🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <10844@gryphon.COM> richard@gryphon.COM (Richard Sexton) writes:
>In article <88@sopwith.UUCP> snoopy@sopwith.UUCP (Snoopy) writes:
>I wrote:
>>|I'm getting real tired of seeing books, forms, and ad's in magazines
>>|set with a laser printer instead of a phototypesetter.
>>|
>>|I can't help but feel that we're making negative progress here.
>>
>>What is happening is that the range of reproduction quality is getting
>>compressed towards the middle.  I am happy to see less memeograph (sp?)
>>and draft quality dot matrix output.

 ...

>To summarize: laserset output, in place of typesetter output, looks
>cheap.


Well, yes - and it _is_ cheap, which is the point. The O'Reilly
Nutshell guides, to use an example that you mentioned earlier, have
information that I want, presented in a manner that is readable and
legible, in a binding that is useful if you are sitting at a keyboard.
That is to say, the book opens up and stays open when laid flat. This
is a characteristic that is missing from most computer manuals. No, in
contrast, let me offer a beautiful paperback I recently bought: 
_SGML:_An_Author's_Guide_. This book looks great, with nice figures, 
great highlighting and layout, and so on. On the other hand, it won't 
stay open without physical restraint, and it cost me over $35 at my 
local book store (Harvard Coop). Cheap laserprinted books are a direct
and suitable response to the rapid rise in cost of books. I think this
is OK, myself. What I don't understand is why book costs still are
rising so fast... 
  -lar
 Lar Kaufman   <= my opinions          Fidonet: 1:322/470@508-534-1842 
 kaufman@multimax.arpa    {bu-cs,decvax,necntc,talcott}!encore!kaufman