Talk:Display PostScript

message: I can't find an authoritative source, but every source I can find (and my own memory) says that Display Postscript was developed at Adobe, and that NextStep was just an early licensee. Even if I'm wrong about this, the vague language about how DPS became an Adobe product indicates nonverified facts, and needs to be resolved into something definite. ---Isaac R 21:26, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: From interviews (sorry, also don't have a source) with programmers at Adobe who were involved in creating Display Postscript, I suspect Adobe's programmers were subcontracting under NeXT and possibly even working from the NeXT offices during development of the project. I'm pretty sure it was a joint effort, with Adobe doing most of the work but NeXT deciding how it would work. NeXT didn't actually have much of its own staff, they did a lot of subcontracting as far as I can tell from people who were involved. NeXT themselves derived most of their income from consulting, so their workload varied significantly. They used subcontractors to handle changes in the workload as enterprise/government clients asked for changes/improvements to NeXT. --58.168.42.109 (talk) 22:27, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Disputed

message: It was always my impression that even without licensing concerns, DisplayPDF is significantly faster than DPS. It deals with a simpler subset of instructions and doesn't have to be Turing complete. In other words, it's Teh Snappy.
: Frankie 13:57, 2005 August 1 (UTC)
::Display PDF (I think you mean Quartz, Apple's never called it Display PDF formally), while I don't know if it's faster, does offer other advantages. Like the fact that you can pretty much save directly to PDF from any print dialog, without firing up Acrobat. PDF has a lot of advantages as a document format over PostScript, which I've changed the article to reflect. 142.150.142.28 02:19, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Well considering that OS X was much slower at graphics than Rhapsody (I ran them both) the speed argument is, well, arguable. The differences in terms of "theoretical performance" seem limited IMHO, I doubt that the decoding in the interpreter represents any sort of real-world time compared to actually running the math and pushing the bits across the bus. As to the "advantages" of saving directly to PDF, one could of course do that with DPS as well. The two are very similar in concept, and generally trivial to convert between (with exceptions, of course).Maury 22:32, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Fixed. Maury 22:32, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Performance? 

message: The sentence "the full implementation of Display PostScript was developed for Sun Microsystems' NeWS in 1986" is incorrect. NeWS was not Display PostScript. NeWS was an implementation of PostScript that rendered on the screen, implemented by James Gosling, David S H Rosenthal, and others at Sun, but Display PostScript is a totally distinct product that shares absolutely no code with NeWS.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xardox (talk • contribs) 08:11, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  NeWS and Display PostScript are complete different implementations of Adobe's PostScript specification 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Display PostScript. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060603154639/http://partners.adobe.com/public/developer/en/ps/psrefman.pdf to http://partners.adobe.com/public/developer/en/ps/psrefman.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080515120658/http://partners.adobe.com/public/developer/ps/sdk/index_archive.html to http://partners.adobe.com/public/developer/ps/sdk/index_archive.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:15, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified