Conference hydra::amiga_v1

    Re .0:
    
>   I unpacked and tried out the PSDemo that's running around PD.  I'm not
>   sure which version of PageStream this demo is from.  I started printing
>   the demo document around 10:30AM and it was still printing page 5 nine
>   (9) hours later!
>   
>   My A500 has the 1 meg Agnus now and, at the moment, only 1 meg of
>   memory.  My printer is a Panasonic 1091 (parallel).  My question: Is PS
>   ALWAYS this slow, or do memory sizes and printer speeds have any
>   effect?  The printer doesn't seem to be going full blast or anything. 
>   In fact, it pauses for extended periods.  Surely, they can't expect us
>   to produce documents of more than a few pages with something this slow.

    I have PageStream 2.0 and a 9-pin Star SG-15 printer configured as an
    Epson clone.  I can assure you that even at the printer's highest
    density (208x240 dpi -- three passes per line), there's NO WAY it
    should take more than a few minutes per page to print.  My observation
    has been that PageStream 2.0 spends considerably less time (<50%)
    thinking about printing than ProWrite 3.0 (my word processor of choice)
    does at the same density.
    
>   BTW, the last AmigaWorld had a review on PageStream V2.0 while
>   PageStream V2.1 was being advertised in the same magazine.
    
    V2.1 appeared very soon after V2.0 and seems to be a bugfix release
    more than anything else.  Rumor has it that registered V2.0 owners will
    automatically receive free V2.1 upgrades, though I've heard nothing
    official from the publishers.

    I tried the demo as well (on a Citizen GSX-140 at 360x180) and it was
    very slow - not as slow as .0 however). I printed all 10 pages in about
    4 hours. I have a standard A2000 with WB 1.3.2 and KS 1.3 with 1Meg
    AGNUS and 3 Meg total ram.
    
    John

Re .1:

Sounds like there could possibly be some memory-dependence there, since a 3-Meg
user observes some slowness, a 1-Meg user incredible slowness. Bill, how much
memory do you have? If it's significantly higher than 3 Megs, we may have a
theory here! I'm interested in the result, since I was contemplating a purchase
of PageStream (or a competitor), and I have a 3-Meg machine as well.

(What I'd *really* like is Framemaker! So far I still haven't seen a DTP package
on the Amiga that supports fundamentals like TOC and indices, which I'd really
like for high-quality technical reports and proposals.)

Bob

    Re .3:
    
    I should have pointed out my hardware configuration.
    
    	A500+A501 (512KB CHIP RAM, 512KB "Half Fast" RAM)
    	A590 Hard Drive (1MB Fast RAM installed)
    
    Total is 2MB Fast RAM, well below the amount claimed in .2.
    
    I'm using KS1.3 and WB1.3.2, so I have the (faster) 1.3 print drivers.
    
    Offhand, the demo doesn't sound like it would do much to sell copies of
    PageStream.  How about checking out the "About" item in the Project
    menu to see what version the demo is based upon?

    Another explanation might be that the demo was specifically crippled to
    make printing slow so that you would get tired of waiting and pony up
    the $mumble$hundred$ to get the full program. Although 2 hours a page
    seems excessive. A C=128 running GEOS printing quad density (144x160?)
    takes less than half an hour on a 1091i, an Amiga ought to go much
    faster (1MHz/8-bit vs 7MHz 16-bit).

    RE: .1
    
    I received my free PageStream V2.1 upgrade a couple days ago. It has
    a VERY nice feature. You can import CLIPS now, *and* edit them in the
    document file!
    

    Re .6:
    
>   I received my free PageStream V2.1 upgrade a couple days ago.
    
    Did you have to request it, or did they send the upgrade automagically?
    I'm looking forward to mine.

    Re: .0

    I was curious about the print speeds you're seeing as I've got the
    same printer (Panasonic 1091) as the base noter, so I d'loaded the
    demo and tried it on my system (A500 w/ 3 meg, WB 1.3.2, EpsonX driver).
    At the lowest density setting (120 x72) page 1 took about 3-4 minutes to 
    print (haven't tried other density settings or other pages of the document 
    yet). Maybe your excessively slow printing is due to having the density 
    set too high?

    -Dom
 

    Dom,
    	you may be right about the setting, but even 3-4 minutes per page
    with the lower setting seems extreme. That printer can rip off a full
    page in "draft" mode in 30 seconds. Maybe twice that time in graphic
    mode if the system doesn't have too much going on. That or my KXP1091i
    is ever so much faster than a non-i model - unlikely as that may seem.

