CompuServe Messages

#SEYBOLD

    26-Sep-89 10:41:09
Sb: #13017-#SEYBOLD
Fm: Jon Hodges 76276,3102
To: Scott R. Leyes 71041,121
I agree wholeheartedly with your statement. However, I think you're letting Warnock off the hook too easily. If he had thrown open the standard a year ago, this whole Royal stuff probably wouldn't have happened in the first placed. Of course, I'm sure the economics of opening PostScript is driving the "suits" crazy. The PostScript licensing fees for both the RIPs and the font encryption have to be a tremendous part of Adobe's income — which they now stand to lose. The Adobe rep I heard last night said Adobe plans to stand on its software produ cts and type sales. Obviously, the type library is being challenged by URW, Bitstream and others. As far as the software, I've been playing with a beta copy of ATM and the only program it won't work on properly is Adobe Illustrator (I know, it's unfair to report a beta bug, but that one strikes me as really strange). My concern is that someone has to fill the void being created by Apple as far as determining PostScript-compatibility. It's always been what will run on the latest Apple Laserwriter. Someone's got to say, "here are the benchmarks that a RIP must run to be certified compatible with SPS/Adobe PostScript Version 60.0 or 70.0 or whatever." If it's Adobe, the clone guys will scream. If it's the clones, Adobe will probably be upset. We need an independent group. How about PPA? Any takers?