Xref: utzoo comp.lang.postscript:6003 comp.sys.mac.misc:2936
Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!att!pacbell!pacbell.com!decwrl!bacchus.pa.dec.com!shlump.nac.dec.com!mountn.dec.com!minow
From: minow@mountn.dec.com (Martin Minow)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.postscript,comp.sys.mac.misc
Subject: Re: Obscure LaserWriter features
Message-ID: <1899@mountn.dec.com>
Date: 4 Sep 90 16:10:19 GMT
References: <428@macuni.mqcc.mq.oz> <1510@chinacat.Unicom.COM> <1990Aug29.091431.12213@grian.cps.altadena.ca.us> <33357@cup.portal.com> <1990Aug31.082117.6829@grian.cps.altadena.ca.us>
Reply-To: minow@bolt.enet.dec.com (Martin Minow)
Followup-To: comp.lang.postscript
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Lines: 24

In article <1990Aug31.082117.6829@grian.cps.altadena.ca.us>
alex@grian.cps.altadena.ca.us (Alex Pournelle) writes:
>
>I'm still wondering why you can't use SCSI to talk to your LW IINTX; I'm
>also wondering why your font cache can't live on your computer's hard
>disk.

One good reason why font caches ought not to reside on the Mac hard
disk is that the Mac OS wasn't setup to handle multiple SCSI bus
initiators, and you're liable to have wierd crashes if you do SCSI
operations when the system isn't expecting it.

Since hard disks are hovering around $10/Mbyte quantity one, I would
think that using the main system's disk as a font cache would be
false economy.  If nothing else, the Laserwriter's font accesses will
slow the system down somewhat.

>  (Doubtless several people will call me nieve, which is one reason
>that USENET is called USELESSNET by its detractors.)

You're neive.

Martin Minow
minow@bolt.enet.dec.com