| Author |
Message |
Chapman Flack
Guest
|
 Posted:
Wed Nov 09, 2005 8:25 am Post subject:
Re: How can I test whether a printer has true PostScript? |
|
|
zakezuke wrote:
| Quote: | Was Kermit designed for communication over tty lines? I know that is
one application for kermit but kermit according to the columbia.edu
|
Yes - it was born the same year as TCP/IP (a brand new DARPA networking
protocol nobody had heard of); Ethernet existed, but so did a large
field of
competing networking technologies with incompatible and expensive
cabling
and interfaces, and if you had a roomful of assorted boxes, probably
EIA-232
serial ports were about the only remotely standardized comm facilities
you
could count on them all having in common ... and no matter what the
boxes
were, after a while you could be pretty sure somebody had ported Kermit
to them.
The major Kermit clients from Columbia have sprouted support for TCP,
TELNET, FTP, HTTP, ... over the years just so it remains the Swiss army
knife of communication programs - if you have any odd job that requires
automating some communication between some oddball boxes in any of
these major protocols, and you already know the Kermit client and its
scripting language, you're pretty much in business.
Note that when you tell a Kermit client to connect over TCP, it no
longer needs to use the original Kermit protocol - that is an error-
correcting protocol, and TCP takes care of that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Chapman Flack
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Nov 09, 2005 8:25 am Post subject:
Re: How can I test whether a printer has true PostScript? |
|
|
Julian Vrieslander wrote:
| Quote: | The manual for the Phaser 3500 mentions "PostScript" many times, but the
phrase "Adobe PostScript" does not appear anywhere. It contains the
text "Adobe (r)", but only in the usual boilerplate listing of
trademarks for all third-party products that may be associated with the
...
As mentioned in my original post, I tried to get a definitive answer
from Xerox. Two of their reps told me, after checking with their expert
sources within the company, that the 3500 has true Adobe PS 3. But I'm
inclined to believe that these people are poorly either poorly informed,
|
My Phaser 750, which is unquestionably Adobe PS 3 (executive says so,
and the ROM chips are labeled (C) Adobe Sys) also has no Adobe logo
anywhere on the case, and no mention of Adobe in the user manual
(except in the trademark boilerplate, just as you describe). You can't
go
by these signs; ask the interpreter! If Xerox tells you it's Adobe,
they
might not be lying; they're a fairly prominent organization to run that
kind
of a risk.
-Chap |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
measekite
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Nov 09, 2005 8:26 am Post subject:
Re: How can I test whether a printer has true PostScript? |
|
|
zakezuke wrote:
| Quote: | looks like "1981: Kermit
:-D :-D :-D |
| Quote: | protocol designed at Columbia University and first implementations
written (CP/M, DEC-20)." with the intended application transfering
files from the dec-20 to floppy disks on a micro computer is the
earliest entry. I can totally see replacing terminals with micros for
this application, and as they were already wired for serial no mucking
around with new cables and as a 90k floppy was the upgrade I can also
see that 9600bps more than adquate.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jim Land
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Nov 10, 2005 12:42 am Post subject:
Re: How can I test whether a printer has true PostScript? |
|
|
cdl@deeptow.ucsd.edu (Carl Lowenstein) wrote in news:dks2se$oof$1
@news1.ucsd.edu:
| Quote: | In article <Xns9708C87241306RrrrFfffTttt4396hotm@216.168.3.72>,
Kermit as "(K)L10 (E)RROR-FREE . . . " seems to be a good example of a
retronym, that is, an acronym that was built after the fact.
|
Wiki prefers the term "backronym" and has lists of them:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backronym
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_backronyms |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chapman Flack
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Nov 10, 2005 12:56 am Post subject:
Re: How can I test whether a printer has true PostScript? |
|
|
Julian Vrieslander wrote:
| Quote: | If Xerox tells you it's Adobe, they might not be lying; they're a
fairly prominent organization to run that kind of a risk.
I would not put it past them to spread a little ambiguity. The
|
In this thread, has anybody looked here yet?
http://www.office.xerox.com/perl-bin/product.pl?product=3500&page=spec
Language support: Adobe® PostScript® Level 3™, PCL® 6, PCL® 5e
The spec page says Adobe. The reps you called said Adobe. If there's
really still any doubt, you might try executive again the next time
you're
in the dept with the 3500. after setting the AppSocket page language to
PostScript, as I suggested earlier. But I am not sure why there would
be
any doubt.
| Quote: | promotional materials for the 3500 are also ambiguous about its
resolution spec. They use the phrase "1200 dpi quality", which is
|
Maximum resolution: 1200 dpi Image Quality
| Quote: | probably marketer's weaselspeak for some sort of resolution enhancement
|
well, that does look kind of suspicious, but I wonder if "Image
Quality" is their
name for the printer's highest resolution setting. I'll see if I can
find out.
| Quote: | When I compare its output against a true 1200 dpi device, there is an
obvious difference in the greyscale dotscreens.
|
Was this a test (a) on the same page input (b) with specified halftone
screens
(c) explicitly selecting the printer's maximum resolution? There are a
lot of
variables here.
