MHS108@psuvm.psu.edu (Mark Solsman) (03/23/90)
I am looking for some advice on which laser printer to get. I have looked at
The HP series 2p, the Epson EPX-6000 laser (maybe wrong model number), and the
HP Series 3. My findings are that for my use, the 3 is too much, although it
is probally the best printer EVER made! The HP 2p lacks a straight thru paper
feed. The epson is like the 2p but has the straight-thru pass.
So here it is... Which is better?
The HP series 2P 4ppm; 16 fonts
The Epson 6ppm; 6 fonts
(I will be using Go-Script POST-SCRIPT Emulator)
If I use the post script emu, than do I really need all of those built in fonts
thanks-cs4g6ag@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca (Stephen M. Dunn) (03/27/90)
In article <90081.180614MHS108@psuvm.psu.edu> MHS108@psuvm.psu.edu (Mark Solsman) writes:
$So here it is... Which is better?
$ The HP series 2P 4ppm; 16 fonts
$ The Epson 6ppm; 6 fonts
$ (I will be using Go-Script POST-SCRIPT Emulator)
$If I use the post script emu, than do I really need all of those built in fonts
No, and GoScript will not use them. In fact, the PPM ratings _and_
number of built-in fonts are both pretty useless if you'll be using GoScript
for everything, since the limiting factor as far as time goes is the
processing power of your CPU. Anything less than a 25 MHz 386+387 with
at least 1M of EMS won't even come close to generating 4 pages of output
in a minute.
I'd advise you to think about what you'll be using it for other than
for GoScript output, as I doubt you'll use that all the time.
--
Stephen M. Dunn cs4g6ag@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca
<std_disclaimer.h> = "\nI'm only an undergraduate!!!\n";
****************************************************************************
"So sorry, I never meant to break your heart ... but you broke mine."dlow@hpspcoi.HP.COM (Danny Low) (03/28/90)
>I am looking for some advice on which laser printer to get. I have looked at >The HP series 2p, the Epson EPX-6000 laser (maybe wrong model number), and the >HP Series 3. > >If I use the post script emu, than do I really need all of those built in fonts You can get postscript emulation cartridges for the HP Laserjet printers. I have never used one but all the test reports I have ever read indicate they are faster than any postscript emulator. Some are actually as good as a real postscript printer but much cheaper. Danny Low "Question Authority and the Authorities will question You" Valley of Hearts Delight, Silicon Valley HP SPCD dlow%hpspcoi@hplabs.hp.com ...!hplabs!hpspcoi!dlow
mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us (Marc Unangst) (03/29/90)
cs4g6ag@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca (Stephen M. Dunn) writes: > In article <90081.180614MHS108@psuvm.psu.edu> MHS108@psuvm.psu.edu (Mark Sols > >[he asks whether a HP-IIP or an Epson laser is better with GoScript] > > I'd advise you to think about what you'll be using it for other than > for GoScript output, as I doubt you'll use that all the time. In fact, if you *are* going to be doing a lot of PostScript output, you might want to seriously consider a PostScript emulator cartridge. Although they may only be available for the HP (and it will take up your only font/whatever cartridge slot in the IIP), it will be a LOT faster than any PS interpreter, such as GoScript. If you'll be doing a LOT of PostScript printing, you might be better off getting a PostScript printer and then buying a HP->PS translator program for the programs that support HP output but not PS output If you're not going to be doing a lot of PostScript, then I might question why you're even considering something like GoScript. As Mr. Dunn observed (in a part I deleted), unless you have a fast 386+387 and at least 1MB extended memory, GoScript is going to be really, really slow. REALLY slow. Interpreting PostScript code is a very processor-intensive task; that's why printers that support PostScript, like the Apple LaserWriter NTXSDGLKJ (or whatever letter sequence they're using this week) include on-board 68000's or 68010's. In fact, you might even be better off printing it to a disk, and then taking the disk over to Jack's Printing and Photocopying and running it off on their PostScript printer. If you only print out 10-15 pages a month, this might be more economical than any of the other options. (BTW, please forgive me if any of this stuff has already been mentioned... I never saw the original article, just Mr. Dunn's reply.) -- Marc Unangst | "This country is in no way founded Internet: mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us | on the Christian religion." UUCP : ...!uunet!sharkey!mudos!mju | - George Washington Fidonet : Marc Unangst of 1:2200/129.0 +-------------------------------------- BBS : The Programmers' Pit Stop, 1200/2400 bps, +1 313 665-2832
malloy@nprdc.arpa (Sean Malloy) (03/29/90)
In article <FJVRg1w161w@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us> mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us (Marc Unangst) writes: >If you'll be doing a LOT of PostScript printing, you might be better off >getting a PostScript printer and then buying a HP->PS translator program >for the programs that support HP output but not PS output > >If you're not going to be doing a lot of PostScript, then I might >question why you're even considering something like GoScript. As >Mr. Dunn observed (in a part I deleted), unless you have a fast >386+387 and at least 1MB extended memory, GoScript is going to be >really, really slow. REALLY slow. Interpreting PostScript code >is a very processor-intensive task; that's why printers that >support PostScript, like the Apple LaserWriter NTXSDGLKJ (or whatever >letter sequence they're using this week) include on-board 68000's or >68010's. Not true. The lack of a coprocessor is normally not noticeable when printing text documents, where a small set of fonts and sizes is used. Only when the files to be printed include a significant fraction of graphics operations, or _large_ numbers of font and size changes, does a coprocessor significantly improve performance. And a dedicated PostScript printer isn't necessarily the fastest way to print your file. I recently created a PostScript file that took over 20 minutes on a LaserWriter (I don't know how much over it would take, because I killed the print job due to jobs backing up in the queue) that took less than a minute on my home system (386+387) with GoScript. If you're interested in seeing the file, send me e-mail; it's less than 2K of straight PostScript commands with no bitmap imaging at all (repeated outlined text with scaling, offsets, and rotation is all it does). From my observations comparing my home system running GoScript with the Laserwriters at work, running straight text output there isn't a lot of speed difference (remember, I have a 'fast 386+387'); however, as soon as a significant amount of graphics get added, my home system will blow away the Laserwriter. Why Apple didn't include a floating point processor in their printer is a mystery. Sean Malloy | "The Crystal Wind is the Navy Personnel Research & Development Center | Storm, and the Storm is Data, San Diego, CA 92152-6800 | and the Data is Life." malloy@nprdc.navy.mil | -- _Emerald Eyes_, D.K. Moran