Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mstar!mstar.morningstar.com!bob From: bob@MorningStar.Com (Bob Sutterfield) Newsgroups: comp.windows.x Subject: Re: Usefulness of colour & simplicity of text applications. Message-ID: Date: 6 Jul 90 13:57:55 GMT References: <9007031301.AA08567@zephyrus.crd.Ge.Com> <9007031705.AA00978@kestrel.> <1990Jul5.191121.10139@watdragon.waterloo.edu> Sender: usenet@MorningStar.COM (USENET Administrator) Reply-To: bob@MorningStar.Com (Bob Sutterfield) Organization: Morning Star Technologies Lines: 17 In-Reply-To: tbray@watsol.waterloo.edu's message of 5 Jul 90 19:11:21 GMT In article <1990Jul5.191121.10139@watdragon.waterloo.edu> tbray@watsol.waterloo.edu (Tim Bray) writes: ...advanced typography, as practiced in reference books, relies hardly at all on colour. And for windows-based non-simple text applications, colour is just sugar - totally non-cost-effective given the exorbitant price of colour display technology. An advantage of using color display technology for video typography would be that it maintains more bits of information per pixel. This would let application designers do better approximations of high resolution displays with "fuzzy fonts", use of gray scale for kerning, etc. But I agree, that huge 3-gun color monitor with the fancy mask is overkill for the application, expensive, tough to align, and hard to carry to trade shows. The world needs a good, cheap N-bit gray scale frame buffer and monitor, with window servers and applications to drive them. (for those north of the border: s/color/colour/g and s/gray/grey/g :-)