Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!decwrl!adobe!heaven!glenn
From: glenn@heaven.woodside.ca.us (Glenn Reid)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.postscript
Subject: Re: PostScript vs TrueType?
Message-ID: <257@heaven.woodside.ca.us>
Date: 25 Aug 90 23:27:38 GMT
References: <9724@goofy.Apple.COM> <438@three.mv.com> <9931@goofy.Apple.COM>
Reply-To: glenn@heaven.woodside.ca.us (Glenn Reid)
Organization: RightBrain Software, Woodside, CA
Lines: 59

In article <9931@goofy.Apple.COM> chewy@apple.com (Paul Snively) writes:
>> MACHINE CODE????  This sounds like a solution that will only work with
>> Apple's Laserwriter (or other 68k based systems).  What about all of
>> the non-Apple postscript devices?  What about the non-68k based 
>
>Geez, relax, will ya?  What this means is that different devices will 
>probably require a different driver (gee, what a shock.  That already 
>seems to be true).

The Macintosh already downloads machine code, which is also one of the
reasons that Mac-generated PostScript files run into trouble on other
brands of printers.  There is "bit-smoothing" code in eexec form buried
in LaserPrep (or was the last time I looked).  Luckily, it checks to see
if the product is an Apple LaserWriter before executing it.  Unluckily,
in the process of NOT executing it, it often NOT executes the rest
of your job too.  Adobe's driver should fix this, I would imagine.  In
the meantime it continues to be a first-class headache for everyone trying
to use Mac-generated PostScript.  In fact, I'm sure it's one of the most
frequently asked questions in this newsgroup.

And no, different devices really shouldn't require a different driver,
except where printer-specific features like trays are concerned, and
even that should go away with PostScript Level II.

The one thing that is truly device-independent in PostScript is the
fonts.  There are something like 90 Adobe-licensed PostScript devices
out in the world, I think.  All of them work with the same font
library, from IBM Electro-compositors hooked up to IBM 370 mainframes
right through to Display PostScript on a NeXT machine.

I think it would be very bad if my fonts were written in (or rendered
by) machine code.  I don't think the instruction sets on the IBM 370
and the 68030 are very similar.

What Apple wants to do can be done, of course, but it will require
re-building a lot of what already exists.  People who are serious
PostScript users require color printers, film recorders, typesetters,
large plotters, high-speed printers, duplex printers, envelopes,
stapling, and endless other things.  Unless Apple manages to license
technology, get products built, and keep the system end of things tied
up neatly, it is likely to be messy, and I can't believe they could
ever close the gap on the products already available in the world.
Need a color PostScript printer?  There are at least five or six of
them to choose from.  Need 11x17 output?  600dpi on plain paper?
full-color slides?  They're all shipping.  And your fonts work.  Maybe
three years ago it might have been all right to build just a low-cost,
low-speed laser printer and complement it with a high-resolution
phototypesetter, but that's just the tip of the iceberg in 1990.

Anyway, we'll wait and see.  A brand new font technology will present
many major software and hardware issues before becoming successful.

These are just opinions.  I speak for no one, and probably would be
better off just not speaking, but what the heck, it's Saturday.

-- 
 Glenn Reid				RightBrain Software
 glenn@heaven.woodside.ca.us		PostScript/NeXT developers
 ..{adobe,next}!heaven!glenn		415-851-1785