Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!att!occrsh!uokmax!apple!daveo From: daveo@Apple.COM (David M. O'Rourke) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc Subject: Re: Windows/Mac flame war fuel Message-ID: <42681@apple.Apple.COM> Date: 5 Jul 90 22:47:59 GMT References: <8974@goofy.Apple.COM> <2988@gmdzi.UUCP> <42650@apple.Apple.COM> <3042@gmdzi.UUCP> Organization: Apple Computer Inc, Cupertino, CA Lines: 89 strobl@gmdzi.UUCP (Wolfgang Strobl) writes: >What do you call a specific printer, here? Even one and the same >printer can have different capabilities at different times, >for example if you install a tractor feeder on a needle printer or >remove a font cartridge on an ink jet printer. A tractor feed being installed/not-installed is unimportant. Most of of the print driver's are written for a Specific printer, or query the printer as to it's font list. But you are thinking DOS only. Most of the ink jet printers for the mac, including the Deskwriter, store the font's on the Macintosh and not the printer. In addition the Macintosh rarely sends just the character to the printer. Rather it typically sends a bitmap to the printer that happens to look like text. So the only relivant info for a particular printer type is it's maximum resolution, dpi. And then the Macintosh creates a bit map at the resolution and sends the graphics to the printer. >Most PC clones offer both serial and parallel interfaces. Both can >be used to connect a printer to it. People prefer to use the >parallel port, because it is cheaper and simpler to use, as I explained >in a separate message. Serial links are symmetric, parallel links aren't. I'm not saying PC's don't have serial ports. What I said it the Serial port is the prefered Mac connection, and given a serial port you have a lot more capability for interaction with the printer. Since the serial port is standard on the Macintosh the printer drivers can make assumptions about what sort of info will be availible at run time that you can't always make about a print driver for a DOS machine. >What do you mean by "even with Windows, the PC DOS is still primarily a >character based OS"? Is it a statement about Windows (then it is plain >wrong), or is it a statement about PCDOS (then it's true, but not very >meaningfull). Windows is build on top of DOS, dos is a character based OS. It has no standard graphic routines, and no standard graphics model. NOTE: A graphics model goes beyond simple color specification and point ploting, it includes standard font handleling, a graphics plane for ploting in, and OS supported graphics functions for ovals, squares, shading and so forth. The PC is a text based OS because in has no *standard* graphics model that cover's even half of what QuickDraw is capabile of. And since MS Windows is based on DOS there are still left-overs of a character based model in the printing and screen handling routines that you won't get away from until you choose a new OS for your base. In addition there has to be a standard way for handleing non-raster based graphics and so-forth... The statement is only meaningless to people who can't think beyond their favorite machine, and QuickDraw while it is good, doesn't meet a lot of the criteria for a complete graphics model, but it does a better job than MS Windows or DOS. >Anyway. The problem Windows has (and the Mac OS has not) is that it >has to support a much broader range of printers, from the cheap >9-needle-printer to the big Postscript RIP. In my opinion this support >is an advantage. It may be an advantage, but that means that all software to be fully compatible has to be designed to a lower common demoninater than on the Mac. The Macintosh requires a high capability printer than a DOS machine. This isn't a bad thing. It means that Macintosh Software can assume a highly level of functionallity in their output devices, and people won't accept a lower quality standard. The Macintosh can support just as many printers as the PC, if all of those printers where up to a Macintosh standard, but most of the cheap PC printers will not do an adequite job of printing compared to other Macintosh printers, and therefore can't compete. >Just one more question. How do you print into a file, if the >printer is not physically available? It cannot be queried in this case. >Don't tell me that the printer driver just stores the abstract >graphics operations into a file instead of sending it to the printer. >How can it know the specifics of the printer, if it is not available, >and if there is no configuration at all? You don't. The Macintosh print arch. requires the printer to be able to communicate back to the computer. Not a limitation, it's a requirement that allows the Mac to enjoy a higher level of basic printer functionality than an equivilant DOS machine. If you want a spooler or print server your software must behave like the printer it's emulating, there is no batch dump mode where the Mac just assumes the printer is there and doesn't pay any attention. >installing a different printer driver and telling it a few things >about the new printer, once. As long as the printers have similar Why should I have to tell it anything about the printer. That's the drivers job, not the users. -- daveo@apple.com David M. O'Rourke _______________________________________________________________________________ I do not speak for Apple in *ANY* official capacity.