    Figured while I had nothing better to do, I'd give the highest density
    (7 = 240 x 216) a whirl. It took about 3 minutes before it started to
    print, then another 17 to print page 1. Looks nice, but at this rate
    I'm gonna need a new ribbon :-). Think I'll pass on printing the rest
    of the document.

    -Dom

    Yes, my print density was 7.  That is the highest, I think.  I'll try
    it again at about 3 and see what happens.
    
        Tonyf

    The update was automatic for anyone with V2.0.
    
    Regarding print densities, you'll slow things down considerably at
    higher densities. You might also check to see if your higher densities
    require two passes per line. If so, that will effectively double the
    print time.
    
    I've also noted that a lower density produces better output of
    bitmapped graphics containing grey-scale.
    

    I've been playing with the PageStream demo, I'm reasonably impressed.
    Printing speed (PostScript) seems quite good.  I've been comparing it
    to a friend's (newly purchased) Professional Page.  There's one feature
    that I haven't been able to find in PageStream...  In PPage, you can
    adjust size and position of the frame independently from the picture
    therein, e.g. crop the image.  So far I haven't figured out how to do
    this in PageStream, the picture always gets scaled in proportion to the
    frame changes.  I assume PageStream must have this feature somewhere,
    anybody know the "magic" incantation?

    I'm looking for opinions on the pros and cons of Pagestream vs PPage.
    I've looked at all the notes on the subject here that I can find, but
    can't find much that is likely to be valid for current versions of the
    two.

    One of the Amiga rags has a review of PPage, Pagestream, and Saxon
    Publisher this month.  It helps a bit, but feels somewhat biased in
    favor of Pagestream.  One of its major assertions is that Pagestream
    supports Adobe fonts while PPage doesn't.  Yet it also says that PPage
    supports PS output.  I don't understand how it can do one without the
    other.  This is important to me - I expect to be doing all output to a
    postscript printer.

    Other than that, I gather that the functionality of the two packages is
    quite similar.  However from the notes here it also appears that
    Pagestream has a history of being more buggy than PPage.  This of
    course can be the most important factor of all.

    It appears that several people have both packages.  If so, why?

	Paul

    re: .14
    
    I haven't seen the review, but it is perfectly possible for a DTP
    package to support PostScript output without supporting PostScript
    fonts.  A package that doesn't support PostScript fonts would just
    send all its characters to the printer as bitmaps.
    
    There is also an intermediate possibility: supporting a small number
    of PostScript fonts.  I am in that situation with ProWrite/ProScript.
    I have a relatively modern PostScript printer, equivalent to a
    LaserWriter-Plus.  However, the package supports only those PostScript
    fonts that were present in the original LaserWriter, and has no
    provision for adding more.  As a result I am more and more using
    AmigaTeX verson 3, which has full PostScript support, including the
    ability to add new fonts which you either purchase or write yourself.
        John Sauter

    Re .14:

>   I'm looking for opinions on the pros and cons of Pagestream vs PPage.
>   I've looked at all the notes on the subject here that I can find, but
>   can't find much that is likely to be valid for current versions of the
>   two.
    
    I have PageStream 2.1 (the automatic update came mere days after I
    entered a note asking if others had received theirs).  It's not
    perfect, but I'm quite happy with it.

>   One of the Amiga rags has a review of PPage, Pagestream, and Saxon
>   Publisher this month.  It helps a bit, but feels somewhat biased in
>   favor of Pagestream.  One of its major assertions is that Pagestream
>   supports Adobe fonts while PPage doesn't.  Yet it also says that PPage
>   supports PS output.  I don't understand how it can do one without the
>   other.  This is important to me - I expect to be doing all output to a
>   postscript printer.
    
    Both products support both PostScript and non-PostScript printers. 
    Professional Page supports the built-in Adobe fonts (e.g. Times,
    Courier, Helvetica, & Symbol) on PostScript printers, but cannot
    produce the equivalent output on non-PostScript printers, which
    PageStream CAN.  Both products support Compugraphic outline fonts for
    high-quality dot-matrix (including LaserJet) output and each is shipped
    with at least two.  The bottom line is that neither has an edge if you
    send your data to PostScript printers; PageStream produces much better
    output if you don't.

>   Other than that, I gather that the functionality of the two packages is
>   quite similar.  However from the notes here it also appears that
>   Pagestream has a history of being more buggy than PPage.  This of
>   course can be the most important factor of all.
    
