Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!think.com!snorkelwacker!bloom-beacon!fis1138.GOVt.shearson.COM!fgreco
From: fgreco@fis1138.GOVt.shearson.COM (Frank Greco)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
Subject: Re: OW as a PostScript X server...
Message-ID: <9011131842.AA08663@islanders.>
Date: 13 Nov 90 18:43:55 GMT
Sender: daemon@athena.mit.edu (Mr Background)
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 47

> 
> The technical problem with the X11/NeWS merged server is the following:
> 
> If you want to mix X and PostScript based imaging models (and I know people
> who do, for very good reasons; each imaging model has much to offer the
> application programmer), you have to synchronize the two connections.  This is 
> more than a minor pain to an application programmer in this cicumstances
> (and can be a non-trival performance problem; it basically involves putting
> XSync calls and equivalent everywhere you care about order, which requires
> a server round trip); and comes naturally if you are talking to a server 
> over a single connection.

	I don't get it.  Why is this a "technical problem" with the X/NeWS
	merged server?  It is a concern wherever you want to mix imaging models.

	I guess DEC wouldn't have the same problem mixing Display PostScript
	and Xlib...;->
> 
> I personally agree that it would be very nice to have a common X PostScript
> extension, that would work no matter what the implementation of X, so that
> applications programmers could count on it.

	If everyone could count on it, doesn't that imply that 
	PostScript rendering will be added to the X server?
	It would be nice if it wasn't an extension.  However, what
	are the legal/business ramifications with Adobe in this matter?
	Are they going to allow us to us a printer PS or a display PS
	interface for free?  Maybe Paul Asente could answer this...
> 
> And as to the rest of your message, isn't Shearson the brokerage house that
> has taken a big interest in Sun Microsystems? Or is it one of the other
> ones?
> 				- Jim
> 
> 
	My comments are my own and do not involve my client, Lehman Brothers at all.
	They are my own comments (I am an independent contractor) and do not reflect
	any of my clients' views..... I would've added my .signature that has the
	usual caveats, but it would waste bandwidth like I'm doing right now
	answering your last (surreptitious) comment.

	I'm sure working for DEC has not colored your opinions at all...right?


	Frank G.

	I was going to say something about snake-oil...but I won't....;->