#DTP w/ LJII
28 messages in this thread
Hi Bill,
I also use an A3000 but with ProPage 3.0 and Ricoh LP1200 which has HPLJ 3
emulation. Now this printer has 2mb installed but the current thinking is
that you need at least 1mb to print a page of A4 graphics, preferably more.
I prefer ProPage to Pagestream as the screen refresh rate seems quicker.
Also font rendition on the screen is better under ProPage especially using
the CGfonts. There are some useful things that Pagestream does that Propage
doesn't for example stretching a word or graphic to fit a space. Purists
don't like fiddling with fonts sizes and shapes but it can be very handy.
Pagestream handles fonts a bit better than ProPage in that it can have
sizes altered by smaller increments and it will use some fonts whereas
ProPage won't. Why this should be I don't know as it doesn't happen to all
fonts.
Overall I prefer ProPage but thats probaly because I am used to it and use
it evry day. You pays your money and takes yer choice.
Pete from West Dorset in Englands West Country – via Whap!
Hi, Pete! Commenting to little old me all the way from England! We met a
family of Britons this week while we were visiting the mountains. They
thought they were on a different planet here in Arizona!
As I mentioned to Michael, I'm going to a local dealer's place today so a
user's group member can take me through Pro Page a bit. Just from the
comments I've gotten from others and what I've seen myself, I'm leaning
heavily toward PageStream, but the screen refresh rate is a serious concern
to me. As a possible tradeoff to the refresh rate, another local user (a
PageStream aficionado) tells me PageStream prints to his non-Postscript dot
matrix printer much faster than Pro Page.
The fellow I'm visiting today is a Pro Page fanatic, though, and I'm very
interested in finding out why.
As you said, "You pays your money…"
Hi Bill,
We visited my wifes cousin in cavecreek Arizona 11 yrs ago now and had a
wonderful 4 days. Naturally its very very different to the UK but what a
fabulous state. We especially liked the higher country from Sedona
northwards towards Flagstaff. We would all very much like to come back but
funds are so short as to be almost nil. But one day…
I've also a standing invite to stay with Betty Clay who has visited me at
my hotel.
Pete from West Dorset in Englands West Country – via Whap!
Just to add my ha'p'orth … the balance between ProPage and PStream is now
changed somewhat. At one time, ProPage was very significantly better at
doing most things (although it lacked the versatility of PStream, as it
couldn't handle PostScript fonts or scale fonts) and, above all, was much
more stable.
Now, PageStream has put right a lot of the problems although it is still a
little slow at times … but it's user interface is much better than it
was. Screen refresh on an accelerated machine is acceptable, on a raw
68000 it isn't but, as you say, the dot-matrix output speed is very good.
ProPage has also cleaned up its act recently, but it is flawed in some
critical areas. Its font handling is dreadful … it requires an (ever so
slow) external utility to convert PostScript Type-1 fonts to CG, an
external program to update its list of fonts when a font is added and it
has no way of properly managing a large number of fonts.
The addition of `genies' is, however, a major advance and has given ProPage
a significant edge for some applications. Its screen refresh is also faster
than PStream, although its dot-matrix support is a fair bit slower.
PPage is unable to make some of the very fine adjustments that one
sometimes needs, and it cannot scale fonts other than just changing their
overall point size.
For my own applications, I use a mixture of PPage and PStream as required.
PStream's direct support of Type-1 fonts is a _major_ selling point, as is
its excellent font management system … although, until recently, PPage
was my main choice, falling back to PStream as necessary.
Now, the balance has changed … PPage lacks a coherent environment and
some fundamental features. So, PStream has now become the work-horse in
these parts … with ProPage only coming out when I need to use the genies.
Mike (from the UK)
PS … I'm coming over to the US at the end of the month. I'm starting off
visiting Betty in Texas, then driving up to Monument Valley … then down
through Arizona to Tucson where I'm going to visit the Organ Pipe Cactus
NatMonument, Kitt Peak and the Titan
Thanks for jumping in, Mike.
