Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2008 16:53:07 -0600 (MDT) From: Warren Block <wblock@wonkity.com> To: Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> Cc: FreeBSD Questions <questions@freebsd.org> Subject: RE: Duplex printer advice Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.1.10.0806031643410.14860@wonkity.com> In-Reply-To: <20080603100421.B5921@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> References: <BMEDLGAENEKCJFGODFOCMELCCFAA.tedm@toybox.placo.com> <20080602232417.J36835@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <alpine.BSF.1.10.0806022007290.10705@wonkity.com> <20080603100421.B5921@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 3 Jun 2008, Wojciech Puchar wrote: >> This depends a lot on your print jobs. Low quality machine-generated >> PostScript output can be slow. PCL can also be slow. The only way to >> really know is to benchmark with your print jobs. > > there was no case i found postscript to print faster. But then you've said you're using a LaserJet 4, which came out in 1992 and has a slow PS interpreter. Some of my print jobs ran much faster in PS, because it only sent a few K of PS rather than a megabyte of bitmap in PCL. >> There's also the potential overhead of the print processing systems. Just >> sending PS in the first place may be quicker than apsfilter or CUPS. > > i use lpd+my script for filtering postscript to PCL > >> Recent printers have fast RISC CPUs and fast PS interpreters. I/O speed >> comes into it, too. FreeBSD seems particularly slow over parallel and USB > > both not true, but just use lptcontrol for parallel port! Did that, didn't help (at the time). Not an issue with Ethernet. -Warren Block * Rapid City, South Dakota USA
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.1.10.0806031643410.14860>