From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Tom Duff"
Message-Id: <10009080943.ZM941358@marvin>
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 09:43:01 -0700
In-Reply-To: please_no_spam_to_
"Re: [9fans] new versions of graphics programs?" (Sep 8, 3:28pm)
References: <10009071535.ZM922826@marvin>
<8pav64$m8l$1@beta.qmw.ac.uk>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] new versions of graphics programs?
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 05935676-eac9-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025
Jim Choate (ravage@einstein.ssz.com) wrote:
>
> Thu, 7 Sep 2000, Tom Duff wrote:
>
> > > Speaking of new versions of graphics. Anyone remember NAPLPS?
> > Get thee behind me, Satan!
>
> You're jealous you didn't think of it sooner...
I'm sorry, I didn't understand this until
just now...
I wasn't trying to suggest that NAPLPS was
inferior to the alternatives (Prestel or
Ceefax or whatever), but that the whole idea
of transmitting cheezy little display lists
over ISDN or in your TV's vertical interval
was dopey. (But, if you have to do that
sort of thing, Display Postscript is more
like the right way to do it.)
--
Tom Duff. Superficial similarities spawn spurious statements.
|