MacOSX-admin Digest, Vol 39, Issue 26

[Ashley Aitken]

On 03/04/2007, at 11:05 PM, Scott Ribe wrote:

>> ..but I wouldn't knock third-party implementations too quickly.
>
> Every single person who's knocking the 3rd-party implementations is
> reporting having had significant problems with them.

Every single one?

> I'm not quite sure why
> you don't seem to be able to acknowledge that point.

Because I am not sure it is a problem with the 3rd party  
implementations as opposed to lack of memory in the printer, for  
example.

I've had problems with my HP 2100TN (that I believe uses a non-Adobe  
postscript implementation) but I not so quick to blame the 3rd party  
implementations over other problems (like memory).

I have no problem admitting it could be the 3rd party implementations  
though.

>> But Adobe's Postscript is Postscript emulation as well...
>
> Well, no, it's not. It's an *interpreter* for the Postscript  
> language. I
> think we all just let that quibble pass the first time, but if  
> you're going
> to keep repeating it, then it needs to be corrected.

Ok sure, interpreter would be a better word. I should have used that,  
thanks for pointing it out.  Can't one say, also though, that the  
application on the printer is emulating a Postscript machine/ 
interpreter?

Like a Java Virtual Machine software is emulating a Java machine  
(whilst it is an interpreter for the Java language).  I guess I was  
just trying to understand why the call this third-party software  
"Emulated Postscript"

Cheers,
Ashley.

--
Ashley Aitken
Perth, Western Australia
mrhatken at mac dot com
Skype Name: MrHatken (GMT + 8 Hours!)