Timeline for What was novel about the Atari ST? Did it introduce any innovations?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 5, 2021 at 15:56 | history | edited | Omar and Lorraine | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
edited body
|
| Jul 2, 2020 at 16:34 | comment | added | Raffzahn | @MSalters In fact, next to all printers are used that way today. They simply get a bitmap to print, Font rendering is done on the PC anyway. Or when was the last time you had to look for a printer font? | |
| Jul 2, 2020 at 16:30 | comment | added | Raffzahn | Not to mention that the laser printer was a very long horror story to early adopters. THe software was buggy as hell, crashed the system without any reason at random times. A friend who used Ataris for all his office employees (way into the 90s and otherwise quite happy) had to buy a separate system just acting as printer controller, spooling from diskettes. | |
| Jul 2, 2020 at 15:32 | comment | added | manassehkatz-Moving 2 Codidact | @MSalters The devices, and I still see this today, likely had some minor differences beyond just pure marketing. In the olden days, that better CPU, RAM, etc. was quite a bit. But today (and already 15 - 20 or so years ago when I had this particular incident, can't find exactly when it was right now) the incremental cost is tiny. Similar to the difference between a scan/print/copy machine and a fax/scan/print/copy machine (which needs a modem and phone jack added but uses the same CPU/etc.). The difference for GDI vs. PCL is possibly just extra RAM + different firmware. | |
| Jul 2, 2020 at 15:21 | comment | added | MSalters | @manassehkatz-Moving2Codidact: The idea makes even more sense today as it did back then. The key insight is that it's cheaper to get a 25% faster CPU than it is to add a similar processing capacity to an external device in the form of an independent microcontroller, and that faster CPU is also useful for other tasks. Saving $20 is indeed not worth it, that sounds like two models which shared the same hardware and merely had a marketing difference. | |
| Jul 2, 2020 at 14:24 | history | edited | Patrick Schlüter | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 185 characters in body
|
| Jul 2, 2020 at 14:21 | comment | added | manassehkatz-Moving 2 Codidact | And a technique that, while it made some sense at the time, has been a horrible thing ever since. Once I had a customer, thinking they were saving me trouble, buy a laser printer and connect it themselves to replace another one. It didn't work. Why? They didn't ask me and saved (literally) < $ 20 by buying the cheaper model with GDI-only. The more expensive (but not by much) had full PCL necessary for their shared medical records and billing systems. Had to replace it - waste of my time and their money. | |
| Jul 2, 2020 at 14:10 | history | answered | Patrick Schlüter | CC BY-SA 4.0 |