Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!bu-cs!purdue!decwrl!sun!hanami!landman
From: landman%hanami@Sun.COM (Howard A. Landman)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next
Subject: Re: Display PS vs NeWS
Message-ID: <79510@sun.uucp>
Date: 30 Nov 88 19:31:07 GMT
References: <7361@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> <941@riddle.UUCP>
Sender: news@sun.uucp
Reply-To: landman@sun.UUCP (Howard A. Landman)
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mountain View
Lines: 25

>In article <7361@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> faustus@ic.Berkeley.EDU
>	(Wayne A. Christopher) writes:
>>Why did NeXT use Display Postscript instead of Sun's NeWS?  How much of
>>a difference is there?  Is there any reason to use DP instead of NeWS,
>>or is NeXT just trying to be different?  It seems like ignoring
>>standards is a big part of their business stragegy...

I'm not much of a PostScript expert, but NeWS is also based on PostScript.
Many of the extensions to PostScript in NeWs are written *in* PostScript,
and hence should be easily portable to any PS machine.

In article <941@riddle.UUCP> domo@riddle.UUCP (Dominic Dunlop) writes:
>Er.  NeWS a standard?  Sun would have liked it to be a standard, but,
>unlike -- say -- NFS and SPARC, it hasn't caught outside Sun: X is
>sweeping it aside even if, arguably, X isn't addressing quite the same
>problem as NeWS.  (Hell, corporate deceision makers don't want to be
>bothered with little details like that.)

NeWS and X11 are being integrated - you'll be able to write NeWS and
X11 applications, and have them work on the same screen under the same
windowing system.

	Howard A. Landman
	landman@hanami.sun.com
	UUCP: sun!hanami!landman