    PageStream 2.1 was a bugfix version.  That doesn't mean that 2.0 was a
    turkey, but it's clear that 2.0 wasn't as stable as the authors wanted
    it to be.  I've had no serious problems with either version.
    
    Since we've been talking about outline fonts, one nicety in PageStream
    is the DISPLAY of outline fonts on the screen.  Truly, what you see IS
    what you get.  The cost of this is in CPU cycles, so editing becomes
    (painfully) slow due to repainting of the screen.  You can disable this
    feature AND/OR zoom in close enough that the number of characters to be
    repainted is reduced AND/OR minimize the editing process by using a
    regular word processor to create articles for paste-up by PageStream. 
    PageStream can import ProWrite and Excellence! documents directly, even
    retaining most of the embedded formatting information.
                                                                

    I use PPage 2.0 and am also quite pleased with it. I read the article
    you mentioned,and came away disinchanted. The writer stated that for
    professional work that he liked Pagestream, but in the next breath it
    was stay tuned for next month when I cover output. Well I don't see how
    he could make the statement he did before covering output. If you need
    4 color seps I feel PPage is by far the better. If you like bell,and
    whistles then Pagestream is it. I talk to people that own both on a
    regular basis, and PPage gets the nod a lot. Pagestream has many neat,
    and cute features but the professionals arn't swayed by printing type
    upsidedown etc as much as say PPages online support of the pantone
    color system. I can duplicate much of these features in PDraw but you
    can't duplicate pantone support at the level it has in PPage. I doulbt
    that you would be disappointed no matter which way you go. Pagestream
    will offer you a greater ability to import from several formats ie: GIF
    etc but it remains to be seen how good a job it does. I also know that
    Gold Disk upgrades more than The other people. Many of the upgrades I
    recieved(had 1.0) since 1.1 have been enhancements as opposed to bug
    fixes.
    								bill 

Thanks for the info.  I have been playing with the PageStream demo, and I
see that the speed is prohibitive for any editing, but might be tolerable
for layout.

I am still having trouble understanding the issue of supporting PS fonts:

PageStream is clearly drawing the characters, and can apparently scale them
arbitrarily on the screen, and can do this for Postscript fonts.  It seems
to me that this is a necessity in order to support any reasonable range of
printed font sizes while displaying the page on the screen in various
zooms.

I don't see how this can be done reasonably without actually processing the
fonts.  To do it with digitized screen fonts would seem to be prohibitive.
(For each font/size combination supported for printing there would need to
be screen fonts for each level of magnification.)

So how does PP do it if they don't understand Adobe fonts?  Perhaps they
are just restrictive on the font sizes and magnifications allowed with
Adobe fonts?  Or do they approximate appearance with some other scalable
font?

	Paul

    	They have a fairly elaborate caching scheme for storing the scaled
    versions of the characters you use. Each time you type a character that
    has not been used in that size before, there is a perceptable, but not
    oppressive delay. I haven't done anything bigger than a couple of pages
    in PP yet, but so far, I haven't stressed the capacity of my 3 Meg
    machine. The rendering speed is not fast enough to keep up with
    fast typing, but it doesn't miss by much. If I were doing a lot of this
    type of work, I would definitely get an accelerator.
           

>    	They have a fairly elaborate caching scheme for storing the scaled
>    versions of the characters you use. Each time you type a character that
>    has not been used in that size before, there is a perceptable, but not
>    oppressive delay.

This implies that PP generates scaled screen fonts somehow, but how does it
do so with Adobe fonts if it doesn't understand them?

Excellence just has corresponding screen fonts in a few sizes and limits you
to what you can select and the sizes they are displayed on the screen.

To do more without understanding the outline fonts, I suppose it would be
possible to try to scale the bitmapped screen fonts, but I can't imagine
that would work worth beans.  (Suppose you are using Times, and have screen
fonts in 8, 12, and 18 point sizes.  If you want 16, 14, or 36pt sizes
there is no big deal - they can be created by integral scaling; but if you
need 13pt, 20pt, or heaven forbid 6pt, then tough luck.)

I have a feeling I am asking stupid questions because I don't understand
even slightly how PP handles this or what restrictions it puts on font size
choices.

	Paul

    	PP can use Compugraphic outline fonts. It also uses scaled bitmap
    fonts, but those look about like what you would expect. The outline
    fonts produce surprisingly good results on a 9 pin printer.
    

