Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!bloom-beacon!gatech!hao!ames!amdahl!nsc!voder!apple!tecot
From: tecot@apple.UUCP (Ed Tecot)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: LaserWriter IISC Gripes
Message-ID: <7377@apple.UUCP>
Date: 12 Feb 88 05:38:26 GMT
Reply-To: tecot@apple.UUCP (Ed Tecot)
Organization: Apple Computer Inc., Cupertino, USA
Lines: 29
Keywords: Apple HD backup wants more disks

Note:  I'm forwarding this from an Apple engineer who worked on the IISC.

In response to "LaserWriter IISC Gripes" from lawrence@bbn.COM
(Gabriel Lawrence):

Gripe #1 is that Apple didn't put QuickDraw in the printer, which
would have made it as fast or faster than PostScript printers.
Answer #1A is that for a large class of documents, the IISC already
IS as fast as PostScript printers.

Answer #1B is that QuickDraw isn't just QuickDraw; it calls a lot of
other stuff in the Mac ROM.  Most significantly, it has to call the
Font Manager to get fonts loaded, and where are they going to come
from if it's running in the printer?  By the time you have a useful
implementation of QuickDraw in the printer, you have most of a
Macintosh in the printer, and it gets expensive and isn't worth it.

Gripe #2 is that we didn't use outline fonts for the IISC.  This is
indeed the IISC's most important limitation, and there is no one
simple answer to why we didn't do it.  From a strictly engineering
point of view I can say that it would have taken a lot longer to get
to market, and the printer's performance would have suffered.  Many
users don't desperately want to have lots of fonts in a continuous
range of sizes, and for these people, outline fonts are just
overkill.  Finally, anyone who takes advantage of the IISC's low
price can upgrade to a PostScript LaserWriter later one, if they find
they want the PostScript functionality.

					David Casseres