I don't work for Xerox, but I've been very pleased with my 750 and I
have
found very little to complain of in the quality of any of their specs,
user, or
service documentation.
-Chap |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Julian Vrieslander
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Nov 10, 2005 3:18 am Post subject:
Re: How can I test whether a printer has true PostScript? |
|
|
In article <1131562570.241858.247160@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
"Chapman Flack" <googrou@anastigmatix.net> wrote:
| Quote: | Julian Vrieslander wrote:
If Xerox tells you it's Adobe, they might not be lying; they're a
fairly prominent organization to run that kind of a risk.
I would not put it past them to spread a little ambiguity. The
In this thread, has anybody looked here yet?
http://www.office.xerox.com/perl-bin/product.pl?product=3500&page=spec
Language support: Adobe® PostScript® Level 3™, PCL® 6, PCL® 5e
|
I did see that page, and mentioned it in previous posts. The wording is
ambiguous. "Language support = Adobe PS" does not necessarily mean that
the interpreter was sourced from Adobe. Just enough wiggle room for the
lawyers.
Note that the equivalent webpage for the 4500 makes a prominent mention
of "True Adobe PostScript 3" as a significant feature. Not so on the
3500's webpage. Then, there is this brochure
<http://www.office.xerox.com/latest/OPBBR-01.PDF>
where the "Print Language[s]" of the 3500 include "PostScript 3 and PCL
6 emulations", but the 4500 and 5500 are listed with "Adobe PostScript
3, PCL 5e and PCL 6 emulations". How much significance should we attach
to the inclusion or absence of the word Adobe, or the placement of a
comma?
Note also that this page describes the resolution of the 4500 as "1200
dpi" and the 3500 as "1200 Image Quality".
| Quote: | Maximum resolution: 1200 dpi Image Quality
probably marketer's weaselspeak for some sort of resolution enhancement
well, that does look kind of suspicious, but I wonder if "Image
Quality" is their name for the printer's highest resolution setting.
I'll see if I can find out.
When I compare its output against a true 1200 dpi device, there is an
obvious difference in the greyscale dotscreens.
Was this a test (a) on the same page input (b) with specified
halftone screens (c) explicitly selecting the printer's maximum
resolution? There are a lot of variables here.
|
I printed several documents, including PDF vector graphics, photos,
greyscale gradients, etc. Same documents on both printers, with both
set to their max resolution/quality setting. It was quite obvious that
the 3500 is not a 1200 dpi device.
I don't want to make a career out of this thread. My printer choice had
narrowed down to the HP 2420DN vs the Xerox Phaser 3500DN. These
products are almost indentical in features and price. The HP has true
1200x1200 dpi and emulated PS. I was thinking of choosing the Xerox if
it had a real Adobe PS interpreter. I still do not know if it does, but
I suspect not. I have no love for HP, having had a bad experience with
one of their AIO inkjets. But, compared to Xerox, HP's promotional
materials are far more honest and clear in the way that they specify
features like PS emulation and resolution.
--
Julian Vrieslander |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chapman Flack
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Nov 10, 2005 5:47 am Post subject:
Re: How can I test whether a printer has true PostScript? |
|
|
Julian Vrieslander wrote:
| Quote: | one of their AIO inkjets. But, compared to Xerox, HP's promotional
materials are far more honest and clear in the way that they specify
|
I understand the concern, but even as a person who has no
connection to Xerox I cringe to see you use the word 'honest' in this
way. In simple fact there has been nothing shown in this thread to
establish that the PS interpreter is *not* Adobe, and your concern on
that score is just that every time they say it is, on the spec page and
when you ask them directly, you find it unconvincing for reasons of
your own. That's up to you, but nothing establishing dishonesty on
their part has been shown on that question.
There was a chance to get a clear answer when you had the
opportunity to telnet to a 3500, but you had a spot of difficulty
because
port 9100 didn't have PostScript selected and (quite understandably
because you didn't know what to do about it) you gave up before
learning yes or no.
Your hunch *might* be right. I don't know, I don't have a 3500. If you
ever find out it is, then's a good time to start talking about their
honesty.
If you have another chance to print anything on a 3500, you might
print this:
%!PS
36 600 moveto /Courier 12 selectfont //executive 0 get /copyright get
show
showpage
If you get an Adobe copyright, that's a yes. If you get an error,
it's only a maybe-not (because undocumented internals of
executive could have changed even in Adobe's code). But if it's
easier for you to try printing something than to actually run
executive interactively, it might be worth a try. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Elmo P. Shagnasty
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Nov 10, 2005 6:10 am Post subject:
Re: How can I test whether a printer has true PostScript? |
|
|
In article <1131580054.839084.227830@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
"Chapman Flack" <googrou@anastigmatix.net> wrote:
| Quote: | In simple fact there has been nothing shown in this thread to
establish that the PS interpreter is *not* Adobe, and your concern on
that score is just that every time they say it is, on the spec page and
when you ask them directly, you find it unconvincing for reasons of
your own.
|
That's not *quite* true.
