#SEYBOLD
9 messages in this thread
Warnock's annoucement was fantastic and exasperating at the same time
(fantastic 'cuz it means type 1 fonts will become a real standard, exasperating
because I had to completely change the "Font Wars" presentation I gave Saturday
to the PPA).
The announcement caught everybody off guard (at least a little). I'd heard
plenty of rumblings over the past couple of months (and mentioned it at least
once here), but I think it got a little rushed by the Seybold conference and
the latest Apple/Microsoft dealings. URW/The Font Company, for example, had
already "cracked" the type 1 encryption scheme (at no small expense, I'm sure),
and have alreaday written software to create "type 1 compatible" fonts (which
they showed off at Seybold)…NOW they plan to take an extra couple of weeks to
go back and make any changes necessary to insure that they are creating TRUE
type 1 fonts, using the promised information from Adobe (this throws off their
release schedule, though).
Actually, if you really want to see the complete poop on PostScript, you'll
probably see it in the upcoming "Gold Book" first (being created by the SPSS
-the "Society of Page Specification Standards", I think). Adobe seems to be
cooperating with the idea that PostScript needs a more formal definition, and
the Warnock announcement is a large part of that.
It would be a blessing if Adobe cooperates with SPSS. Prior to Seybold, I was
envisioning three PostScript standards — Adobe and their licensees, SPSS and
their clone cohorts and whatever Apple/Microsoft decide to do to interface
Royal with PostScript. At least getting the clone world and Adobe together
would make it possible for PostScript to continue as a "standard". If Adobe and
SPSS shows a united front to the Unix world and the makers of high-resolution
imaging machines, Apple and Microsoft are always going to have to maintain some
compatibility, no matter how far they stray on their own platforms — they'd be
slicing their throats if they didn't.
I worry a little about Apple. Big Bad Bill Gates could chew Sculley for lunch
if Apple's not careful. What was the word at Seybold? Who did participants
think got the better end of the deal in the Apple/MS announcement?
I also hope that the SPS Association (you and Scott put in an extra "s")
and Adobe can get together. I was at the SPS Association meeting on
Thursday night. It now includes about 70 major companies including many of
the biggies (Aldus, Linotype, Agfa Compugraphic, Microsoft, Xerox, etc.,
etc.). The SPS leaders were genuinely happy about John Warnock's
announcement the day before about opening up Type 1 fonts.
I heard on Sunday a rumor (yet unconfirmed) that Adobe was going to be
opening up more to the SPS Association. If the two can get together in some
reasonable way, we stand a very good chance of forging a single
industry-wide standard. And that should make all us PostScript service
bureaus very happy.
At the New York PostScript User's Group meeting on Monday night, the two
Adobe reps said they had no word on SPS membership. I keep getting the
feeling that Adobe feels that if it throws open the full specifications on
PostScript that everyone will feel so grateful that they'll allow Adobe to
continue to define the standard. The rep said Adobe hopes to use its
developers' conferences as places to discuss and define new specs for the
language. Hopefully, they'll realize how important it is in light of the
Apple/MS alliance that the PostScript world speak with one voice and get on
the SPS bandwagon.
The worse case scenerio: a world with Adobe-defined PostScript, SPS-defined
extensions, MS/Apple-defined PostScript clone and the Royal font rendering
technology. That prospect was making several service bureau managers
shudder a bit.
Lot of questions raised. Will Apple continue to issue and administer the
NFNT numbers? Will Apple customers let Apple back off from its earlier
statement that it would develop a utility to convert Royal fonts to
PostScript (which they reneged from at Seybold)? Will Adobe fill that void,
since the Royal font technology will supposedly be open?
Hang on to your hats, folks, the next few months could be bumpy.
Adobe's alread announced that they will NOT be offering an "easy" way of
converting Apple's Royal fonts into PostScript (a turnaround from their
position last May). If Apple's going to play dirty, then Adobe's not going
to make Apple's life any easier.
John Warnock seems to be the one in all this who is trying to "do the right
thing"…he knows that if he doesn't open up "true" Adobe PostScript, the
whole page description arena will go to hell, with infighting, hundreds of
standards, and nobody winning in the end. PostScript is a good thing, and
Warnock wants it to continue to succeed.
What Adobe's lawyers & "suits" are thinking is another story, I'm sure.
You're probably right about the three standards emerging (if Adobe Doesn't
open up PS). Now, there will be only TWO standards (PostScript -vs-
"AppleScript"). I'm not certain what to think about Apple's impending
PostScript clone, but I'm pretty certain it'll have some MAJOR
incompatibilities and problems, since Apple has never been a company
willing to play by OTHER people's rules (they have their own (inferior)
versions of Adobe screen fonts, they don't follow standard SCSI protocols,
their video standard is off the wall, etc, etc.).
Views from my end tend to be "it don't taste like nothin' 'til it gets
served up". We've only seen a few of the ingredients at this point, and
haven't had a chance to stick our fingers in and taste a bit. This whole
AppleScript business could end up being a bit like Airline Food — You can
live on it, but it tastes like sh*t, and (unfortunately) it's the only
thing you can get while you're on the flight.
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?
After the SPS Association meeting I went to on Thursday night, I'm
convinced it has to be Adobe working with the SPS Association to develop a
PostScript standard. The SPS Association includes many Adobe licensees,
it's not just the "clone people."
BTW, it's not really surprising that Illustrator should not work with ATM.
Illustrator has always used a unique way of writing the screen (a modified
form of display PostScript I've heard). It doesn't use the standard
Macintosh font calls. An free upgrade for Illustrator is promised for next
month, at the same time that ATM will be released.
I think your rose colored glasses are clouding your vision:
John was the guy who first put PostScript in the public domain, and then,
several years and several hundred million dollars later, tried to take it
back, and finally settled for some goofy free licensing agreement with
either very odd or very sinister intentions.
He was also the guy who copy-protected Adobe fonts to the printer ROM, so
you couldn't output on someone else's printer or take yours in for service.
Later he charged $40 per set to unprotect them.
As for his indignation and surpise over the Apple/MS agreement, I hardly
think it's real or warranted. Apple has talked about their open standards
since last year and Adobe hasn't moved to address those concerns, even
after others had cracked Type I. Now that he has reneged on his promise to
convert the Adobe library to Royal, Adobe's future has dimmed even further.
Quite a rhetorical feat, by the way, to turn John's newly broken promise
into an example of Apple's "playing dirty." What promise did Apple break?
Apple licensed those fonts from Adobe. Apple was the first mass-market
implementer of SCSI and, yes, strayed a bit but have come back in line with
emerging standards. You seem quite forgiving, on the other hand of
Illustrator's rather comical incompatibility with ATM. Oh, and remember
NFNTs? the format Adobe waited until the last possible minute to support,
depsite rampant font ID conflicts? Remember Illustrator's odd
incompatibilites with Jasmine hard drives? Sigma displays? It's intentional
incompatibility with the GCC Laser Printer and other QuickDraw-based
printers? And there is nothing particularly odd about Apple's video. It's
quite nice, actually.
The Bauer clone that Apple has gotten from Microsoft is compatible with (a
superset of) Postscript – and if Adobe opens it up in '90, there is no
reason to think Apple will diverge from Postscript.
I love Illustrator and outline fonts…but I won't miss Adobe's prices or
attitude. The bottom line is: when Apple and Microsoft and IBM get behind
something, it's going to happen. Adobe should quit mourning the death of
the golden goose and become the world's best type vendor. The market just
quadrupled in size – they could own it.