🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <0ZLD=oG00WBLQ1UnJM@andrew.cmu.edu> dw2x+@andrew.cmu.edu (Duane T. Williams) writes:
>
>In a recent article, Brian Bezanson writes:  "But for now I repeat that
>ATM works, and very well if you listen to our users."
>
>Not if you listen to this user.  The quality of ATM output on my
>ImageWriter is, for the most part, no better than what I get without it,
>and in some cases it's (surprisingly) worse.  And it's very slow.  For
>me, it was a waste of money.  I would advise most people to wait for
>System 7.0.

Works fine for me.  Quite nicely, in fact.  Then again, I didn't go
off to buy ATM expecting some miracle as it seems others have.  ATM
does exactly what it says it does.  It generates bitmaps based on
the outline fonts for when you need a size that isn't installed in
your system.

People have been bitching (yes, bitching) that 12 point fonts look
better with the bitmaps installed.  To that I say, of course they
do.  You're not going to get any better than hand-tuned bitmaps?
How could anyone possibly expect that?

I keep all the general bitmaps installed.  ATM kicks in when I need
a nice 48 point headline and it looks great.

Conclusion: ATM won't produce miracles and Adobe doesn't advertise it as such.

Ken



--
Ken Hancock '90            | DISCLAIMER: I'm graduating and looking for
Consultant                 |             a job, so I'll stand by my words.
Computer Resource Center   |==============================================
Dartmouth College          | EMAIL: isle@eleazar.dartmouth.edu