Newsgroups: comp.unix.internals
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!uupsi!ficc!peter
From: peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: X11 bashing
Message-ID: <7WXASUE@xds13.ferranti.com>
Reply-To: peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva)
Organization: Xenix Support, FICC
References: <14820@helios.TAMU.EDU> <1991Apr17.194141.17315@wlbr.imsd.contel.com> <14875@helios.TAMU.EDU> <1991Apr18.014319.8272@decuac.dec.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 91 18:55:28 GMT

In article <1991Apr18.014319.8272@decuac.dec.com> mjr@hussar.dco.dec.com (Marcus J. Ranum) writes:
> 	do an "lpq" on a machine with a few PostScript printers.

Do the same on any system with the capabilities of postscript and bitmapped
printers. Even nastier. And that's basically what X is to NeWS.

> 	PostScript can produce spiffy images, for sure, but it's just
> too easy to produce 100K worth of glop to print a page.

Anyone have net stats on traffic generated by NeWS versus X?

> system is a savings, but you have to make sure that your applications
> are not stupid about doing the PostScript equivalent of bells and
> whistles.

Yes, you don't want to MacDink your server to death. Though pie menus
*are* neat.
-- 
Peter da Silva.  `-_-'  peter@ferranti.com
+1 713 274 5180.  'U`  "Have you hugged your wolf today?"