preese@dewey.soe.berkeley.edu (Phil Reese) (01/25/88)
An interesting thing happened today anI wondered if others had athing to
say about it.
We recently had all of our LW+ upgraded to wht I hoped was version 47 of
postscript. Each of the machines spits out '3.0' underneath the correct
icon, yet when I used LaserView to get info from the laser it came back
with version 42.2(3) (or something very close). Does anyone have any
idea of what might be going on? I would have expected that the version
number would have been 47 or so.
Phil Reese
SESAME Group
School of Ed, UC Berkeley
preese@garnet.berkeley.edu
{decvax,dual,hplabs,sdcsvax,ulysses}!ucbvax!garnet!preeseegv@aicchi.UUCP (Vann) (01/27/88)
> An interesting thing happened today anI wondered if others had athing to > say about it. > > We recently had all of our LW+ upgraded to wht I hoped was version 47 of > postscript. Each of the machines spits out '3.0' underneath the correct > icon, yet when I used LaserView to get info from the laser it came back > with version 42.2(3) (or something very close). Does anyone have any > idea of what might be going on? I would have expected that the version > number would have been 47 or so. > > Phil Reese > SESAME Group > School of Ed, UC Berkeley > preese@garnet.berkeley.edu > {decvax,dual,hplabs,sdcsvax,ulysses}!ucbvax!garnet!preese I had the same experience. I jumped on the horn to the tech support group for Apple and voiced some concern. The gave me some line about a bug in the internal value, for which there was no cause for concern. Say what? Don't they mean that they are somehow marketing version 42.2(3) as 47 since the may be only slight differences? Why not simply tell the truth? Anyhow don't waste too much time on the issue. Its probably not something they want to spend too much time trying to explain away to the public via media articles following personal interviews. -- Eric Geoffrey Vann Analysts International (Chicago Branch) (312) 882-4673 ..!ihnp4!aicchi!egv