Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!athena.mit.edu!captkidd
From: captkidd@athena.mit.edu (Ivan Cavero Belaunde)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: Postscript (was Re: Apple's System 7.0 Q&A)
Message-ID: <11518@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU>
Date: 19 May 89 16:13:23 GMT
References: <1169@mcrware.UUCP> <1788@husc6.harvard.edu> <4067@ece-csc.UUCP> <78161@ti-csl.csc.ti.com>
Sender: daemon@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU
Reply-To: captkidd@athena.mit.edu (Ivan Cavero Belaunde)
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Lines: 48

In article <78161@ti-csl.csc.ti.com> holland@m2.UUCP (Fred Hollander) writes:
>In article <4067@ece-csc.UUCP> jnh@ece-csc.UUCP (Joseph Nathan Hall) writes:
>>In article <1788@husc6.harvard.edu> waldman@endor.UUCP (benjamin Waldman) writes:
>>Well, I think Adobe is finally in deep yogurt anyway, given that Bitstream
>>claims to have "cracked" the Adobe font encryption scheme.  I can see
>>PostScript processors going the way of the IBM BIOS real soon now ...
>First of all, that is extremely cruel and unfair to compare a
>Postscript processor to an IBM BIOS.  If Bitstream has "cracked"
>Adobe's font encryption scheme, then, wouldn't it stand to reason that
>they are planning to use Postscript fonts?  Also, there are other
>capabilies (understatement) of Postscript besides printing outline
>fonts.  Even just considering text, the first relase of Apple's
>outline fonts will not support non-uniform scaling, rotated text or
>text on a curve.  I agree that this is not good new (another
>understatement) for Adobe, but, I also don't see Postscript printers
>becoming obsolete immediately upon the release of System 7.0.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I was under the impression that the "cracking"
of the font encryption scheme removed the final obstacle to PS clones.
Yes, there are other capabilities of PS besides outline fonts, and they
obviously plan to use PS fonts.  However, until the encryption scheme was
broken, PS-language clones could do everything PS does *except* use
downloadable postscript fonts (since they are encrypted).  Bitstream then
opens the door for companies to use and develop PS clones which then should
bring the licensing fee back down.  The Jasmine printer is a good example
of a printer that uses a PS language clone to avoid paying through the nose
for PS itself.
So, yes, I do think PS will go the way of the IBM BIOS pretty soon.  Of
course, Adobe could still survive by making the licensing fee more
reasonable (but still slightly more expensive than the clones) and upgrading
the language's capabilities more often, thus keeping the clones playing
a catch-up game.

>Fred Hollander

-Ivan Cavero Belaunde

	"An MIT computer man got drunk one fateful night
	He opened up the console and smashed everything in sight.
	When they finally subdued him, the judge he stood before,
	Said, "Lock him up for twenty years, he's rotten to the core!""
		-The MIT Engineers' Drinking Song (I know, this one was
			a bad joke)

EMail: captkidd@athena.mit.edu
USnail: 407 Memorial Dr.
	Cambridge, MA 02139
Phone: (617) 621-0312