🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <2519@phri.UUCP> roy@phri.UUCP (Roy Smith) writes:
>	PostScript is wonderful.  If DDL is something which has roughly the
>same capabilites as PostScript, but is different just for the sake of being
>different, why bother?  My personal opinion is that any laser printer
>company that doesn't come out with a true PostScript printer soon is headed
>for the tubes.

Like Xerox?

But seriously, folks, while I, too, like PostScript (a lot), I found
this to be arrogant and a bit narrow.  We have two Xerox 9700s and one
4050 running at full tilt much of the time, and find for many (if not
most) applications (DP-type printing, forms, job output, reports, etc.)
we need the speed of those printers more than we need the fancy
features that PostScript provides.  The probability that someone could
drive a printer at 120 ppm with PostScript and make it available at
reasonable cost approaches nil.  It's not even clear that Xerox can
drive a 9700 with Interpress, which is more oriented toward big,
batch-y sort of situations than is PostScript.

The jury is still out on what will become the standard page description
language, and there really doesn't seem to be anything available yet
that can service both small desktop publishing (I hate that phrase)
applications and large DP printing needs.
-- 
Melinda Shore                               ..!ihnp4!gargoyle!sphinx!shor
University of Chicago Computation Center    XASSHOR@UCHIMVS1.Bitnet