🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <18000049@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu) morris@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu writes:
)... Yes, Apple has a better technology (quadratic curve definition vs.
)cubic which render faster), and the new system will simplify the rats nest of
)problems caused by font ID conflicts. But the real reason Royal will succeed
)while other great technology has failed is quite simple. Royal makes cents!
)By breaking the monopolistic power of Adobe, and providing the font technology
)without licencing fees, Apple has certainly executed a coup. Royal fonts will
)be cheaper and easier to use. And better. They will work for the same reason
)that great technology has often failed, because of the all important dollar.

I have to question the statement that Apple has a better technology.
Would you justify that, please?

Quadratics may draw faster, but they are inherently less smooth and
require more points, and hence more storage space, to define a path
comparable to PostScript. It remains to be seen whether or not Royal
fonts will be cheaper. Why will they be better?
How will they be "easier to use"?  I've read all of the
quoted articles, and while it doesn't seem clear to me which
technology (or should I say strategy) is better, it does seem apparent
that Apple's primary motivation is money, not altruism.
Also, the "coup" hasn't been executed yet. At least one of the
articles mentioned that it can take years to create digital typefaces,
and Adobe certainly is well entrenched in that area. (e.g., I can't
imagine my local Lino shop dumping their huge investment in PostScript;
come to think of it, I don't want to dump mine either)

-- 
Frank Kolnick,
Basis Computer Systems Inc.
UUCP: {allegra, linus}!utzoo!mnetor!frank