🚀 go-pugleaf

In this argument about the suitability of embedded-command vs. WYSIWYG and
laser printer vs. photocomposer, several distinct issues seem to have
become confused.

WYSIWYG systems are extremely useful for some applications.  Embedded-command
systems are just as useful for other applications.  For example, if I were
producing, for example, a newsletter for limited distribution (such as for
a club or other local organization), I would use a WYSIWYG page layout system
and a small laser printer.  A Macintosh with Aldus PageMaker and a LaserWriter
would be the way to go.  It would allow me to do a ONE-TIME layout quickly and
accurately, with fast proofing and output quality good enough for xerographic
reproduction.  It certainly beats a Selectric.  This is being popularly
referred to as ``desktop publishing.''  This is what such products as PageMaker
were designed for.

On the other hand, if I were writing a book that would be conventionally
printed, I would use TeX (or a TeX macro package such as LaTeX) with a
laser printer for proofing and a photocomposer for reproduction masters.
Put simply, I have not found a better system for getting the highest quality
output with the smallest expenditure of effort.  I don't WANT to manually
lay out each page of my document.  I don't even want to manually lay out
section headings and the like.  I want to specify the format I want once,
in excrutiating detail if necessary, and not worry about it again.  Aside
from that, TeX's handling of kerning, page and line breaking, etc., works
correctly.  In the uncommon situation that you need it to act differently,
it can.  All you have to do is tell it what you want.  If you want
unhyphenated, ragged-right text set without leading, you can do it by putting
one line at the beginning of your text.  If you decide it was a bad idea
after all, take out that line.  Voila!.

Ah, but I hear the objection that it wastes paper to reformat and print it
to make sure it came out the way you wanted it.  This is not true.  Since
TeX puts out a device independent file, I can preview it on my screen first,
and then print out selected pages.

As to output devices, laser printers are very nice toys.  They allow
quite reasonable-looking output on a demand basis at a fairly low cost.
If a photocopy is good enough quality (such as for a reference manual
for a computer program, high-class form correspondence, etc.), a laser
printer is usually the right solution.  For professional printing,
however, there is no substitute for a photocomposer.  I can see jaggies
on a 300 dpi LaserWriter.  It does an admirable approximation, but it
isn't the same, especially when reproduced.

What type of software & hardware is the ``best way'' depends on what you
are doing.  Let me draw an analogy--If I want to move my belongings from
Ohio to California, I'll use a moving van.  If I want to get from my home
to a conference in another state, I'd rather have a Ferrari.  Neither
is better than the other.  What's important is to use the right tools
for the job at hand.

-- 
				-- Clayton Elwell
				Elwell@Ohio-State.CSNET
				Elwell%Ohio-State@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
				...!cbosgd!osu-eddie!elwell
-----------------
"Roads? Where we're going, we don't need roads..."