🚀 go-pugleaf

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. :-)