>    	PP can use Compugraphic outline fonts. It also uses scaled bitmap
>    fonts, but those look about like what you would expect. The outline
>    fonts produce surprisingly good results on a 9 pin printer.

That begs my question, which is: how does it handle Adobe fonts?  Since I
want to output to a PostScript printer I want to use Adobe fonts, but I
don't understand how they are displayed on the screen in the whole range of
sizes that they can be printed.

Does someone have a phone number for tech support for PP?  Maybe the best
thing I can do is call them and ask.
    
	Paul

    I see that PP(PPAGE?) was mentioned here so I thought I'd break in.
    	PP uses the Compugraphic Scalable font technoligy. Now when you
    use a font for the first time it is stored in a cache. After that it
    is always available,and will not take as long to show on the screen as
    the first time. With scalable fonts you are dealing with something that
    is very close to a structured graphic in that it actually only exsists
    as a equation in memory or cache. Every time you use a different size
    this data is revamped,and added to cache. I used the convert program
    that comes with PP to convert the Compugraphic fonts to PostScript
    fonts. Then I simply send the font file down to the LPS20 before my 
    PostScript file  "Print /par=(data=post) fontname,filename. After the
    printing is done the font is flushed. I would dare to say if you have
    postscript fonts (adobe??) you could do the same but you won't need to
    convert. IF it is a font supported by the LPS20 then all you need to do
    is print the file. The postscript language should be able to handle any
    postscript file(except very complex drawings) aS LONG AS THE FONT IS
    AVAILABLE.
    								bill 

I seem to be having trouble making myself clear.

I KNOW that PP is capable of using Compugraphic scalable fonts.  But I
*DON'T WANT* to use them!  Using them would require purchasing them,
converting them to PS format and downloading them each time.  They probably
would print slower too, and might require more memory on the printer.

I have access to a PS printer and want to use ITS ADOBE fonts.  That way
they print fast, take no extra memory, don't have to be downloaded, and
don't have to be bought.

PP claims to support Postscript printers.  Every answer I get suggests
that while it does so it doesn't support the standard adobe fonts.
IS THAT TRUE?

I am rapidly concluding that I should go with PageStream.

I certainly hope C/A or somebody gets this font support issue resolved
before long.

	Paul

P.S. Sorry if I sound like I'm flaming - I thought this was a simple
     question, so I am frustrated at not finding a direct answer.

    PPage supports the standard Adobe fonts as I understand them,  i.e.
    AmericanType, AvanteGarde, Bookman, Lubalin, Courier, Times, Helvetica,
    NewCentury, Palatino, Souvenir, Univers, Garamond, etc...
    
    John
    
    

>    PPage supports the standard Adobe fonts as I understand them,  i.e.
>    AmericanType, AvanteGarde, Bookman, Lubalin, Courier, Times, Helvetica,
>    NewCentury, Palatino, Souvenir, Univers, Garamond, etc...
    
What is meant by "support"?  Is it capable of representing them on the
screen?  How would it do this without supporting the adobe font format?

(I guess it could have private outline fonts which approximate the
"standard" adobe fonts.  This would allow it to support the builtin adobe
printer fonts while not allowing it to handle additional ones.  IF that is
the situation it would be tolerable to me.)

Do you know if this is the case?

	Paul

    The screen handling (apart from the Cg supplied fonts) are "primative"
    representation. When PP prints it will use the native postscript font
    if available else it will down load - or you can forsce a down load
    regardless.
    
    I have had a reasonable look at the postscript PP produces and it
    doesn't look to bad - although I have had some fun printing
    ZapfDingbats.
    
    Print times are good - at least on my HP IIIp. I have compared the
    print times to an LN03 scriptwritter and I usually have the paper in my
    hand from the IIIp quicker - it images etc quicker but the print engine
    is slower. 
    
    The other fun I have with PP is that it seems to be most buggy in the
    printing area and will just freeze. I have adopted a policy (now) of 
    ALWAYS saving before printing.
    
    regards
    kevin
    
    My only related question is how do I make use of the MAC postscript
    fonts available?? ie after getting them onto the AMI how do I set them
    up for use?? ANyone done this yet - and if so what steps.
    
    

    	When you render fonts on your screen or if PP does the rendering
    for a printer, it uses CG outline fonts. Two are supplied with PP, one
    is Times and the other is a sans serif. You can also send a PostScript
    file to a PostScript printer and let it render the fonts using
    whatever fonts it uses, including Adobe. You can save PostScript
    files to disk, download them to your system at work and print them on
    a PostScript printer.
    
