MacOSX-admin Digest, Vol 39, Issue 26

[Ashley Aitken]

Howdy All,

On 03/04/2007, at 8:48 AM, Alex Satrapa wrote:

> On 02/04/2007, at 23:39 , Scott Ribe wrote:
>
>>> Works just fine for 99% of people.
>>
>> I don't define: "refusing to print a not-complex page" as "works  
>> fine for
>> 99% of people".
>
> I think the main problem is that "non-complex" in today's terms is  
> far more complex than "non-complex" in the days gone by. Look at  
> the PostScript being produced by something even as simple as BBEdit  
> printing syntax coloured source code. (almost) Every letter is  
> individually positioned and coloured. I can understand why cheap  
> PostScript emulation would have a headache with some of this stuff.

Please someone correct me if I am wrong:

Why would this be any different from the Adobe Postscript  
implementation (apart from the fact that Adobe probably have a better  
implementation of the Postscript specification)?

Even an Adobe Postscript implementation is emulating the Postscript  
program (which is the document being printed).  We're just talking  
about two (or more) different implementations of the same emulator  
specification.

I would say its very similar to two different implementation of the  
Java Virtual Machine.

I don't believe there is chip that runs Postscript natively.

Now if the "Emulated Postscript" implementation is actually  
outputting another printing language (e.g. PCL although I am not sure  
that would be sufficient) then that would be another situation.

Cheers,
Ashley.