Conference vaxuum::document_ft

    Sorry, but the Laserwriter is not a supported device.  We commit
    to supporting DEC's PostScript devices.  We have, as a test, set
    VAX DOCUMENT output on a Linotype typesetter.  I don't know why
    the Laserwriter won't work.  It might well have to do with memory
    requirements.
    
    PostScript, they say, is "standard".  So is Pascal.  But
    implementations of PostScript, like implementations of Pascal, are
    about 80-90 per cent the same, and the rest different.  Also, earlier
    versions of PostScript devices have bugs that have been fixed in
    later versions.
    
    For instance, we used to have a PostScript driver that worked with
    Laserwriters but failed on the LPS40.  It turned out it was using
    a convention that was "standard" in early PS implementations but
    was, in fact, forbidden in the PS language manual.
    
    If we can get VAX DOCUMENT output to work on Laserwriters, fine.
    But it's not a commitment (and DEC would like everybody to buy
    ScriptPrinters :-) ).
    
    Mark

    Mark,
    
    Any idea how one can tell if DOCUMENT's PostScript ouotput will
    work on a certain PostScript printer?  There are, or will be a lot 
    of high resolution laser printers coming out on the market that
    are very attractive, and for which DIGITAL has no counterpart.
    
    I'd like to be able to know in advance if we'll be able to use them
    or not.
    
    -- Craig

    Sorry, but I don't know of a way to predict failure on any specific
    kind of device.
    
    After V1.0 gets out the door and we settle in for the next round,
    we'll be doing a lot of work on the PostScript converter.  I hope
    to have the time to at least see why it fails on the Laserwriter.
    
    It is encouraging, however, that we've been able to set our files
    on the Linotype.  We plan to produce at least one of our manuals
    that way, so that we can gain more experience with that kind of
    device.  We've also been urged to support high-end devices that
    do not compete with DEC (again, like the Linotype), and we see that
    as a desirable goal.
    
    We are now a product-development group, but our first priority is
    still to support Corporate User Publications and other DEC publishing
    groups, and we view support of such devices as being important to
    our in-house users as well.
    
    Thanks for asking.  Sorry I couldn't fully answer your question
    right now.
    
    Mark

RE:< Note 480.1 by VAXUUM::DEVRIES "M.D. -- your Device Doctor" >
>    Sorry, but the Laserwriter is not a supported device.

Funny thing happened...I generated some Postscript software and tried the 
include the code in the .SDML file.  Didn't work.  I then included a 
drawing the was generated using GRED and rendered for Postscript.  That 
worked!  What's the deal?  I'm just getting into learning the Postscript 
code and I'm trying to figure out why it won't include Postscript source 
code that draws a little box.

Dale

    RE: .4
    
    > What's the deal?
    
    I don't know what's the deal -- but a VAX DOCUMENT output file contains
    about 50 blocks of macro definitions plus, most likely, caption text 
    and a page number, even if all you do is "include a drawing".  So a 
    document that contains a drawing is not the same as a standalone drawing.
    This is a big penalty for a little document -- but results in a big 
    savings for a big document.  
        
    Yes, all these things are made up of PostScript and yes, some of
    the pieces may work by themselves.  But some other pieces won't
    work.  I don't yet know why and, with code "slush" four days away
    now, I must concentrate on committed features.
    
    I'm sorry to be delivering such an off-putting answer, but the fact
    is that we have not committed to supporting the Laserwriter.  The
    Laserwriter, at the very least, has less memory than some supported
    devices, and some other variations as well.  As I said before --
    after V1.0 I will try to find out why these documents don't always
    work on such a device.  If it's a "bug" that will probably crop
    up on supported devices eventually, for instance, we'll certainly
    fix it.  But if it requires special accommodation for Apple, we'll
    have to put it on the wishlist and evaluate it with the other
    possibilities.
    
    
    > But it does support the Laserwriter
    
    This is precisely why I'm being so careful to state it this way:
    some things may work;  many things won't work;  to say we "support"
    a device means we commit that ALL things will work.  Not all things
    will work on a Laserwriter, so we do not even hint that we support
    it.  If you've got a Laserwriter and some things happen to work
    now, that's nice -- and not unexpected.  But we simply cannot devote
    time in the few remaining days of development to debug our interaction 
    with Apple's printer.
    
    If I've been heavy-handed in this reply, please forgive me.  In
    no way do I mean to attack those who are contributing to this topic.
    I am just trying to clear up any misconceptions about this subject.
    Don't be misled by marketing hype and half-page articles in trade
    journals -- PostScript devices, like IBM-compatible PCs, are not 100%
    alike.
    
    And thank you for your continuing interest and valuable feedback.
    
    Mark
                

RE:< Note 480.5 by VAXUUM::DEVRIES "M.D. -- your Device Doctor" >

Mark,

Thanks for the explanation.  Don't worry about sounding heavy-handed, I'd 
much rather hear it 'exactly' the way it is!

Dale

    Yesterday I ran into someone who has a Laserwriter PLUS, and he
    was able to print my .POST files.  I didn't try anything big, but
    previously I hadn't been able to print ANY .POST files on our lowly
    LW minus.
    
    He mentioned that he'd seen the same thing with other PostScript
    files -- some wouldn't print on a plain LW but would print on a
    LN03R and on an LW+.
    
    So there's hope for you LW PLUS owners, and further support for
    the notions that (1) VAX DOCUMENT isn't doing anything pathological
    and (2) the problem is most likely the limited memory of the plain
    LW.
    
    This was, of course, a tiny sample (n=2).  If you have occasion
    to try to print .POST files on an LW *PLUS*, please report the results
    (good or bad) here.
    
    Thanks,
    Mark