- Lurk mode off - Hello everybody I started my fractal explorations using fractint (version 16.something) when I bought my first PC (around 1990?), and I owe this program (that is, its creators) a lot. Nevertheless, some years ago I switched to Ultrafractal. I know that this is the Fractint list, but it seems a little strange to me that the topics that generate a lot of traffic on this list are the same that also have been appearing on the official fractint wishlist http://web.ukonline.co.uk/members/robin.b2/olig/fracwish.htm page for several years now. These include truecolor support, windows (or at least 32 Bit OS) compatibility and formula compiler enhancements. It is true that UF doesn't have the complete functionality of Fractint (evolver, boundary tracing, L-systems - and yes, the color cycling now implemented in UF doesn't work as smooth as the one in Fractint), but the abovementioned and often asked-for functionalities are realized in UF and work very well, so if someone feels that he or she really needs one of these, she might feel inclined to pay the registration fee for that programm (for those who don't know if the program is worth its money, they can download a fully functional demo version). I am not suggesting to abandon Fractint altogether, but I have the feeling that some people will like the additional functionality offered by UF (and it is quite easy to import Fractint parameter and even gradient files to UF). One possible szenario: find a nice parameter set in Fractint using the evolver, then import the par file into UF and generate the picture in truecolor (I wonder: if the artistic merit of the pictures is not an issue, then why are so many people demanding truecolor support?). And with respect to Jack's email (attached below), as far as I know, every statement he makes does *not* apply to UF 3. Deepzoom: supported now even for user-made formulas (So, Jim Muth, here is your possibility to do deepzoom dives - arbitrary precision math - into your MandelbrotMix formulas). Formula writing: the formula compiler is much more advanced than that of Fractint; additionally, you can also write your own inside/outside colouring formulas (and no limitation to the amount of parameters you can define). Most fractal types: since the whole (orgform?) formula collection can also be used with UF, I think this statement is obsolete. Most options: most definitely not! I don't know what the price for a second hand pentium system is, but I guess it is more expensive than an UF license - and for my part, I wouldn't like to add another PC to my living room just to run Fractint (if I had a spare room for setting up more computers, things might be different - but more probably I would do this only to take advantage of UF's capability to use networked PCs). Regards Ralph - lurk mode on -
From: "JackOTradez" <JackOTradez@email.msn.com> To: <fractint@mailman.xmission.com> Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2002 10:55:20 -0400 Subject: [Fractint] Re: Fractint digest, Vol 1 #274 - 12 msgs Reply-To: fractint@mailman.xmission.com
Re: Fractint "deadware"? NO!
I have purchased and registered several of those "other" new windoze-based fractal programs. They are good; a couple of them are really good. But (unless I have missed something) none of them can zoom AS DEEP as Fractint, nor with anywhere close the max number of iterations. And Fractint still has the most options and fractal types. The other programs seem pointed towards those who just want to make pretty pictures. Fractint is (and always has been) for the serious fractal explorer. You can even write your own formulas and experiment! And it is good enuf just as it is. (I use the developers version 20+). As for DOS obsolete, I feel that anyone sophisticated enuf to use Fractint to it's max capabilities should be able to buy or obtain a cheap/second-hand pentium-2 or 3 system and install DOS on it - this will be possible for many years yet. Deadware? Not in this lifetime ... ... ...