Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!rutgers!njin!princeton!phoenix!caromero
From: caromero@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (C. Antonio Romero)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next
Subject: Re: Display PS vs NeWS
Message-ID: <4435@phoenix.Princeton.EDU>
Date: 14 Nov 88 17:38:17 GMT
References: <7361@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> <1669@sun.soe.clarkson.edu>
Reply-To: caromero@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (C. Antonio Romero)
Organization: Princeton University, NJ
Lines: 24

In article <1669@sun.soe.clarkson.edu> abstine@sun.soe.clarkson.edu (Arthur Stine) writes:
>From article <7361@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU>, by faustus@ic.Berkeley.EDU (Wayne A. Christopher):
}> Why did NeXT use Display Postscript instead of Sun's NeWS?  How much of
}> a difference is there?  Is there any reason to use DP instead of NeWS,
}> or is NeXT just trying to be different?  It seems like ignoring
}> standards is a big part of their business stragegy...
}Whats not 'standard' about display PostScript? if you accept that postscript
}is a standard, and X windows is a standard, then what isn't standard
}about display postscript? who says that Sun is the only company that comes
}up with 'standards'?

Well, they didn't use X...
Display Postscript as such is pretty standard, I think, but the
windowing system they put on it is proprietary.

Saw one the other night. 

It's been a long time since I've had my socks knocked off like that.
Probably not since Macintosh appeared.  I don't know if it will seize
the marketplace, ultimately, and it was still kind of buggy (running
version 0.6 of the OS, not the one they'll be sending buyers) 
but even so, I was astonished.

-Antonio Romero     romero@confidence.princeton.edu