCD. LCD Monitor --> LCD. Same technology, so why can't the case also be true for regular LCD PC monitors?

Gleasonator · Post by **Gleasonator** » Sat Feb 28, 2009 8:31 pm

I spent like five hours playing Earthbound yesterday, saved the game numerous times, then shut down my PC (the normal way, start > shut down) but had left bsnes open.

Today I opened it and the save was old; every thing I'd done while the window was open is gone. ;_; I assume it writes to the save file when the application is closed, and maybe by forcing it closed it didn't have time to write it?

Tallgeese · Post by **Tallgeese** » Sat Feb 28, 2009 9:30 pm

Haneda wrote:
LCD TVs are different kind of beast. They have higher-quality panels, intelligent dynamic contrast and additional image processing chips.
This makes no sense to me. LCD TV --> LCD. LCD Monitor --> LCD. Same technology, so why can't the case also be true for regular LCD PC monitors?

Because there are different standards for manufacturing TVs and Monitors in the same company.

FirebrandX · Post by **FirebrandX** » Sat Feb 28, 2009 9:41 pm

Haneda, the only problem with your display is the max native res. That's pretty low for PC monitor standards, and on the cheaper end for HDTV specs. Ideally, you want 1920x1080 for both displays. You can get away with 1680x1050 for PCs, but for blu-ray movie viewing, its better to have the full-on 1080p native res.

Haneda · Post by **Haneda** » Sat Feb 28, 2009 10:00 pm

FirebrandX wrote:Haneda, the only problem with your display is the max native res. That's pretty low for PC monitor standards, and on the cheaper end for HDTV specs. Ideally, you want 1920x1080 for both displays. You can get away with 1680x1050 for PCs, but for blu-ray movie viewing, its better to have the full-on 1080p native res.

I can justify my choice. You can watch a blu-ray movie in 720p and it will still look good anyway.
1) I'm not much interested in watching blu-ray movies; maybe I may rent a movie or two every now and then, ok, but I'm much more likely to download some crappy-quality/standard-DVD-quality version off a torrent network, or buy a much-cheaper DVD off of Amazon.
2) I only got the TV so I could play my PS3 games in HD via HDMI. I understand that 1080p is worthless in this regard, given that most PS3 games will output natively in 720p, where anything higher would only be upscaled. Some PS3 games only output natively in 480p/576p.
(I only use this display to play games on; in addition to my PC, I have connected the following consoles; SNES, PS1, PS2, PS3, Xbox, Sega Saturn) I rarely watch actual TV
3) I wasn't willing to spend any more than £300 when going out looking for a new TV. I also didn't have more than that.
4) Anything bigger than 26 inch would not fit very nicely on my desk; my TV is wider than my desk as it is, so anything like a 42 inch would probably be a stupid idea.

1080p output would be nice, but it's only a luxury. 720p still looks absolutely fantastic. Right now, 1080p isn't in wide use, and won't be for some time; 720p is the standard if we're talking about HD.
If 1080p didn't exist, my TV would be very high-end. Increase it's size then add 1080p supports, and it would be top-of-the-range; it's a really good TV, all it lacks is native 1080p support (it can accept 1080p inputs for compatibility reasons, but it will downscale that to 720p).

My last PC monitor (note, only a PC monitor; one VGA input, and this was when I was using an SDTV to play PS3 games on) could pull off a resolution of 1280x1024 @75Hz (it was a Dell E196FP). I still have that monitor, but rather than have two monitors in this (very small) room, I thought "why not make things more convenient and just have everything connected to the TV". Sure, my old PC monitor had a higher resolution, but I'm not at all bothered.

There was an old 2GHz Pentium 4 computer lying around unused... I plugged in my old monitor, a keyboard, a mouse, some headphones, and an ethernet cable, then installed Debian Linux on it; that PC is now used by my brother to do school-based work on, so my old monitor (and the old PC that was lying around) has not gone to waste.

I can't see the difference between 1080p and 720p on anything lower than 42 inch anyway. Even then, 720p still looks great.
1080p is like sugar in a bowl of wheatabix; it only makes it a little bit better.

sweener2001 · Post by **sweener2001** » Sun Mar 01, 2009 12:04 am

Haneda wrote: If 1080p didn't exist, my TV would be very high-end.

ha

stupidest argument, ever

Haneda · Post by **Haneda** » Sun Mar 01, 2009 12:24 am

sweener2001 wrote:
Haneda wrote: If 1080p didn't exist, my TV would be very high-end.
ha

stupidest argument, ever

Why? That wasn't even an argument; I was pointing out how it's a good display, except for the lack of 1080p output.

What's so retarded about that? You're just attacking me for no good reason.

Post by **grinvader** » Sun Mar 01, 2009 12:48 am

It's good, except it's not good.

You're using Saturn-grade logic, which is why he's laughing.
So am I.

Haneda · Post by **Haneda** » Sun Mar 01, 2009 12:59 am

grinvader wrote:It's good, except it's not good.

You're using Saturn-grade logic, which is why he's laughing.
So am I.

WTF are you babbling about old man? All I meant is that it's good at what it does. It's like a small peice of nice candy.

crappy analogy:
Shit candy -- shit
large good candy -- good + 1
good candy -- good

gllt · Post by **gllt** » Sun Mar 01, 2009 1:03 am

Haneda wrote:
grinvader wrote:It's good, except it's not good.

