Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!psuvax1!husc6!m2c!wpi!macman From: macman@wpi.wpi.edu (Christopher Silverberg) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac Subject: Re: Royal Fonts vs. ATM Message-ID: <6595@wpi.wpi.edu> Date: 11 Jan 90 16:05:32 GMT References: <844@sahiways.gov.au> <1693@intercon.com> <6265@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> <6523@wpi.wpi.edu> <10324@zodiac.ADS.COM> <28729@amdcad.AMD.COM> Organization: Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Worcester ,MA Lines: 18 MC> I don't understand this thread. Why won't System 7 display Adobe MC> fonts the same way System 6 does, ie., with bit-mapped screen MC> fonts? Why are people assuming that ATM won't work (or be upgraded MC> to work) with System 7? Why do people equate font technology with MC> Postscript - a page description language? I feel like I must be MC> missing something. Sure, System 7 might support the bitmapped screen fonts, but who cares about those??? The concern is that the system 7 wont support Adobe Type 1 Postscript fonts that will display nicely on the screen and print nicely on a Quickdraw printer. Some people have quite an investment in those expensive adobe fonts. Now, according to what Adobe is saying, they will have an ATM that works with System 7, but hey, if Apple puts Adobe type 1 support in system 7, we all wont need to go out any bye ATM7 (or the equivalent upgrade) -- ============================================================================== (.) (.) | Chris Silverberg, WPI Box 719 | BBS Sysop: Main Street U.S.A u | USENET: macman@wpi.wpi.edu | 2400 baud - (508) 832-7725 \___/ | BITNET: macman@wpi.bitnet | Fido: 322/575 - Second Sight BBS