The 3400 and 3450 used a clone of Postscript for the interpreter, and in
fact Xerox's own documentation seems to contradict itself.
Those items in themselves are enough to keep one wondering.
Until Xerox can come up with definitive proof that their 3500 uses Adobe
Postscript--like a configuration page showing an Adobe trademark, or a
picture of the processor board with an Adobe trademark screened onto
it--you have to assume the worst. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dan Sideen
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Nov 10, 2005 7:51 am Post subject:
Re: How can I test whether a printer has true PostScript? |
|
|
I am not sure why you care whether the printer is genuine Adobe or not? Does
it print your PS Level 3 job?
We have several Phasers, and they never seem to choke on any PS files. I
couldn't care less who wrote the code.
BTW, the real irony is that Xerox invented Postscript, but, like so many
things, didn't know what to do with it. So Warnock and company left Xerox,
started Adobe and got rich!
Many, many years later, and with great reluctance, Xerox licensed Postscript
from Adobe for their production printers to replace their proprietarly
Metacode language. Metacode is truly the ugliest, most obtuse and least
functgional page description language ever invented, and I give thanks every
day that is is disappearing!!
"Julian Vrieslander" <julianvREMOVE_THIS_PART@mindspring.com> wrote in
message
news:julianvREMOVE_THIS_PART-AF71B4.14223103112005@gnus01.u.washington.edu...
| Quote: | In another thread on comp.periphs.printers, I described how I was
finding it difficult to determine whether a particular monochrome laser
was equipped with a true PostScript Level 3 interpreter (licensed from
Adobe, not emulated). The printer is the Xerox Phaser 3500. The Xerox
web site has documents which are conflicting. There is a product line
brochure which indicates that the 3500 uses a PS emulator. But other
documents show "language support" is "PostScript Level 3" or "Adobe®
PostScript® Level 3". Telephone calls to Xerox were not helpful. I
spoke to several people, including a technician. One had no clue, while
two others said that the printer has true Adobe PS. But none of them
seemed to have a clear understanding of the difference between a printer
that supports PS commands vs one that has a PS interpreter licensed from
Adobe.
It's also possible that Xerox (through its literature and its reps)
might be intentionally obfuscating the issue.
I called Adobe to ask if they have list of printers which use licensed
PS. I was told that they do not. Well, it's a sure bet that this list
exists, but it may not be available to the public.
So is there any way to run a test for this? Is it possible to print a
page with commands that will reveal whether a printer has real or
emulated PS?
--
Julian Vrieslander |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chapman Flack
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Nov 10, 2005 8:25 am Post subject:
Re: How can I test whether a printer has true PostScript? |
|
|
Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
| Quote: | In simple fact there has been nothing shown in this thread to
establish that the PS interpreter is *not* Adobe, and your concern on
That's not *quite* true.
The 3400 and 3450 used a clone of Postscript for the interpreter, and in
|
That establishes that the 3400 and 3450 did not use Adobe PS, and
indeed
the spec pages for 3400 and 3450 do not say Adobe PS, while the spec
page for the 3500 does.
http://www.office.xerox.com/perl-bin/product.pl?product=3400&page=spec
http://www.office.xerox.com/perl-bin/product.pl?product=3450&page=spec
http://www.office.xerox.com/perl-bin/product.pl?product=3500&page=spec
Has there been anything shown in this thread to establish that the
interpreter
in a 3500 is not Adobe's?
| Quote: | Until Xerox can come up with definitive proof that their 3500 uses Adobe
Postscript--like a configuration page showing an Adobe trademark, or a
picture of the processor board with an Adobe trademark screened onto
it--you have to assume the worst.
|
What would you have them do--post scanned images of their circuit
boards
on the website? Do you require that of every other printer vendor? If
they
did, would you then suggest they had added the Adobe logo in Photoshop?
If you fire up the interpreter's executive and it says (C) Adobe will
you then
suggest the message is faked? Where does it stop?
I bought a Xerox printer whose spec page said Adobe PS. I unwrapped it
and what do you know, it has Adobe PS. Do you think Adobe would stand
for it if one of their licensees claimed Adobe PS on the spec pages
both of
products that use it and of products that don't?
I am all in favor of skepticism, and I've seen as many stupid
marketroid
tricks as anybody else. But when it would be so easy for anybody with
access to a 3500 to just go find out the answer to the question, a
thread
so full of innuendo as this one starts to look like a FUD campaign.
I'll be the first to agree that Xerox's use of "Adobe PostScript" on
the
spec page is dishonest, the minute anybody simply establishes that it
actually isn't true. (!) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in