You're using Saturn-grade logic, which is why he's laughing.
So am I.
WTF are you babbling about old man? All I meant is that it's good at what it does. It's like a small peice of nice candy.

crappy analogy:
Shit candy -- shit
large good candy -- good + 1
good candy -- good

direct your argument at sweentroll, grin was just having some lulz like I would've, except that I'm tired of seeing all the people yell at you because it takes up precious space where something I'd rather look at could be, like real lulz or something relevant to the thread

but grin can laugh at all of us he is sekrit master

Haneda · Post by **Haneda** » Sun Mar 01, 2009 1:06 am

I'm beginning to remember why I left this place; this place is full of assholes.

But I remember that trolls are not to be fed, so I'm alright this time around.

gllt · Post by **gllt** » Sun Mar 01, 2009 1:09 am

If you want to call them that, if you know them well enough they're pretty awesome.

You should use IRC more, it would work you into the community faster.

Also on the internet, don't care what anyone says. Works in real life too guise.

Panzer88 · Post by **Panzer88** » Sun Mar 01, 2009 1:23 am

actually sweener had a good point.

if my computer wasn't a piece of shit, it'd be good.

see what I did there?

also see this test to see how most LCDs fall short

http://hdguru.com/will-you-see-all-the- ... usive/287/

think you are getting all 720 lines of resolution when playing that ps3? chances are you aren't.

doktor_kris · Post by **doktor_kris** » Sun Mar 01, 2009 2:22 am

Haneda wrote:I'm beginning to remember why I left this place

You left this place? T'was more like you had a ## hours break, really.

kick · Post by **kick** » Sun Mar 01, 2009 3:44 am

Panzer88 wrote:see this test to see how most LCDs fall short

http://hdguru.com/will-you-see-all-the- ... usive/287/

think you are getting all 720 lines of resolution when playing that ps3? chances are you aren't.

Are there any freeware/open source motion resolution tests for computer displays?

The static pattern tests can be simulated with MS Paint

Panzer88 · Post by **Panzer88** » Sun Mar 01, 2009 4:02 am

not that I know of, you'll have to find one yourself. Sorry.

byuu · Post by **byuu** » Sun Mar 01, 2009 4:13 am

grinvader wrote:You're using Saturn-grade logic, which is why he's laughing. So am I.

Be nice! If you piss him off, he'll ask to have all his posts deleted and not come back! :(

blackmyst · Post by **blackmyst** » Sun Mar 01, 2009 4:16 am

Haneda wrote:http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g288/ ... 050706.jpg
Cameras are very bad at taking pictures of any sort of display monitor; the blacks you see here are actually blacker, you'd have to be physically next to me looking at my monitor with your naked eye to fully believe me. I'm currently looking at my desktop and it looks extremely black as far as I'm concerned.

That's a nice blue gradient background you have there.

But seriously, that blue shit at the edges there is exactly why I got rid of my LCD after just a few days. Since you're so used to it I guess you're gonna have to put it next to a properly calibrated CRT to really see the difference. It would not show any blue or grey where it's supposed to be black, camera capture or not. My friend (with his shiny new top of the line LCD) could hardly believe it himself.

I.S.T. · Post by **I.S.T.** » Sun Mar 01, 2009 4:48 am

FitzRoy wrote:
byuu wrote:I agree the ladder is annoying. If I had support for modifier keys, that'd be awesome to do Shift+1-5. Since I don't, I didn't want to tie up five keys for that. Especially the ones most emulators use to toggle BG layers (a hangover from the days when SNES layer priorities weren't well understood.)
Okay, but what about the initial question? Why is suspension out of the loop instead of in Emulation Speed as 0%? It would make more sense if it was in there inheriting the check.

I also agree with Verdauga, anyone with a 4:3 frame CRT screen should be running at 1280x960 over 1280x1024. Unless there's an OS or OS app somewhere out there that was designed for rectangular pixels, 5:4 on a 4:3 frame is pure error, a historical blip with no modern relevance.

I have a shitty CRT that squishes the damn picture if you run it at 1280x1024. Three actually(low end CRTs=FAIL.).

kick · Post by **kick** » Sun Mar 01, 2009 4:58 am

LG Electronics wrote:LG announced a new fleet of full-HD capable LCD monitors today. The lineup consists of three models of different screen-sizes: 22 inch, 24 inch and 27 inch.The monitors pack LCD panels with 2 ms response time. All models have native resolutions of 1920 x 1080 pixels (1080p HD), and are HDCP-capable.

consumer wrote:24" screens used to be 1920x1200. Now, for your money, you get 1920x1080 (10% less screen real estate). Funny how HD "1080" format is allowing TFT manufacturers to sneak in lower pixel count screens onto the market. Oh, the retail consumer... This is a ripoff!

DancemasterGlenn · Post by **DancemasterGlenn** » Sun Mar 01, 2009 5:46 am

byuu wrote:
grinvader wrote:You're using Saturn-grade logic, which is why he's laughing. So am I.
Be nice! If you piss him off, he'll ask to have all his posts deleted and not come back! :(

Lulz. I heart you, byuu.

FitzRoy · Post by **FitzRoy** » Sun Mar 01, 2009 5:56 am

Really, manufacturers are just trying to create a uniform aspect between tv and computer markets, the line between the two is blurring. Computers are increasingly being hooked into televisions, tuners and consoles are increasingly getting hooked up to computers.

Panzer88 · Post by **Panzer88** » Sun Mar 01, 2009 6:42 am

then why are tvs 16:9 and monitors 16:10

that sounds an aweful lot like not the same, but I could be wrong.