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