I think PageStream's screen refresh rate is one of my major concerns. I'll
be seeing both programs on a friend's '030/25 MHz-accelerated A2000
tomorrow (Gawd, I love that kind of talk!). His machine should pretty well
simulate what I'll see on my A3000.
Beyond that, I agree that Pro Page's Genies are a strong attraction. I
wonder how far behind in ARexx support PageStream can be. It also seems to
me that your comments re font handling and user interface are also
on-target.
Well, I'll make a decision tomorrow and get things rolling.
(I'm replying to the rest of your message in the Ramblings section. I hate
reading on-topic discussions that wander too far afield.)
You'll find a real 3000 gives faster refreshes than on 030 2000.
Yes, PageStream doesn't have ARexx yet. But remember, that's only an
advantage if you're using it to link to other programs, and we have
HotLinks for that, which is a far better solution. PageStream does have its
own macro system which is better is some ways because you can record
scripts without having to learn something like arexx.
But yes, ARexx is very high on the wishlist.
Michael Soft-Logik
> You'll find a real 3000 gives faster refreshes than on 030 > 2000.
I'm no technical wizard, but I'd pretty much expect that. Since the fellow
I'm visiting tomorrow has both PageStream and Pro Page I'll get to see how
the two programs compare.
And I agree with you about ARexx. It sounds nifty, but I just don't have a
programmer's mind. Perhaps what's needed are some pre-made macros and a
macro editor something along the lines of what's available for WordPerfect.
ProPage actually comes complete with a number of pre-made macros (sorry,
`genies').
However, I think you'll probably find yourself preferring PStream.
Mike (from the UK)
Well, Mike (and everybody lurking), I've decided to go for PageStream.
The programs — PageStream and ProPage — seem to me to be fairly
equivalent in what they do, how they work, and features.
PageStream comes with more fonts, but I consider several of those
"decorative," useful only in special situations. ProPage probably has just
as many — perhaps more — fonts usable on a day-to-day basis as
PageStream.
PageStream's direct support for Adobe Type 1 fonts is very attractive, but
ProPage's conversion program really is quite fast and painless.
Image cropping seems to be more difficult in PageStream, but that's more
than balanced out by the wide range of graphic file formats PageStream
supports, as well as the ability to show some EPS images and print them to
non-Postscript printers.
OTOH, ProPage offers easier text and image rotation and stretching than
PageStream. The need in PageStream to do these things via a "model" in a
requester window seems unnecessarily complex. I much prefer ProPage's
more-direct method.
In the end, it was the font and image file format support that did it. It's
very important to me to be able to draw on all the stuff that's out there
for Macs and PeeCees. ProPage just didn't offer that capability.
All this is, of course, IMHO. YMMV.
Bill,
Congratulations on your choice–for now ;^)
Whatever packaged you purchased I am glad to see that you have put some
time and effort to assess the packages and not just go by someone elses
word. Very impressive and it assures that you will find a program that
meets your needs and expectations.
Many users may be surprised how many people spend hundreds or THOUSANDS of
dollars on software/equipment before checking to see if it will work.
Your assessment was also fair and honest, both packages are very good
aren't they?
Thanks for your input.
Philip Laitar
Supervisor
Thanks, Philip. I always try to research something before I buy it
-especially when money is as tight as it has been of late — and I *never*
feel I've got enough information to make a truly informed decision.
And, yes, they are both very good packages. I think I'll have much less
trouble getting up to speed on PageStream than I did with a client's
PageMaker a couple years ago. It (and ProPage) just seem to make more
sense.
Now, when are you guys going to offer a $5 upgrade so I can have both
packages? That's all I'll be able to afford for a while. 🙂
– via Whap!
Bill,
Well, the Gold Disk Power-Up for Professional Page isn't $5.00, but it is
$99.00, for just owning ANY other DTP package. At the same time, you can
purchase Professional Draw for just $99. (That is just $198us for both
packages).
