Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site uw-beaver
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!cbosgd!ucbvax!decvax!tektronix!uw-beaver!laser-lovers
From: laser-lovers@uw-beaver
Newsgroups: fa.laser-lovers
Subject: Xerox Interpress announcement
Message-ID: <1367@uw-beaver>
Date: Mon, 1-Jul-85 13:02:12 EDT
Article-I.D.: uw-beave.1367
Posted: Mon Jul  1 13:02:12 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 8-Jul-85 01:03:29 EDT
Sender: daemon@uw-beaver
Organization: U of Washington Computer Science
Lines: 20

From: Randy Frank 

As I understand it, there is a critical difference between what Xerox and
Adobe are offering potential vendor who wish to implement their respective
page description languages (Interpress and Postscript).

Xerox is basically offering a document describing Interpress.  Adobe is
offering a document plus the option of licensing Postscript interpreter
code.

Thus, Adobe will actively assist a vendor in getting a Postscript printer to
market, where Xerox passively sit by while you develop a product.  I would
be highly surprised if Xerox does anything to actively assist other laser
printer manufacturers in producing (competing) products.  Adobe has no such
conflict of interest since they are not directly producing a laser printer.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I'd be *very* surprised if Xerox starts licensing
Interpress interpreter code so that other laser printer company can quickly
get competing Interpress printers to market.
-------