MacBook back-up necessity
in [UK Mac]
|
From: Rowland McDonnell on 3 Jul 2010 22:21 D.M. Procida <real-not-anti-spam-address(a)apple-juice.co.uk> wrote: > Woody <usenet(a)alienrat.co.uk> wrote: > > > > > PDF is basically built upon PostScript, a language intended to be > > > > interpreted by laser printers. All it does it tell the device: make > > > > such-and-such a mark here. > > > > > > Oh no it doesn't. > > > > > > The design intention of PS is that it's meant for drawing on paper, but > > > since PS is a full-on programming language, it's much much more than a > > > mere page description method. > > > > Wasn't he reffering to PDF though, which is just a page description > > language with a couple of other things thrown in, and none of the PS > > programming language available. > > Acually I didn't know that PS was executable. I thought it was just > descriptive, like HTML. <http://www.tailrecursive.org/postscript/postscript.html> (or <http://www.tailrecursive.org/postscript/postscript.tar.gz> if you want a tarball of the entire site) It's a full on programming language, everything you could need, if you like Reverse Polish. I learnt a little PS programming at uni. There's a PS program out there to draw a Mandelbrot set - using the printer to do the calculations. Rowland. -- Remove the animal for email address: rowland.mcdonnell(a)dog.physics.org Sorry - the spam got to me http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking
From: Mark Bestley on 6 Jul 2010 10:09 Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid> wrote: > Woody <usenet(a)alienrat.co.uk> wrote: > > > Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid> wrote: > > > > > Woody <usenet(a)alienrat.co.uk> wrote: > [snip] > > > > > > > > Effectively you would just have the information twice > > > > > > Well, yes, why not? Where's the problem with that? Mark up your input > > > file with structure, use your PDF creator to generate a structured > > > marked-up PDF, and Bob's yer auntie's live-in lover. > > > > > > Does a small amount of apparent data inefficiency matter, if indeed > > > there is much? > > > > Depends what you want to do with it. PDF is not a good output format for > > most things, other than sending a document for printing. > > So you claim - but *WHY* do you claim that? > I thinlk a better claim is that except for sending a document for printing and making a document uneditable then there is usually a better format than PDF, If you want to search the structure of the document then XML/SGML provide a richer structure including cross references. If you want to have it displayed on a computer/ebook/phone screen then HTML is better as the text can reflow and chnage line length to meet the display which the author of the PDF has no idea of the size. The size of the fonts can be chnaged by the user and the text will reflow. Basically the PDF is fixed by the author whilst other formats allow the reader to format and manipulate as they want. (of course bad programmers can mess up other formats as well to make things unchangeable by readers e.g setting absolute font sizes in HTML.) > I can't see the reasons. > > What you say about PDFs does not seem to apply to the PDFs I see. > -- Mark
From: Woody on 6 Jul 2010 14:02 Woody <usenet(a)alienrat.co.uk> wrote: > Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid> wrote: > > > Agreed. When it comes to A4 books, ebooks are definately a second class > > > thing, which is why my sony ebook was not as good as the iPad for a4 > > > stuff (although I didn't have the iPad until very recently) > > > > When it comes to normal paperbacks too, if you ask me. Big books are > > totally not possible to replace by electronic versions. > > For me very much so. > > > > > Proper ink on paper printing is easier for flipping back and forth by > > > > one or two orders of magnitude - the difference in *that* respect is > > > > staggeringly huge and is the main reason e-books are a total no-no for > > > > me. > > > > > > I don't have a problem with it. > > > > Obviously not - which is good for you, because it means you can use this > > very convenient method of carting words around and then using them. > > It is very convenient. It means I can access the information I want a > lot easier than I could before. and seems it is not just me: <http://www.reghardware.com/2010/07/06/ipad_kindle_reading_study/> -- Woody www.alienrat.com
From: Rowland McDonnell on 6 Jul 2010 14:06 Woody <usenet(a)alienrat.co.uk> wrote: > Woody <usenet(a)alienrat.co.uk> wrote: > > > Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid> wrote: > > > > > Agreed. When it comes to A4 books, ebooks are definately a second class > > > > thing, which is why my sony ebook was not as good as the iPad for a4 > > > > stuff (although I didn't have the iPad until very recently) > > > > > > When it comes to normal paperbacks too, if you ask me. Big books are > > > totally not possible to replace by electronic versions. > > > > For me very much so. > > > > > > > Proper ink on paper printing is easier for flipping back and forth by > > > > > one or two orders of magnitude - the difference in *that* respect is > > > > > staggeringly huge and is the main reason e-books are a total no-no for > > > > > me. > > > > > > > > I don't have a problem with it. > > > > > > Obviously not - which is good for you, because it means you can use this > > > very convenient method of carting words around and then using them. > > > > It is very convenient. It means I can access the information I want a > > lot easier than I could before. > > and seems it is not just me: > > <http://www.reghardware.com/2010/07/06/ipad_kindle_reading_study/> Well, yes, obviously. So? What's good for one person's application is not necessarily good for a different person's different application. This point needs to be taken into account - supplying `one size to fit all' results in the realization that one size only ever fits a minority. --- meaning that not everyone gets on with each particular way of doing things, and other ways are better for some jobs, and we need access to multiple routes to information. I gave up on this thread when you refused to admit that there are some jobs which cannot be done on a small screen - such as looking at a big map. Just because *YOU* personally have never wanted to look at a big map to get the big picture which is impossible to see unless you look at the big map - impossible, I tell you - doesn't mean that the job's not worth doing by anyone. I really don't see why you refuse to admit simple truths like that. Rowland. -- Remove the animal for email address: rowland.mcdonnell(a)dog.physics.org Sorry - the spam got to me http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking
From: Rowland McDonnell on 6 Jul 2010 14:07
Jochem Huhmann <joh(a)gmx.net> wrote: > Chris Ridd <chrisridd(a)mac.com> writes: > > > The last time I tried creating tagged PDFs (from Framemaker) the > > resulting files were massively bigger than untagged PDFs. > > > > I'm not sure I've really seen any tagged PDFs in the wild. What do > > Preview, iPhones/the iBooks app etc make of them? > > I have no idea, really. Tagged PDF is indeed nothing you run into > easily... What's a pdf file filled with hyperlinks classed as? 'cos I meet them quite often. They're standard in the TeX world, being so easy to produce. Rowland. -- Remove the animal for email address: rowland.mcdonnell(a)dog.physics.org Sorry - the spam got to me http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking |