Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!pequod.cso.uiuc.edu!dorner
From: dorner@pequod.cso.uiuc.edu (Steve Dorner)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: Royal vs Adobe
Message-ID: <1990Apr9.212938.5194@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>
Date: 9 Apr 90 21:29:38 GMT
References: <27618215MES@MSU) <18000049@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> <5363@mnetor.UUCP> <11255@wpi.wpi.edu>
Sender: usenet@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (News)
Reply-To: dorner@pequod.cso.uiuc.edu (Steve Dorner)
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Lines: 18

In article <11255@wpi.wpi.edu> macman@wpi.wpi.edu (Chris Silverberg) writes:
>Royal will be much easier to use. It will be merely dropping the fonts in the
>system folder and go. There wont be this hassel that ATM currently has of
>installing bit map fonts, choosing BI Helvetica Italic font, or whatever and
>running atm as an init...

Um, there are TWO issues here.  One is Royal vs. PostScript.  The other is
Apple's System 7 vs. Apple's System 6.

This ease-of-use issue is really a red herring; it's Apple's current system
design that forces Adobe to go the way they go now.  Once system 7 comes out,
I'll bet you'll just drop ATM and PostScript fonts in the system folder and
go.  No different (except for the ATM part) than for the Royal fonts.

Of course, this is just speculation.
--
Steve Dorner, U of Illinois Computing Services Office
Internet: s-dorner@uiuc.edu  UUCP: {convex,uunet}!uiucuxc!dorner