Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mailrus!bbn!rochester!pt.cs.cmu.edu!ius3.ius.cs.cmu.edu!ralphw
From: ralphw@ius3.ius.cs.cmu.edu (Ralph Hyre)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next
Subject: postscript speedup (Re: How did they make the printer so cheap?)
Message-ID: <3396@pt.cs.cmu.edu>
Date: 27 Oct 88 02:27:19 GMT
References: <5807@zodiac.UUCP> <24895@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu> <533@gt-eedsp.UUCP> <41087@linus.UUCP> <73489@sun.uucp> <7049@ut-emx.UUCP> <25141@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu> <231@lloyd.camex.uucp>
Sender: netnews@pt.cs.cmu.edu
Organization: Carnegie-Mellon University, CS/RI
Lines: 20

In article <231@lloyd.camex.uucp> kent@lloyd.UUCP (Kent Borg) writes:
>In article <25141@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu> bob@allosaur.cis.ohio-state.edu (Bob Sutterfield) writes:
>...
>>             The imager can image much faster than this printer can
>>print (8ppm), so the bottleneck is in the printer.
>I have seen unimpressive pages on which a LaserWriter cranks well over
>an hour to output.  For the NeXT machine to output a 1 LaserWriter-hour page
>it would have to interpret PostScript more than 28000 times as fast...
A lot of the hard stuff might be floating point stuff, which unadorned
Laserwriters have no hardware support for.  Given the NeXT has an '882 AND a
DSP chip.  So I have no problem imaging ~1000 times speedup for 'normal' hard
pages.  Maybe Adobe obtained the other 1.5 orders of magnitude by doing a 
better implementation:-)


-- 
					- Ralph W. Hyre, Jr.
Internet: ralphw@ius3.cs.cmu.edu    Phone:(412) CMU-BUGS
Amateur Packet Radio: N3FGW@W2XO, or c/o W3VC, CMU Radio Club, Pittsburgh, PA
"You can do what you want with my computer, but leave me alone!8-)"