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.