Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site uw-beaver Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!qantel!hplabs!tektronix!uw-beaver!laser-lovers From: laser-lovers@uw-beaver Newsgroups: fa.laser-lovers Subject: Any comments on Interleaf? Message-ID: <1464@uw-beaver> Date: Fri, 2-Aug-85 14:31:00 EDT Article-I.D.: uw-beave.1464 Posted: Fri Aug 2 14:31:00 1985 Date-Received: Sun, 4-Aug-85 10:20:30 EDT Sender: daemon@uw-beaver Organization: U of Washington Computer Science Lines: 25 From: Marshall Rose I saw a very slick demonstration of an interleaf workstation a couple of days ago and I was wondering if anyone would care to make some comments one way or the other on the system. Basically, they supply a lot of software that you run on a SUN workstation. The final output device is an Imagen-8/300 which is on an ethernet. The user-interface is the usual icon-drive stuff, but what's interesting is that they represent documents and the like as structured objects and, when you change the attribute of an object (e.g., a paragraph), they update the entire document in "real-time". They also integrate graphics with the system very smoothly. In a nutshell, interleaf is very much a what-you-see-is-what-you-get system. What I'm interested in is: what quality of decisions does the system make when it comes to line/page-breaking and so on. The software looks like it runs really fast on a SUN when you change the document, so I suspect that it's being rather simple-minded about things (compared to the high-quality decisions that TeX would make about things). /mtr ps: let's avoid flames about WYSIWYG systems and try and stick to the merits of the interleaf system. thanks!