Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!samsung!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!bionet!agate!shelby!neon!pescadero.Stanford.EDU!philip
From: philip@pescadero.Stanford.EDU (Philip Machanick)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.postscript
Subject: Re: 7 vits vs. 8 bits (again)
Message-ID: <1990Jul4.192457.12516@Neon.Stanford.EDU>
Date: 4 Jul 90 19:24:57 GMT
References: <3803@rodan.acs.syr.edu> <2414@acorn.co.uk> <1990Jun23.184530.1326@cbnewsl.att.com> <184@heaven.woodside.ca.us> <1363@chinacat.Unicom.COM> <1990Jun27.201333.10418@utzoo.uucp> <3439@adobe.UUCP> <268C0233.50F0@intercon.com> <1990Jul3.173300.6547@zoo.toronto
Sender: news@Neon.Stanford.EDU (USENET News System)
Reply-To: philip@pescadero.stanford.edu
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University
Lines: 41

In article <3803@rodan.acs.syr.edu>, amichiel@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Allen J
Michielsen) writes:
> In article <1990Jul3.173300.6547@zoo.toronto.edu>
henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry
> >>The biggest problem with it is that nothing much speaks it except
Macintoshen
> >>and PCs...
> >The biggest problem with it is that it's not available over the RS232 port.
> >People would have written software to speak the printer protocol, whatever
> >it was, but having to add funny new hardware just to talk to the printer
> >was a much bigger obstacle.
Not on the Mac. You didn't even need a network connector for a single
Mac to talk to a LaserWriter - I've seen this done with a straight through
cable. My guess is almost all PS printers come with AppleTalk because it's
no big incremental cost after Adobe designed it once for Apple.
>   Actually, I see it slightly differently.
[stuff about why localtalk is expensive]
> ...  Apple drove the market price for the pc card down to
> help support the protocool.
Hmmm. As I recall, Apple invented the protocol at a time when it
was _not_ company policy to cohabit with other people's equipment.
AppleTalk was integrated into Macs, and was almost no extra cost
(one cheap connector per node) for Mac users.
>  Lastly, as a printer/sharing/LAN it has
> severe/major/... limitations.  For a few users or a small network, it
> is great.  Fast, easy, simple, cheap...  For a larger network with a
> light printing load, else a mixed market basket of printing, it also is
> quite good.  Fast-enough, easy, simple-enough, cheap.  HOWEVER, for a
> large netowrk (say 30 or more) users and multiple printers, say 3 or more,
> it sucks the big wazolla.
No surprise here. These were the intended design limits. The original
LaserWriter was also not fast enough for a large group, and the Mac
was intended to be networked in small groups.

Has the fact that postScript has become so successful made some
people forget that there was a time when only Apple was pushing it in
a big way? Hence Apple design decisions embedded in subsequent Adobe
implementations.

Philip Machanick
philip@pescadero.stanford.edu