captkidd@athena.mit.edu (Ivan Cavero Belaunde) (08/16/89)
MacWorld this year: nothing absolutely *dazzling* but a lot of solid products
out there.
1) Apple had (surprisingly) nothing new to say or show. I guess they expected
to have the laptop and/or the IIci ready to show there, but it didn't
happen (a couple of the people in the Apple booth were trying *really*
hard to look clueless while saying "laptop? which laptop?" :-)
2) LaserMAX had a cheap (performance wise) laser printer: $7995 for 1000x400
dpi resolution and *astounding* printing speeds (15-20 seconds for
*complicated* Freehand files [multiple TIFFs+fonts with effects and
the like]). They also had Nubus cards that directly control the engine
on any LW, givin you 600x300 dpi resolution and much faster speeds.
Very nice products, very friendly people. I liked it.
2) Color printers were more common than at last year's show. Most of them
were the same-old thermal xfer technology. Like kent@lloyd.uucp
said, DOW was showing a nice expensive color printer. I saw a couple
of the new Kodak continuous tone printers around as well; they print
on photographic paper and had very nice output. Finally, Howtek had
*very* nice printers (for the money) that used a "Thermo-Jet" process
(ink jet with plastic ink that is melted on the spot). Some of the
nicest color output I've seen without any of the glossiness inherent
in the other printers. Postscript compatible, too.
3) A new company called Serius had a nice powerful development system. Very
visual and object oriented, (you write "objects" for your "project"
in C or Pascal, then add it). Spits out standalone applications.
*Very* nice. An apple person called it "what HyperCard should have
been." I'm not kidding, check it out.
4) Most elegant and cleanest hack of the show: A company (forget the name)
which allows you to get color scans out of a grey scale printers by
placing green, red, and blue high-quality transparent acetate sheets
over the source material and doing multiple scans, then putting all
three together in software. Very neat idea - hope they make much $.
5) SCSI software: LaCie's SilverLining. Although it has been mentioned in
the net, I hadn't seen it running yet. Impressive piece of work.
True SCSI partitioning and password protection, as well as a number
of other features (choose among six different drivers to optimize
performance, depending on your drive and machine, for example). One
of the neatest things I saw it do was to "truly" treat three 20M
drives as a 60M drive. The price takes it, though: $69.
6) Printers: HP's DeskWriter: outstanding. Enough has been said in the net
about this one already, so I'll mention the other two I saw that I
liked. GCC's WriteImpact: 360x180 dpi resolution with scalable and
fully rotatable (1 deg increments) outline fonts and a forecoming
utility to convert nonencrypted Bitstream and other fonts to the
GCC format for $699 list (including Times, Helvetica, Courier, Symbol,
Palatino and some other font I can't remember). Minor registration
problems (very hard to notice) which I was told would be solved by
release time (sometime this fall). Likewise, Toshiba's line of
24 pin 360x360 printers (including one in color) include outline font
technology. I didn't like the Toshiba's as much, since although their
resolution is nominally higher, the rendering of the fonts was not
as smooth. $699 list for their lowest priced model.
7) Memory everywhere, but nothing cheaper than what you could get mail order
from Chip Merchant or Tech Works.
8) Really stupid product: Computer Clothes. "Fashion" computer covers.
Expensive.
9) Word Processors: Forget Word, I'm getting Nisus. V2.0 is out, and includes
the missing pieces people were griping about: footnotes and endnotes.
It also has hyphenation now. Very fast. Now if they just added auto
numbering and referencing of figures, equations and tables, I'd be
in heaven.
10) MacroMind Director and Director Interactive. Director is, like it has
been said, what VideoWorks should have been. Director Interactive
adds most of the interactive abilities of HyperCard to it, as
well as compatibility with various video overlay boards and what not.
It was supposed to be a beta version, but I didn't see it crash once
while I was there.
11) Some company whose name I forgot already had a full-blown audio/video
editing system based on the Mac II. They used the Mac to control
professional videotape recorders and players and had digitized
frame by frame displays and audio-dub capabilities. Slick.
12) Electronic Arts had a DMCS-compatible MIDI multi-channel recorder/sequencer
- it had various editing capabilities as well (transpose, etc).
13) Quark XPress - new version. Impressive image manipulation capabilites
(shifting colors to make it warmer/colder, etc). "Font rendering"
ie using downloadable fonts' definitions to display them on the
screen at arbitrary sizes. Also permitted effects on those fonts
(stretching and what not). Columnar linking across pages ("Continued
on page X") which automatically updated itself. Much smoother
image importing and text-wrap-around-image than before. And *speed*.
Lots of it. Extremely fast. At first I thought it was running on
an accelerated Mac II, but it was a stock II.
