Path: utzoo!yunexus!geac!syntron!jtsv16!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!helios.ee.lbl.gov!pasteur!agate!bionet!apple!rutgers!mailrus!iuvax!pur-ee!pur-phy!sho
From: sho@pur-phy (Sho Kuwamoto)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next
Subject: Re: Resolution (was: How did they make the printer so expensive?)
Message-ID: <1610@pur-phy>
Date: 28 Oct 88 08:29:15 GMT
Article-I.D.: pur-phy.1610
References: <5807@zodiac.UUCP> <17784@glacier.STANFORD.EDU> <1988Oct25.175954.8744@utzoo.uucp> <1256@cfa.cfa.harvard.EDU>
Reply-To: sho@newton.physics.purdue.edu.UUCP (Sho Kuwamoto)
Organization: Purdue Univ. Physics Dept., W. Lafayette, IN
Lines: 22

In article <1256@cfa.cfa.harvard.EDU> wyatt@cfa.harvard.EDU (Bill Wyatt) writes:
>I suspect the dpi would have to be 3 to 5 times better to look `twice'
>as good.
>[...]
>To sum up:
>Resolution is a linear function of dots (really, lines) per inch.
>Appearence is _not_ a linear function of resolution.-- 

Sorry to dredge up an old topic here.  I believe what someone said
about 400dpi not looking that much better than 300dpi, but might this
not be a problem with the print engine?  And this last statement is
all too true.  Appearance is *not* a linear funtion of resolution.
The Apple ImageWriter prints at 144dpi and LaserWriter output is IMHO
definitely more than 'twice' as good, whatever that means.  I remember
getting blown away by it.  Oh, how spoiled we've all become.  Now, I
want to get rid of the jagged lines in 300dpi LaserWriter output, moan
about the lack of a magazine quality color printer, and complain about
having only 256 colors at one time on my Mac II.  I find that 5 meg of
memory is just not as much as I want, my 68020 is too slow, etc.  The
list goes on.  I remember programming my Apple II+ in assembly.  48k
was a lot then.

-Sho