Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!apple!agate!web-1d!laba-1aj
From: laba-1aj@web-1d.berkeley.edu (John Kawakami)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st
Subject: Re: LaserPrinters and the ST
Message-ID: <1989Dec4.210911.13420@agate.berkeley.edu>
Date: 4 Dec 89 21:09:11 GMT
References: <4725e878.14a1f@force.UUCP> <12513@watcgl.waterloo.edu> <24675@cup.portal.com>
Sender: usenet@agate.berkeley.edu (USENET Administrator;;;;ZU44)
Reply-To: laba-1aj@web-1d (John Kawakami)
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 26

In article <24675@cup.portal.com> buggs@cup.portal.com (William Edward JuneJr) writes:
>
> As far as I know, the major cost of _any_ PostScript-compatible device
>> or software is the royalty paid to Adobe for developing PS. 

I understand that the user ends up paying only about $25 for the PS part
of the printer. I'd guess that most of the extra lettuce goes to pay for
the RAM and 35 (or so) fonts.  That is probably why US costs whatever it
costs...

>> Thus, UltraScript is not likely to drop in price.
>> Can anyone confirm this?
>>        ___             Stephen F. White, esq.     standard_disclaimer()
>
>I thought PostScript was or is becoming PD?
>
>Ed June

The PS standard is out there for anyone to emulate; it's in the "red-book"
from Adobe.  What is missing though is stuff called "Type 1" font support.
Type 1 fonts make small characters readable on low rez (300 dpi) printers.
Obviously, this is one way that Adobe is keeping one step ahead of the
emulators.

The only PD PS I can think of off hand is Ghostscript from the GNU project.
Ghostscript is a PS screen previewer.