Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 07:16:28 -0500 From: David Kelly <dkelly@hiwaay.net> To: Ted Mittelstaedt <tedm@toybox.placo.com> Cc: Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>, FreeBSD Questions <questions@freebsd.org>, Chuck Robey <chuckr@telenix.org> Subject: Re: Duplex printer advice Message-ID: <43742D27-BF20-4BDF-B73C-2AB6B28B1471@hiwaay.net> In-Reply-To: <BMEDLGAENEKCJFGODFOCKELICFAA.tedm@toybox.placo.com> References: <BMEDLGAENEKCJFGODFOCKELICFAA.tedm@toybox.placo.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Jun 4, 2008, at 4:46 AM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > What part of: > > "...there was no case i found postscript to print faster...You won't > on an > HP printer, at least not an older one..." > > is not understandable? > > Let me repeat - on most HP printers PostScript IS SLOWER BECAUSE > HP DESIGNED IT THAT WAY. It is NOT slower because of some inherent > issue with PostScript itself. > > Did you know that Ghostscript is used as the Postscript engine > in a number of printers? Only in "postscript compatible" printers such as the Brother HL-5250DN. When Genuine Postscript is included it is ported to the printer by Adobe. Adobe does not allow it to be crippled as conspiracy-theory Ted claims. All genuine Postscript printers ship with similar CPUs, originally Motorola 68000 family, for this very reason. -- David Kelly N4HHE, dkelly@HiWAAY.net ======================================================================== Whom computers would destroy, they must first drive mad.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?43742D27-BF20-4BDF-B73C-2AB6B28B1471>