Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!bellcore!faline!thumper!ulysses!andante!princeton!udel!gatech!purdue!i.cc.purdue.edu!j.cc.purdue.edu!mace.cc.purdue.edu!rsk
From: rsk@mace.cc.purdue.edu (Rich Kulawiec)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next
Subject: Re: How did they make the printer so expensive?
Summary: Original article was correct.
Message-ID: <900@mace.cc.purdue.edu>
Date: 22 Oct 88 15:56:06 GMT
References: <5807@zodiac.UUCP> <17784@glacier.STANFORD.EDU> <16961@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU> <7099@ut-emx.UUCP>
Reply-To: rsk@mace.cc.purdue.edu (Rich Kulawiec)
Organization: Purdue University
Lines: 16

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.

No, the original author (Trent) was correct; resolution is measured in
dots (or pixels) per square area, and thus:

old: 300 * 300 =  90000
new: 400 * 400 = 160000

80 % of 90000 is 72000; 90000 + 72000 =~ 160000.

Rich