Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!pacbell!hoptoad!unisoft!mtxinu!sybase!kiwi!barry
From: barry@kiwi.UUCP (barry klawans)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.news
Subject: Re: Why is NeWS better than Display PostScript?
Message-ID: <1208@sybase.sybase.com>
Date: 23 Sep 88 21:16:48 GMT
References: <8809212112.AA18188@daedalus> <13353@jumbo.dec.com>
Sender: news@sybase.sybase.com
Reply-To: barry@kiwi.UUCP (barry klawans)
Organization: Sybase, Inc.
Lines: 22

In article <8809212112.AA18188@daedalus> brianc@DAEDALUS.UCSF.EDU (Brian Colfer) writes:
>Why would any want Display PostScript (like NeXT) when NeWS sounds
>so good?

One BIG difference between Display Postscript and NeWS is that NeWS is an
environment.   NeWS includes a windowing system written in Postscript, while
Display Postscript (at least as I understand it) only deals with the
contents of windows.  In other words if you are using display postscript you
talk to some window system (ie NeXT's) to open a window, and then you use
Postscript to describe the contents of the window.

This suggests to me that talking to a Display Postscript window will be similar
to talking to a window.  If you want to play around with Postscript where you
can have an open window running an interactive Postscript session with the
output going to another window, NeWS seems like the choice.  I won't pass
judgement on which is the prefered platform for commercial applications 
until I get a chance to work with Display Postscript.

Barry Klawans
Any opinions given are mine, not my company's.  They don't want them.
UUCP: {mtxinu,sun,pyramid,pacbell}!sybase!barry
"All of my friends are traitors." - Manuel M. Costa