Article View: comp.sys.mac
Article #1635Re: Imagewriter II vs. LQ
From: Steve Goldfield
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1989 23:42
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1989 23:42
20 lines
1361 bytes
1361 bytes
In article <43100013@uicsrd.csrd.uiuc.edu> granston@uicsrd.csrd.uiuc.edu writes: #> #>Can someone post a comparison of the Imagewriter LQ to the Imagewriter #>II? How does the Imagewriter LQ compare to the Imagewriter II #>in terms of both quality and speed? I have a sample of Imagewriter II #>output, but I can't find an Imagewriter LQ to try out. #>How much better is the LQ printing quality? I've heard rumors #>that the LQ in it's highest quality printing mode is "virtually #>too slow to be usable"? Can anyone confirm or deny this? #>Lani Granston I've only used an Imagewriter II a couple of times and haven't experimented a lot with its quality. The LQ when it's working right is almost as good as a LaserWriter, over 200 elements per inch. It isn't terribly slow in highest quality mode; it's slower for graphics than for text, but then so is any other printer. Steve Goldfield
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<26497@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!iuvax!cica!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!agate!violet.berkeley.edu!steveReferences:
<43100013@uicsrd.csrd.uiuc.edu>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!iuvax!cica!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!agate!violet.berkeley.edu!steve From: steve@violet.berkeley.edu (Steve Goldfield) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac Subject: Re: Imagewriter II vs. LQ Message-ID: <26497@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> Date: 19 Jul 89 23:42:51 GMT References: <43100013@uicsrd.csrd.uiuc.edu> Sender: usenet@agate.BERKELEY.EDU Organization: University of California, Berkeley Lines: 20