On Fri, Dec 17, 1999 at 10:47:41AM +0100, Aley Keprt wrote: > > eg use a clean PostScript driver for Windows (there aren't many), and > > get a postscript file out the other end. > What? Why do we need postscript driver? When I need to output postscript, > I do it manually. But this is not needed for Sam.
Er, it was just an example. As for outputting postscript manually ... I'm sorry, but I flat do not believe that you sit there and write level 3.0 postscript. > Oh, what you are saying, man? You know anything really better than DirectX? > I think DX is good piece of soft. I used DX 3,5,6 and everything was alright. I'm not wanting to get into a "better" argument. However, to explain the point (since I was daft enough to raise it): In DX, you can ask it "what features does this system support?" This is good, and sensible, and useful. What is /not/ sensible was that, if a system does not support (for example) bi-linear filtering in hardware, *every program* had to have a software routine to do this. There was no 'centralised' substitution library, which could have been optimised to hell and back. (This is one reason why different programs can get vastly different performances using the same hardware.) This was AFAIK some of the earlier versions, <= 5. I believe this has changed with the introduction of 6 and 7; I could be wrong. -- Paul