That's about it, though.
Some exciting products, but too much rehashing of older stuff.
Oh well, maybe next year.
-Ivan
Internet: captkidd@athena.mit.edu) (08/17/89)
In article <13546@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU> captkidd@athena.mit.edu (Ivan Cavero Belaunde) writes: >3) A new company called Serius had a nice powerful development system. Very > visual and object oriented, (you write "objects" for your "project" > in C or Pascal, then add it). Spits out standalone applications. > *Very* nice. An apple person called it "what HyperCard should have > been." I'm not kidding, check it out. Anyone else knows about this, please post (or e-mail me) since I'm into getting myself a good development system, and presently consider Think C 4.0 8MPW ? Say No Go!) >9) Word Processors: Forget Word, I'm getting Nisus. V2.0 is out, and includes > the missing pieces people were griping about: footnotes and endnotes. > It also has hyphenation now. Very fast. Now if they just added auto > numbering and referencing of figures, equations and tables, I'd be > in heaven. So, soes it have CASE TRANSPOSING ?? This is why I use EMACS. I mean, really. Case transposing, flashing parentheses and autoindent can be quite nifty preparing lab reports, novels or letters too, apart from being a must in any code editor. Does any word processor on the market provide this ? (Microsoft ? Are you listening ? 8) And about QUARK Xpress and speed: PageMaker 3.0 is compiled with LSC, which is not as optimizing as MPW (In fact: not optimizing...) It might gain being re-compiled in MPW. But I understand the people at Aldus: LSC is the best environment by far. (Personal opinion, of course...) 'nuff said. Have a nice evening out or something. h+@nada.kth.se -- This is your fortune from h+@nada.kth.se: Death is Nature's way of saying 'slow down'.
mjkobb@mit-amt.MEDIA.MIT.EDU (Michael J Kobb) (08/17/89)
In article <13546@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU> captkidd@athena.mit.edu (Ivan Cavero Belaunde) writes: [...] >6) Printers: HP's DeskWriter: outstanding. Enough has been said in the net > about this one already, so I'll mention the other two I saw that I > liked. GCC's WriteImpact: 360x180 dpi resolution with scalable and ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > fully rotatable (1 deg increments) outline fonts and a forecoming > utility to convert nonencrypted Bitstream and other fonts to the > GCC format for $699 list (including Times, Helvetica, Courier, Symbol, > Palatino and some other font I can't remember). Minor registration > problems (very hard to notice) which I was told would be solved by [...] Really? What was the print technology on the WriteImpact. Can I assume from the name that it's a really high-resolution dot-matrix?? I was all convinced that I wanted to buy a DeskWriter, but now I'm not so sure... Anybody else see it? Any ideas? Are you wondering why this message is rambling? (Simple: the mailer on media-lab is stupid. If you include more text than you compose, it rejects the message. So in an attempt (?) to cut down on use of the bandwidth, they actually increase it when you need to include large files. :-( Any fixes, anyone? (I'll be talking to someone here about it soon, but if there's a command I'm missing, yell)) --Mike Standard disclaimers...
peter@aucs.uucp (Peter Steele) (08/17/89)
> So, soes it have CASE TRANSPOSING ?? This is why I use EMACS. I mean, really. > Case transposing, flashing parentheses and autoindent can be quite nifty > preparing lab reports, novels or letters too, apart from being a must in > any code editor. Does any word processor on the market provide this ? > (Microsoft ? Are you listening ? 8) If I was to choose a word processor, case transposing would not be high on my list of requirements. It's something I need occassionally, but certainly can live without it. Autoindent can be achieved very easily in Word using the left hand indent. I think one has to be careful in comparing a wordprocessor to a program editor. I can't imagine that EMACS would make a very good wordprocessor, but it's probably an acceptable program editor. The requirements of the two types of editors are simply different. -- Peter Steele, Microcomputer Applications Analyst Acadia University, Wolfville, NS, Canada B0P1X0 (902)542-2201x121 UUCP: {uunet|watmath|utai|garfield}!cs.dal.ca!aucs!Peter BITNET: Peter@Acadia Internet: Peter@AcadiaU.CA
) (08/17/89)
In article <1989Aug17.113507.11903@aucs.uucp> peter@aucs.uucp (Peter Steele) writes: [ Commenting on my previous posting ] >If I was to choose a word processor, case transposing would not be high >on my list of requirements. It's something I need occassionally, but >certainly can live without it. Autoindent can be achieved very easily >in Word using the left hand indent. I think one has to be careful Actually, the autoindent I want can NOT be achieved using rulers in WORD or any other WP program. And case transposal is something I would REALLY like to have. Just my taste, your obviously varies. >in comparing a wordprocessor to a program editor. I can't imagine >that EMACS would make a very good wordprocessor, but it's probably Actually, it can be. Especially if you re-hacked it just a little to handle style sheets and proportional spacing... A fast LISP machine should handle it real smooth... >an acceptable program editor. The requirements of the two types of >editors are simply different. To quote the song playing on MTv right now: I want it all (and I want it now) I do a lot of typing AND coding, and switching editors and missing features in one that are available in another is a pain in the #ss. That's my opinion. Anyone cares to mail me their suggestion of the ultimate text input/edit program is welcome! h+@nada.kth.se -- This is your fortune from h+@nada.kth.se: Going the speed of light is bad for your age.
captkidd@athena.mit.edu (Ivan Cavero Belaunde) (08/18/89)
In article <501@mit-amt.MEDIA.MIT.EDU> mjkobb@media-lab.media.mit.edu (Michael J Kobb) writes: :In article <13546@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU> captkidd@athena.mit.edu (Ivan Cavero Belaunde) writes: ::6) Printers: HP's DeskWriter: outstanding. Enough has been said in the net :: about this one already, so I'll mention the other two I saw that I :: liked. GCC's WriteImpact: 360x180 dpi resolution with scalable and : ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ :: fully rotatable (1 deg increments) outline fonts and a forecoming :: utility to convert nonencrypted Bitstream and other fonts to the :: GCC format for $699 list (including Times, Helvetica, Courier, Symbol, :: Palatino and some other font I can't remember). Minor registration :: problems (very hard to notice) which I was told would be solved by : :Really? What was the print technology on the WriteImpact. Can I assume from :the name that it's a really high-resolution dot-matrix?? It was 24-pin dot matrix. It was not quite as nice as ther DeskWriter. The main problems were that (a) the quality decreased as the ribbon got older (there didn't seem to be a problem like that with the DW - probably due to ink cartridge technology); (b) The registration problem I mentioned earlier: the output resulting from different passes of the printhead were slightly off from each other. Like I said, I was told it would be solved by release time. :I was all convinced that I wanted to buy a DeskWriter, but now I'm not so :sure... Anybody else see it? Any ideas? Well, the reason I liked it was that it was significantly cheaper than the DeskWriter. Remember, it *lists* for $699 (cheaper than the *street* prices we've seen for the DW so far), so it's street price should be ~$400. That's a decent savings for what you give up in the DW: Better quality and quiet operation. I figure not everybody has $750-$800 to dish out on a printer; $400? That's a different market. :Are you wondering why this message is rambling? (Simple: the mailer on :media-lab is stupid. If you include more text than you compose, it rejects :the message. So in an attempt (?) to cut down on use of the bandwidth, they :actually increase it when you need to include large files. :-( Any fixes, :anyone? (I'll be talking to someone here about it soon, but if there's a :command I'm missing, yell)) A nice way to solve it (at least it works on my poster): Use the emacs replace-string command to replace all accurrences of > with : (like in this message). I don't use that feature that often, but it's useful enough. I tried the "line fodder" method once but the poster's smart enough to notice that, and I got chided for being naughty :-). -Ivan Internet: captkidd@athena.mit.edu Disclaimer: I have no relation to GCC Technologies, except that I like their printers.
frank@mnetor.UUCP (Frank Kolnick) (08/21/89)
In article <13546@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU> captkidd@athena.mit.edu (Ivan Cavero Belaunde) writes: > >6) Printers: HP's DeskWriter: outstanding. Enough has been said in the net > about this one already, so I'll mention the other two I saw that I > liked. ... I'm still waiting for 400dpi (or greater) PostScript-driven laser printers. Any news on that front? -- Frank Kolnick, consulting for, and therefore expressing opinions independent of, Computer X UUCP: {allegra, linus}!utzoo!mnetor!frank
mjkobb@mit-amt.MEDIA.MIT.EDU (Michael J Kobb) (08/22/89)
In article <5061@mnetor.UUCP> frank@mnetor.UUCP (Frank Kolnick) writes: >I'm still waiting for 400dpi (or greater) PostScript-driven laser printers. >Any news on that front? Check the most recent MacUser. They reviewed PostScript laser printers, and there were a few that were greater-than-300dpi resolution. Or, there's always a NeXT machine.... :-) --Mike Disclaimer: I think that disclaimers are an incredibly sad statement about our society. Nonetheless, nothing that I say can or should be construed as having been said by anyone. Ever.