    	I have printed pages on my 9 pin printer, then created a PostScript
    file and downloaded it and printed it on the LN03. When I hold the two
    pages together up to the light to compare them, I get a very good match. 
    So, the CG Times font matches the Times font on the LN03 very well.
    I didn't have to send the font. The font available to the LNO3 was
    used. I haven't tried this with the sans serif font or any of the extra 
    fonts on the optional CG font disk (don't own it).
    
    	The two CG fonts supplied can also produce bold, italic and outline
    styles. In addition, you get several bitmap fonts that can be scaled.
    These do not produce good results, but are serviceable for drafts.
    Metric files are included so they will produce similar spacing to the
    PostScript fonts. You can do your drafts with these, then when you are
    satisfied with the page, you can create a PostScript output file and
    send it off to a PostScript printer that uses Adobe fonts.
    
    	I haven't used PageStream, but from what I have heard, the
    rendering time is very long. PP rendering performance is serviceable for
    occasional work on a stock Amiga. It's probably pretty darn good with
    an accelerator.
    
    	I hope this answers your question.
          

    When I stated I downloaded fonts I may have confused the issue. I only
    need to download the fonts that are not supported by the LPS20. If you
    want a "what you see is what you get" look from PP you need the
    scalable fonts. PageStream provides better font support, but I use
    PPage. I look at Pagestream and all it bells,and whistles and I think
    of the old saying"jack of all trades master of none". I haven't seen
    a converter that will convert one postscript font to another yet. As
    for using apple fonts you need to remember that apple is not pushing
    adobe fonts anymore, they are using their ROYAL fonts. I am not sure
    if you can use the adobe fonts available for the Mac's now even if you
    had PageStream. Anybody tried this yet? As an aside I just purchased a 
    Mac compatable 800k floppy,and Mac to Dos. So I am looking for Mac
    Clipart etc to try om the Amiga. Of course if you wish to use Mac
    fonts then you will need at least the Drive,and Mac to dos.
    							bill   
    

    
    from .27
    
>>    The other fun I have with PP is that it seems to be most buggy in the
>>    printing area and will just freeze. I have adopted a policy (now) of 
>>    ALWAYS saving before printing.
    
    Yes, I have had similar trouble when printing.  It seem that it doesn't
    have any protection from running out of chip ram when printing.  At
    least that seem to be my problem, I only have 512K of chip and when it
    hangs available chip is next to nothing.
    
    BTW: Have you noticed that after starting and exiting ProPage you lose
    about 40K of available chip ram?
    
    Now about the fonts.  Note .28 just about said it all.  Basically most
    of the CG fonts map to one of the LN03R fonts (which I assume are
    adobe).  When I try using a CG font that does not match anything on the
    LN03R, I get no output at all.  I haven't tried downloading a font yet.
    I'll have to give that a try (I want to use the Chancery font).
    I'll post the CG to LN03R font mapping when I can check my notes from
    home.
    
    Finally, back to what I think your original question was.  I have never
    tried telling PP to use bitmap fonts for the screen representation
    and then ordering postscript output.  I sure think it would work
    correctly, it has bitmap Times, Helvetica, and others.  If I get the
    chance I will give it a try tonight.
    
    BTW: Back when I was using City Desk.  It does not use CG fonts at all,
    so all screen fonts were bitmap, but I was able to produce postscript
    output as long as I used fonts that mapped to the LN03R.
    

I just called Gold Disk technical support.  This is what they told me:

- Rendering on screen is done from CG outline fonts.

- They have CG outlines compatible with the Adobe standard fonts, so you
  can use them and print with the adobe fonts.

- With PP2.1 will be included a utility which will convert adobe fonts (at
  least type 1) to CG format so they can use them for rendering.
  (PP2.1 is to be a free upgrade to 2.0 owners and to come out within a
  month.)

- Given metric files for an adobe font you can alias it to some font they
  have in CG form.  You will see the CG form on the screen and use the
  adobe on the printer.  Things should be rendered in the proper sizes on
  the screen, though how similar they look will depend on the actual
  similarity of their designs.  (This is apparently the way the standard
  adobe fonts are supported, but with quite similar CG fonts.)

This seems to be a reasonable level of support - enough to eliminate this
particular issue as a criterion for the choice between PP and PS.

Thanks for all the input.

	Paul