Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!ai-lab!geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu!petrilli
From: petrilli@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Chris Petrilli)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next
Subject: Re: Desktop publishing
Message-ID: <14365@life.ai.mit.edu>
Date: 26 Mar 91 17:29:21 GMT
References: <1991Mar25.024612.1264@mlb.semi.harris.com> <1991Mar26.053352.13091@mendelson.com> <16775@chopin.udel.edu>
Sender: news@ai.mit.edu
Organization: Free Software Foundation
Lines: 63

Todd Radel writes:

        > In my opinion the best DTP package is VENTRUA PUBLISHER. It
        > beats the pants of all the others. It is available in MS-DOS,
        > WINDOWS 3, and Mac versions.  From what I have seen, Frame is
        > the best the "in how much money can I make on this sale"
        > department.  You can run Ventura on a 640k PC/XT with a 20 meg
        > disk. I assume the Mac version would run well on a Plus. Don't
        > even think about running Frame on a box that small.

I disagree... I do graphics design work for a living, and for 90% of
the work I do, Ventura Publisher would be in the way.  It has alot of
limitations that I find unacceptable.  Most graphics design people do
mainly short (several page) designs, and I do alot of logos,
letterhead, corporate image work, which is primarily 1 page projects,
for which VP would be useless.  I use PageMaker the most, but have to
use Illustrator and other programs to get what I want for logos
(LetraStudio is quite nice, too bad it's not on the NeXT yet, though
TextArt does a truly good job.)

        > Since you will probably use the machines for word processing
        > (how else does the text get in?), graphic manuipulation,
        > drawing (Adobe Illustrator alone makes a Mac II worth having
        > in a print shop) and lots of other things, I would look long
        > and hard at Macs.  Especailly since Ventura is availble for
        > the Mac.

I would not take a long hard look... at least not too long.  I am
forced to use a Mac, but not by choice, my choice would be a NeXT,
hands down, as Touch Type alone makes the system 10x as useful.  I am
also opposed to Apple as a company, but then you knew that.  And as I
said before, VP doesn't make the system.   Also Adobe Illustrator will
be out this quarter for the NeXT, it FULL Display Postscript glory,
and 10x as useful on the NeXT.

        I'm not sure I'd agree ... I don't even have a NeXT yet, but
        from what I've heard on the net (and thanks to all who
        responded :-), the NeXT is _the best_ writing and desktop
        publishing platform around!

I agree wholehartedly... it is simply a matter of time before
everything is in place for the NeXT.  Quark Xpress is being converted
as I understand, and there enough programs that leave everyone else in
the dust already that I would not consider any other platform for my
work, unfortunately I wasn't working where I am now when the Macintoys
were purchased.

        I'm looking at either a NeXT or a Macintosh ... but the Mac is
        *way* overpriced and can't compete with the NeXTstation for
        performance.  Plus built-in Ethernet on the NeXT makes
        networking to PC's a snap.

Agreed... the NeXT provides the most bang for the buck, period.  If
anyone out there wished to discuss this topic farther, mail me.

Chris


--
 
+ Chris Petrilli
| Internet:  petrilli@gnu.ai.mit.edu
+ Insert silly disclaimer drivel here.