Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!dtgcube!ed
From: ed@uunet!dtgcube (Edward Jung)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next
Subject: Re: Is the NeXT Slow?
Message-ID: <1989Dec2.110409.2251@uunet!dtgcube>
Date: 2 Dec 89 11:04:09 GMT
References: <770002@hpvcfs1.HP.COM> <21947@brunix.UUCP> <1989Dec1.164327.1176@nueces.cactus.org>
Organization: The Deep Thought Group, L.P.
Lines: 26
In-Reply-To: chari@nueces.cactus.org's message of 1 Dec 89 16:43:27 GMT


rca@brunix (Ronald C.F. Antony) writes:

   >As everything is presented in Postscript, it takes a while to 
   >recalculate the graphics (there are no bitmap-fonts nor
   >approximations of postscript-fonts, it's the real thing but
   >this has it's price...)

That is not true.  Display Postscript, as an optimization, supports bitmapped
fonts and a (rather) complex set of operations to map regular fonts (and their
spacings) to their bitmap representations.  On the NeXT machine, this is generally
done only at point sizes less than 24.  You do not *have* to have bitmapped fonts.

Adobe recently released some extensions to DPS concerning new bitmap spacing
caching and use operators (extensions to their existing ones).

A simple test to see the difference between bitmap and regular fonts on the
Cube is to use rotated text at a non-90 degree increment (map text to a circle,
for example).  This will force the use of the outline definitions.


-- 
Edward Jung                             The Deep Thought Group, L.P.
BIX: ejung                                      3400 Swede Hill Road
NeXT or UNIX mail                                Clinton, WA.  98236
        UUCP: uunet!dtgcube!ed          Internet: ed@dtg.com