It is a limited time offer so hurry and call Customer Service at
416/602-4000!
Philip Latiar
Supervisor
Funny thing about computers…most users who LOVE one program and HATE the
other always have and USE both!
Whether it be on the Amiga with PPAGE & PStream or on DOS machines and Macs
using Quark/PageMaker, Illustrator/Freehand/Corel/PDW,
PageMaker/Ventura,…etc etc.
You can please everyone and no one 😉
To sum it up:
For every user that is using your package to make a living, I can give you
a name of one using ours (but chances are it will be the same name)!
Let the `games' continue…it creates better software in the long run.
Phil Laitar
Phil:
I would have to agree with you. I use PPage all the time, and I love it. I
find it generally easier for me to use PPage to make layouts than it is
for me to use PgS. I have both (as well as Saxon Pub & City Desk, but
don't use either), and find that I have to fight PgS to get anything done.
I have a friend who also has both PgS & PPage, and he can say exactly the
same thing, only reversed, he loved PgS, and finds that he has to fight
PPage to get anything done with it, so does 99% of his work in PgS, I do
99% of my stuff with PPage. I think its a matter of what you learned
either first, or better, and folks tend to stick with what they know.
// -Mike Schiller
\X/ AMIGA! On AutoPilot in sunny Fort Lauderdale
Mike,
You're so right about a person getting used to a program and then finding
it more useful than anything else. There is nothing so useful as a
comfortable old tool. In that regard, I have used Pro Draw for many years
and can very easily duplicate almost (repeat almost!) any thing that a
graphic artist working on a Mac can do with Illustrator or Freehand. Simply
because I am so used to the program.
However, about six months ago I started working with Aldus Freehand. At
first, everything was a little confusing, though vaguely familiar. After
about 2 days I had surpassed in speed and sophistication anything I could
do in Pro Draw, all the while finding the Mac OS clumsy and inhibiting
compared to the multi-tasking Amiga OS.
We switched to PgS because of PostScript and Type 1 compatibility. I missed
some of ProPage's feature's, but found PgS _much_ more suited to
productivity. It's macros alone gave it a vast speed advantage of PPage.
But I guess that PPage has such capability now. Although why PgS has
continued to limit its macros to a total of 10 is a mystery. It would be so
easy to expand that number, and have a _really_ useful feature.
It's a shame that we don't have the competition in software happening here
that the other guys have. Also it is a shame that the major vendors (are
you listening Gold Disk) continue to assume that the Amiga user is a
strange animal, content to remain apart from the _useful_ parts of the
mainstream. Of course, CBM is content to go that way <sigh>.
8)
Rich
As long as the heated controversy over which Amiga DTP software is the best
causes both Gold Disk and Soft-Logik to build a better program, I'm all for
it!
Now if we could just get a good episode of "spreadsheet wars" going, the
Amiga could finally get a very nice, much needed application.
Wayne
You're very correct. The competition between programs makes the DTP market
very healthy. I imagine both companies have added features solely because
the other has added them.
You have to remember that this just isn't a job to most of us, it's fun.
None of us have really grown up. We're still playing marketing games left
over from college and university business classes, or programmer
one-upmanship on the case of the programmers. 😉 \ Michael
Need any more programmers?! 🙂
Wayne
Not really, we're just keeping them busy. I'm normally the source of them
being busy 'cause I think of more neat things for them to do. Anyone who
can should go to the WOC Pasadena show Sep 11-13. We'll be there and it
should be a good show. (And you'll find out why our module writer has been
so busy lately.)
Michael Soft-Logik
So just when will Soft-Logic produce a spreadsheet? We have got to have
something competing against BugCalc from Gold Disk. 🙂
-mark=
– whappity whap whap… whap whap!!
Ummm…Phil, not everyone has both 🙂 I'm a ProPage man myself. More than
happy.
Pete from West Dorset in Englands West Country – via Whap!
