Path: utzoo!utgpu!attcan!uunet!husc6!bbn!rochester!udel!princeton!njin!rutgers!bellcore!faline!thumper!ulysses!andante!alice!debra
From: debra@alice.UUCP (Paul De Bra)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next
Subject: Re: How did they make the printer so expensive?
Message-ID: <8318@alice.UUCP>
Date: 21 Oct 88 02:52:07 GMT
References: <5807@zodiac.UUCP> <17784@glacier.STANFORD.EDU> <16961@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU> <7099@ut-emx.UUCP>
Reply-To: debra@alice.UUCP ()
Organization: AT&T, Bell Labs
Lines: 20

In article <7099@ut-emx.UUCP> malik@emx.UUCP (Nadeem Malik) writes:
>In article <16961@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU> lange@cs.ucla.edu (Trent Lange) writes:
>>An increase from 300 dpi to 400 dpi is a nearly 80 percent increase in actual
>>resolution, which I call more than slight.  There are indeed 600 dpi printers
> 
>Actually it is a 33% increase, but it is still quite significant.
> 
>Nadeem Malik

Forgotten that output is 2 dimensional? 400x400 compared to 300x300 is
almost a 78% increase in number of dots per square inch. It is really
this "square" number that matters. Some people will certainly remember that
200dpi printers produced really awful output, whereas 300dpi looks rather
nice, certainly more than a 50% improvement.

Paul.
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
|debra@research.att.com   | uunet!research!debra     | att!grumpy!debra |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------