laser-lovers@uw-beaver (02/01/85)
From: ihnp4!fortune!redwood!rpw3@uw-beaver.arpa (Rob Warnock)
These are my "dumb questions" of the month (in THIS newsgroup, at least).
I have been "observing" for a while and haven't noticed answers to these:
1. My understanding is that both Adobe's PostScript and Xerox's Interpress
are "document construction languages", rather than just "print formats".
Could someone comment on the similarities and differences between them?
2. Are they "mutually translatable", that is, will it be possible (and/or
feasible) to convert one to the other (either one way or both ways)?
If someone were to do both (for some strange reason), which should be
the "base" format and which converted from that base?
3. I have just begun studying the Interpress Electronic Printing Standard
and the other documents (2-3 inches of them) you get when you plop down
your $250.00 to Xerox for the Interpress Architecture set. Is there (yet)
a comparable set of documents for Postscript? ...and if so, how much do
they cost and how do I order them?
4. [Speculation:] Does Xerox actually USE Interpress in any products yet, or
do they still use some version of the "Empress" format (not to be confused
with Imagen's "Impress"... or is it?)? ...and if Interpress is not real yet,
is it likely to be supplanted by PostScript within Xerox?
Thanks in advance for any answers or discussion (mail or post, as appropriate).
Rob Warnock
Systems Architecture Consultant
UUCP: {ihnp4,ucbvax!dual}!fortune!redwood!rpw3
DDD: (415)572-2607
USPS: 510 Trinidad Lane, Foster City, CA 94404laser-lovers@uw-beaver (02/02/85)
From: dave@wisc-rsch.arpa (Dave Cohrs) Rob Warnock asks: > 4. [Speculation:] Does Xerox actually USE Interpress in any products yet, or > do they still use some version of the "Empress" format (not to be confused > with Imagen's "Impress"... or is it?)? ...and if Interpress is not real yet, > is it likely to be supplanted by PostScript within Xerox? Xerox uses Interpress in some of their workstation applications (I don't know specifics -- I haven't gotten my login on them yet...). I might add that they also use Empress and can print both formats. ---- (Bug? What bug? That's a feature!) Dave Cohrs ...!{allegra,heurikon,ihnp4,seismo,uwm-evax}!uwvax!dave dave@wisc-rsch.arpa
laser-lovers@uw-beaver (02/10/85)
From: Lee Moore <lee@rochester.arpa> > 4. [Speculation:] Does Xerox actually USE Interpress in any products yet, or > do they still use some version of the "Empress" format (not to be confused > with Imagen's "Impress"... or is it?)? ...and if Interpress is not real yet, > is it likely to be supplanted by PostScript within Xerox? Yes, for several years Xerox has been selling the 8044 print server as part of the "Star" line of products. It prints interpress documents. Recently, Xerox approached our Computing Center about beta-testing an interpress interpreter for their 9700. I assume this means that it will be offered as a product sometime in the future. I am not sure what the "Empress" format is that you are talking about. The Altos that we (U. of Rochester) got from Xerox use the "Press" format which is not supported by the above mentioned 8044. Press was just a research proto-type and is dramatically different from Interpress. Perhaps you heard the name "Empress" because that is the name of the program on the Altos to turn listings into Press files (among other things). lee moore, senior grad. student
laser-lovers@uw-beaver (02/10/85)
From: ihnp4!sdcrdcf!darrelj@uw-beaver.arpa (Darrel VanBuer)
Xerox really uses Interpress. The Xerox 8000 series (i.e. Star) has
been using it since introduction for printing (so for a couple of
years). Interlisp D code to generate Interpress masters contains
dates starting mid 1982. The Xerox 5700 laser printer supports
Interpress (for at least a year now), and it's announced for the 8700
and 9700. There are things in the standard which Xerox has yet to
implement (e.g. color, arbitrary rotation of text -- only 90 degree
multiples work). I don't know for sure about Postscript, but
Interpress is designed to describe the _appearances_ of individual
pages (e.g. this symbol in that position), and no information about
the logical structure (like this is a paragraph). Xerox no longer
sells anything which prints Press format documents (and were always
reluctant to), though Interlisp D still supports their generation.
Darrel J. Van Buer, PhD
System Development Corp.
2500 Colorado Ave
Santa Monica, CA 90406
(213)820-4111 x5449
...{allegra,burdvax,cbosgd,hplabs,ihnp4,orstcs,sdcsvax,ucla-cs,akgua}
!sdcrdcf!darrelj
VANBUER@USC-ECL.ARPAlaser-lovers@uw-beaver (02/13/85)
From: Randy Frank <FRANK@UTAH-20.ARPA> The comments from various people at Xerox sound like a last ditch attempt to save Interpress from years of corporate stupidity. Both XNS and Interpress *could* probably have become major industry-wide standards had it not been for Xerox's incredibly short-sighted position of on again/off again decisions as to whether or not to release them, releasing them in little pieces to only selected people, not stating up front a corporate position that ALL components of Xerox's communications architecture would be made publicly available in a TIMELY fashion, etc... (I *still* can't get a public description of something as silly as the font format for a Xerox 2700 laser printer, ostensibly because Xerox wants me to buy all my fonts from them. Xerox should be trying to win my font business by having the best and most complete font library, competitively priced, and not by trying to keep everyone else from competing). Even if Interpress and Postscript have similar technical capabilities, there are these non-technical considerations for adopting Postscipt as an industry wide page description language: 1) Adobe has made it clear that the specifications are public domain and easily obtainable, and that it intends to base its commercial success on the basis of the best products that implement the specifications, not on keeping the specifications under wraps. 2) Adobe is actively trying to license the Postscript interpreter (one of its products) to any and all comers, so that a very wide range of competing printers will be available to the market. Even though Xerox has finally released Interpress the likelyhood of Xerox doing anything to help others produce Interpress compatible printers is virtually nil. (I have had more than one person tell me one of the primary arguments against releasing Interpress was the fear inside of Xerox that it would enable the Japanese to produce printers that competed with those produced by Xerox). Xerox seems afraid to let its printers compete based on price/performance, and instead has kept specifications secret in an attempt to prevent competing products. The reality of today's marketplace is that users are rightfully insisting that interface specifications be fully available so that systems consisting of products from a wide assortment of vendors can be easily interconnected. Vendors who push "open systems interconnection" but then refuse to release any and all specifications needed to operate in such an environment are asking not to be taken seriously. -------