Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!ncar!gatech!psuvax1!news
From: melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: An interesting idea...
Message-ID: <yubGrg5-1@cs.psu.edu>
Date: 30 Apr 91 05:06:31 GMT
References: <dm3G_=iz1@cs.psu.edu> <921@cns.SanDiego.NCR.COM> <.29G1$1-1@cs.psu.edu>
	<1991Apr30.044318.31422@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu>
Sender: news@cs.psu.edu (Usenet)
Organization: Penn State Computer Science
Lines: 21
In-Reply-To: es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu's message of Tue, 30 Apr 1991 04:43:18 GMT
Nntp-Posting-Host: sunws5.sys.cs.psu.edu


In article <1991Apr30.044318.31422@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) writes:

	   Mike, come on, you KNOW what Dan meant as well as I do.
   Although it was more dramatic on the 68030, even on the 68040
   converting PostScript to a 400dpi bitmap is time consuming. That
   time comes out of something. If it is a high priority process
   then all your other tasks take a speed hit. If it is a low
   priority process then the printing takes longer.
	   In the end, if you have the CPU in the printer things are
   faster all around. They are also more expensive all around. Dan
   simply said he prefers having the two CPUs. This NeXT/Amiga
   flamage is just getting really stupid on both sides.
	   -- Ethan

I don't think I was that out of hand.  Which do you think prints
faster.  A Mac IIsi and a an Apple LaserWriter(pick a brand) or a
NeXTstation with a NeXT laserprinter.  Now which is going to cost
more?

-Mike