frank@mnetor.UUCP (Frank Kolnick) (08/22/89)
In article <550@mit-amt.MEDIA.MIT.EDU> mjkobb@media-lab.media.mit.edu (Michael J Kobb) writes: >In article <5061@mnetor.UUCP> frank@mnetor.UUCP (Frank Kolnick) writes: > >>I'm still waiting for 400dpi (or greater) PostScript-driven laser printers. >>Any news on that front? > >Check the most recent MacUser. They reviewed PostScript laser printers, and >there were a few that were greater-than-300dpi resolution. Or, there's >always a NeXT machine.... :-) Yes, I had read that. MacUser reviews two 'printers' with >400dpi resolution. I put that in quotes because they're really low-end typesetters (or like to advertise themselves that way), at a cost 3 - 4 times that of a 300dpi printer. (In addition, the Varityper *requires* a maintenance contract at about $4,000 CDN a year. From other reviews I've read, it needs it.) So, I'm still hoping for a >300dpi printer at < $5,000. Sigh. (Still remembering the magazine articles promising a flood of 600dpi printers two years ago :-) I phoned Agfa-Compugraphic, btw, and was told that their 'printer' wouldn't be available until the fall; they couldn't send me any information or give me a price. -- Frank Kolnick, consulting for, and therefore expressing opinions independent of, Computer X UUCP: {allegra, linus}!utzoo!mnetor!frank
gelphman@adobe.COM (David Gelphman) (08/24/89)
In article <5061@mnetor.UUCP> frank@mnetor.UUCP (Frank Kolnick) writes: >I'm still waiting for 400dpi (or greater) PostScript-driven laser printers. >Any news on that front? >Frank Kolnick, There are several models with currently two manufacturers offering such printers. Agfa P400 PS 18 ppm 406 dpi Agfa P3400 PS 12 ppm 400 dpi Varityper VT600-P 10 ppm 600 dpi Varityper VT600-W 10 ppm 600 dpi allows 11x17 paper The NeXT cube together with their laser printer can print at 400 dpi also. Please contact these companies if you need further information on their products. Hope this helps, David Gelphman Adobe Systems Incorporated
captkidd@athena.mit.edu (Ivan Cavero Belaunde) (08/26/89)
In article <5061@mnetor.UUCP> frank@mnetor.UUCP (Frank Kolnick) writes: >I'm still waiting for 400dpi (or greater) PostScript-driven laser printers. >Any news on that front? Well, in the MacWorld Expo report I posted, I mentioned a company called LaserMAX, which was displaying a number of new products. First, it had 3 Nubus boards which attach to a LaserWriter (any model) and drives the engine directly, providing 600x300 dpi resolution and *much* faster performance. The 3 models vary in the amount of on-board memory (2M, 4M, and 6M), which then affects processing speed. It basically had an optimized Postscript-compatible Raster Image Processor (RIP) on the board, and the more memory it has to work with, the faster it goes. The boards were fairly steep, but if you need it, it's there. The other product was the big one, though. They had a laser printer (they called it a typesetter, because of the printout quality and speed) with an optimized RIP much like the one on the boards which had 1000x400 dpi output resolution and ~15 sec/page for *very* complicated printouts (multiple tiff files and stuff). I am not positive about this, but I think it was also connected through the Nubus (for high-speed data transfer, possibly). The price was reasonable for the level of performance it provided: $7999. -Ivan Internet: captkidd@athena.mit.edu
frank@mnetor.UUCP (Frank Kolnick) (08/26/89)
In article <13822@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU> captkidd@athena.mit.edu (Ivan Cavero Belaunde) writes: >In article <5061@mnetor.UUCP> frank@mnetor.UUCP (Frank Kolnick) writes: >>I'm still waiting for 400dpi (or greater) PostScript-driven laser printers. >>Any news on that front? > >Well, in the MacWorld Expo report I posted, I mentioned a company called >LaserMAX, which was displaying a number of new products. First, it had >3 Nubus boards which attach to a LaserWriter (any model) and drives the >engine directly, providing 600x300 dpi resolution and *much* faster >performance. The 3 models vary in the amount of on-board memory (2M, 4M, >and 6M), which then affects processing speed. It basically had an optimized >Postscript-compatible Raster Image Processor (RIP) on the board, ... I remember your review, and I didn't think you mentioned PostScript compatibility. From a brief 'new products' review I read, LaserMAX is really LaserMaster, who makes a similar product for the PC and regularly places obnoxious ads aimed at John Warnock (Adobe Systems). The PC version of the board uses Bitstream fonts, and the magazine article didn't mention PS-compatibility. I'm also pretty sure the LaserMAX ad I read (but no longer have) didn't mention it. Sorry to be long- winded about this, but if the LaserMAX stuff really can upgrade my LaserWriter, I'll be happy. But my question is: are you sure? -- Frank Kolnick, consulting for, and therefore expressing opinions independent of, Computer X UUCP: {allegra, linus}!utzoo!mnetor!frank