I think you'll find an '030/25MHz A2000 looks fairly good on PageStream,
and I doubt you'll see a great deal of difference between that and PPage
for most things.
ARexx in PageStream is only half of the way towards doing what ProPage has
done
.. you then need a `secripting' language (or ARexx host) to allow you to
control it from within an ARexx script.
Remember, PStream also has a limited macro capability (although it is
_very_ limited compared with PPage) … but the ARexx link needs a good
command language, and PPage has done this rather well (although I'd love to
see the ability to get information about text size/width etc etc so that I
could make sensible decisions based on how long aparticular character
string would be, for instance).
One thing I've been able to do in ProPage, for instance, is to generate
font sample pages. One is a single page with the full character set plus
samples of the font in different styles … the other is a single page with
a couple of lines per font (as a quick guide).
These were very easy to do in PPage … it brings up a requester of all the
fonts available, I do an extended selection of the ones I want and one
`genie' keeps generating the single sample page for each font in turn.
Another prepares the index page (it can even allow me to star half-way down
a sheet which perhaps has thre or four fonts already on there).
There's currently no way of doing this in PStream.
Mike (from the UK)
I'm not sure I understand what you mean when you say PageStream's macro
language is limited.
Is there some fundamental way that PageStream's macros are limited? I
mean, are there "barriers" within PageStream the macro language can't
cross. For example, in WordPerfect, once a macro calls WP's Print program,
things are out of the macro's hands. Are the limitations in PageStream
similar? Is it fairly easy to work with?
The only reason I say that they're limited is that they don't have the
power of fully-programmable macros. After all, the PPage `genies' are
really just sophisticated macros written in ARexx.
PStream's macros are really just a way of recording a sequence of
keystrokes, and the macro `language' is just a means of encoding menu
selections (and requester input) as a sequence of ASCII characters.
There's no logical or arithmetic capabilities provided.
It can be _very_ useful, but it's not quite as powerful, for instance, as
Word Perfect 4.1's macros and definitely not as powerful as WP 5.1 on the
PC or ProPage.
Mike (from the UK)
Rocket museum … heading back to Texas via Alamagordo and Carlsbad.
I saw some of Arizona last year and _loved_ it … by the way, how busy do
you think it's likely to be in southern AZ during Labor Day weekend (which
is when I'm likely to be there)?
Mike (from the UK)
Guess what Mike,
I'm green with envy. I have visited AZ a couple of times as friends of
mine are building their retirement home there (Sedona). This may sound odd
but I LOVE the Sothwestern Desert areas of the USA. I am planning to be
there next year on an extended trip to the USA. Sedona is were I would
like to be right now! Oh well…….
Laurie Carroll AKL NZ
Amiga-Via Falnet.APb
Bill,
I heard you mention "your user group". You may wish to know that Soft
Logik had a users group program where they gave our user group TWO copies
of PageStream. One for our newsletter editor and the other to use as a fund
raiser. This was instrumental in our users group upgrading to an A3000.
THANKS SL!
If you plan to buy only one DTP program I suggest PageStream. (BTW I own
both PgS and PPage and have used PgS since version 1.5 – long before the
above promotion.) With the exception of a very few high end color
separation controls (under color removal) it will do everthing PPage will
AND more. PgS includes a "mini structured drawing program" as part of its
standard tools. You can edit or create structured graphics, stretch,
rotate, and warp text within the program. It DIRECTLY supports type I
fonts, and is the hands down winner as far as importing just about every
graphics format I've run into. These two features let you share in the
wealth of material available for the MACs and PCs, and not feel left out in
the cold.
(Librarian: Fairfield County Amiga Users Group)
-Paul-
The group I belong to, AmAz! (Amiga Arizona!), does indeed use PageStream
for its newsletter. I think they "raffled off" their other copy a long,
long time ago. 🙂
The things you mention — especially the graphics importing capabilities —
are some of the things that particularly draw me toward PageStream, Paul.
Thanks for your comments. I'll let everyone know what I decide tomorrow.