🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <216@esquire.UUCP> sbb@esquire.UUCP (Stephen B. Baumgarten) writes:
>
>I, too, believe in using the right tool for the right job, and when it comes
>to individual page layout and graphic design, the Mac is unsurpassed.  But
>when it comes to complicated, multi-page technical documents, where
>relationships between the elements of the document become more important than
>its physical layout (e.g., you want to break the page here if and only if
>a certain table won't fit on the remainder of the page, etc.), face it guys,
>the Mac just can't hack it.  You need troff or TeX.
>
>   Steve Baumgarten             | "New York... when civilization falls apart,
>   Davis Polk & Wardwell        |  remember, we were way ahead of you."
>   ...!seismo!cmcl2!esquire!sbb |                           - David Letterman

	It's amazing how often I read comments telling me what my
Mac cannot do. TeX runs very well on a Mac, thank you. The
processing on a Mac II may be slightly slower than a SUN 3/50, but the previwer
is much faster and more flexible. Since the II and the Sun have the
same CPU at the same clock speed, I attribute the speed difference
to the fact that I'm running the equivalent of Initex on the Mac. I
can \dump format files at any time. I imagine that Kellerman and
Smith could speed things up if they put their energy into it. As it
stands, I'm glad they put it into the interface, which is much
better than the TeX one sees on mainframes. (O.K., by Mac standards,
it's pretty weak, ..... sigh...)
	Anyway, it's true that postscript handling programs are
giving the same output powers to many different machines. With a
monitor like a SUN's, you can even see what you're doing on a UNIX
system. This is fantastic. It's also amazing that you can do it on a
tiny little computer like a Mac :-). Let's all pause in wonder at
our current capabilities and not attack each other's choices.
	Happy TeXing,
			Matt