From: jim@n5ial.chi.il.us (Jim Graham)
Newsgroups: comp.text.tex
Subject: tex v. WP5.1 
Distribution: world
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 92 01:42:34 GMT
Organization: Me? Organized? Hah! :-)

In article <1992Aug14.023630.7178@disk.uucp> tony@disk.uucp writes:

> And what does "dreadfully slow" mean?  Does it take 3 days to print a five
> page document, or does it take 3 hours (using TeX)?  If you say 3 days, then
> I would agree that THAT is dreadfully slow.

well, here's an example of what ``dreadfully slow'' means....  I have a
rather large set of documentation for a shareware program I'm about to
release.  the typeset docs are (or were, when last printed...they've
grown since) around 50 pages or so.

I'm using emTeX, and printing on a Panasonic KX-P1124 (24-pin dot
matrix) at 360 dpi.  when I last printed out the docs (and, sigh, I've
got to print the new version in a few days...much bigger), I set it
to printing not long after I got up in the morning (started it at about
0600 hrs).  granted, I was running this under dv, with UUPC in another
shell, but that didn't make too much difference.  according to a timer
I set, it finished printing at around 1600 or so (that's TEN HOURS!).

running emTeX on this document takes a very small amount of time (i.e.,
if I get up to pour a new cup of coffee, it's done before I get back).
and, I use the VGA previewer most of the time, so until it comes time
for the final print, this isn't much of an issue.

one thing to be aware of, though:  at least, on my 24-pin at 360 dpi,
printing this 50 page documentation out pretty much trashes the ribbon
except for general (read:  unimportant) printouts.

> but if the output is nicer than WP 5.1 or ImagePrint, then I would be
> willing to invest the disk space needed for the TeX program and the
> personal time needed to learn the program.

when I compare the output (for both very small and *VERY* large fonts)
to the HP LJ 3D (w/ PostScript cartridge) at work, there's almost no
difference.  make a photocopy of my printer's output (to take care of
the fact that the darkness isn't 100% uniform), and you basically can't
tell which is which, even looking very close.  not just my opinion, but
the opinion of lots of people who I've asked to tell me which was
which......and those who refuse to believe that my documentation was
printed on a dot-matrix printer, period.

btw, the above was done with exactly the same TeX input file, and the
same fonts on both printers.  if you use the Times fonts with PS, and
compare that to Computer Modern on the dot-matrix, the Times fonts
win...but that's the font itself, not the printer.

since this shareware product is not exactly work related, I will not
(and the rules also say that I will not, but that's beside the point)
print this at work, period. but the results are what counts.  now, if
I were really rich, I certainly wouldn't mind replacing my DM printer
with a good desktop laser just for the speed, but the quality really
isn't an issue in that.

now, as far as a comparison to WP 5.x, I can offer none...I haven't used
a word processor since getting hooked on using TeX....and WP 5.x didn't
exist at the time....
   --jim

--
Standard disclaimer....Ever since my cat learned to type, there's no telling
whose thoughts these really are....         73 DE N5IAL (/9)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNET:  jim@n5ial.chi.il.us  |  grahj@gagme.chi.il.us  |  j.graham@ieee.org
UUCP:  gagme!n5ial!jim@clout.chi.il.us
AMATEUR RADIO: n5ial@n9hsi (Chicago.IL.US.Earth)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------