From: rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari)
Subject: Re: End of NeXT
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 20:36:18 GMT

In article <C0CC35.Du8@news.udel.edu> greimann@ravel.udel.edu (John B Greimann) writes:
>>>
>>>Question:  can you print full page graphics on an HP LaserJet with
>>>no memory?
>>
>>
>>	Doesn't matter.  You can get a 300DPI IIIP *with* the processor,
>>	engine and enough memory to do full page graphics for less 
>>	than the edu cost of a NeXT laser printer.  If you want 
>>	600, it'll be about $350 more then the NeXT, but that'll 
>>	come down.  
>
>Sorry, bad comparison!  I had one of these beasts connected to my (replaced by
>a NeXT) 486.  By the time I had bought 5 megs of memory and a paper tray for
>it and realized that it still damn slow (on a 16 meg 486-33!!! i.e. taking
>minutes to print what the NeXT just whips out) I junked it and bought a NeXT...



	Perhaps you had it configured incorrectly.  I find printing to the
	IIP to be reasonable (i.e. perhaps 60 to 75 seconds for full page
	raw bitmap, much, much much less (saw, near print engine speed)
	for text or Truetype).  Raw bitmaps slow the printer down.

	You're quite right, for bitmap dumping, the HP can't compare
	to the NeXT--but how often do you dump a bitmap?  If you're
	working with text or structured graphics, it goes MUCH 
	faster--probably as fast as the NeXT printer.


>All of this on NEW (last spring) technology...I seem to recall the NeXT laser
>printer being designed in the late '80s...I believe mine says 1988 something
>onit...400DPI, 8PPM...hmmmm, makes me wonder what HP's been up to.  Oh, and the
> price of the HP?  It was $1050 for the printer, another $180 something for 
>memory,and $100 for the paper tray.  The IIIP was slow, loud, and left envelope
>s looking like they'd been through a paper-shredder.  4PPM, 300DPI (Ok, 
>Resolution Enhancement hack helps)...still, no comparison.


	Prices have changed.  It is not hard to find the IIIP bundled with
	enough memory for FP 300dpi and the paper tray for <$1100 or so,
	especially with the release of the 4.  



>Maybe you should try the LaserJet 4 instead...now how much is it with ethernet
>, memory, and the Postscript module?  600 DPI would be nice, though!


	We picked up our 4 with 4 extra megs (6 total--fp 600dpi) for 
	no more than $1550.  If I want to add postscript later, I'm
	welcome to,but as it stands Ghostscript serves.  The parallel
	port performance is somewhat better.  The MS Windows print
	speed is *much* better.  Easily 8 ppm.

	No processor time sucking.  And when competing printers
	come out, the price will drop further.  There is no competition
	for the NeXT printer, and hence it's unbelievably high 
	price for what is basically a box for the engine.  



>>	If these companies can offer *smart* printers with memory
>>	for about the same price as the NeXT LP, doesn't that say
>>	something about NeXT's policy towards it's customers?
>>	(read: price gouging.  they could sell the sucker for $400
>>	and still be making 100% profit)
>
>Hey, why not design it properly from the start?  A 486 should have enough power
>to crunch out full page graphics without the printer needing memory and a  
>processor!  Ok, on a 286, maybe share the load, but on high end Macs and PCs,
>come on! 


	This is the same mindset that relies on dumb frame buffers when
	common sense tells you that it's much, much smarter to at least
	have a line draw and bitblt engine.  (Things like hardware zoom,
	hardware cursor, panning, etc. etc. etc. as well).

	The NeXT printer cannot match the HP's -- even the III (not the P,
	which is a 4ppm engine) -- at text only printing, which happens to
	make up the majority of what you print.  Instead of dumping 
	a full bitmap to the printer (imaged in memory by the processor
	and then dumped to the printer at print speed) you dump the
	small image of each letter *used* in the font, and then treat it
	as text.  This also let's you do some *real* print buffering.

	My main complaint about the NeXT printer is not that it's output is
	lousy (until recently, it was very nice--perhaps slightly better
	than the RET output at 300dpi from HP), nor that it is terribly
	slow (it's not, it just slows down the machine, especially on low
	memory).  My main complaint is not against the *printer* other
	than it's outrageous pricing.  The complaint is that NeXT went out
	of their way to go into *yet another market* which did nothing to
	encourage developer support.  Then they took advantage of the
	virtual monopoly they created (parallel may be slow, but
	serial is *agony*--and ethernet brings the price of competitors
	up to make it not worthwhile) and gouged their users for
	an obscene price.

	As far as I'm concerned, this just gives another example of 
	NeXT's market(less) mentality.  


-- 
      Blaming "society" for your problems is like blaming clouds for rain.
 ---  boycott == coercion == censorship == closed mindedness == cowardice  ---
	      "Psalms 23:1  The LORD is my shepherd; I shall not want."  
		Shepherds are for sheep.   -----      Pain teaches.
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.advocacy