Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!apple!kchen From: kchen@Apple.COM (Kok Chen) Newsgroups: comp.lang.postscript Subject: Re: PostScript Language Message-ID: <38910@apple.Apple.COM> Date: 23 Feb 90 22:34:03 GMT References: <9447@imagen.UUCP> Organization: Apple Computer Inc., Cupertino, CA Lines: 46 ib@apolling (Ivan N. Bach) writes: >jeynes@adobe.COM writes: >> >>UltraScript is not an Adobe product; it is a clone PostScript interpreter >>made by Imagen/QMS. > >I am getting tired of reading about PostScript "clones." The word "clone" >had never been used to describe the implementation of a procedural language >until Adobe started using it to refer to the implementations of the PostScript >language by other companies. Have you ever heard of a COBOL or FORTRAN clone? You are right, "clone" is too good a word, since it used to mean organisms that have the same *genetic* origins, which, obviously, PostScript(R) and UltraScript(TM) don't share :-). More recently, "clone" has been used to imply a copy of a product that was reversed engineered without benefit of the original design documents. Perhaps this is what Mr. Jeynes meant. >Have you ever heard of a proposal for a new world standard for the storing >and transmitting of image data that wastes up to 90% of the communication >channel's capacity? YES! ==> NTSC !!!! :-):-):-):-) > [Then the anti-PostScript flames started to get really hot...] > >Ivan N. Bach Tel (408) 986-9400, x508 >QMS, Inc. Fax (408) 727-3725 PostScript(R) became successful because it satisfied the needs of a lot of folks with sufficiently deep pockets. Instead of griping about what a sicko procedural language it is, perhaps Ivan would care to propose one of his favourites, and let the free market decide? Cheers, Kok Chen kchen@apple.com, AA6TY(ex-KK6DP) Apple Computer, Inc. --- Disclaimer: This is my personal opinion and I do own a small chunk of AQM due to some affiliations in a past life. Furthermore, I may not even like PostScript. :-)