7 Apr
2005
7 Apr
'05
9:45 a.m.
My main printer is a LJ 4L. Not PS, which is why the
LaserWriter
interests me.
Would it maybe be easier to get a postscript simm for the 4L?
I don't know what they go for, but I bought two for LaserJet 4's (not L,
one was a 4 the other a 4 Plus), on ebay for around $10 each (I bought
them about a year apart from each other).
If you do that, you get the newer, faster, printer... and only one
printer to deal with rather than two.
-chris
<http://www.mythtech.net>
7 Apr
7 Apr
7:45 p.m.
On Apr 7, 2005 9:45 AM, chris <cb at mythtech.net> wrote:
The 4L and 4ML are stripped-down single-user-oriented printers, not
big modular monsters like the IIISi, 4MX, etc. The internal boards
for the 4L and 4ML are entirely different (but the engine is the
same). There is no PostScript SIMM in a 4ML; everything is soldered
to the board, plus the 4L has parallel only, and the 4ML has parallel
plus an 8-pin-DIN AppleTalk/LocalTalk connector.
-ethan
My main printer
is a LJ 4L. Not PS, which is why the LaserWriter
interests me.
Would it maybe be easier to get a postscript simm for the 4L? 
8 p.m.
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Ethan Dicks wrote:
The 4L and 4ML are stripped-down single-user-oriented
printers, not
big modular monsters like the IIISi, 4MX, etc. The internal boards
for the 4L and 4ML are entirely different (but the engine is the
same). There is no PostScript SIMM in a 4ML; everything is soldered
to the board, plus the 4L has parallel only, and the 4ML has parallel
plus an 8-pin-DIN AppleTalk/LocalTalk connector.
Which sub-model of 4 DOES take the Postscript SIMM?
I recall one of the colleges that I teach at converted one of their
printers to Postscript using a SIMM.
On the 2 and 3, (and 2P), I've often used Postscript cartridges.
--
Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin at xenosoft.com
8:49 p.m.
On Thursday 07 April 2005 19:00, Fred Cisin wrote:
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Ethan Dicks wrote:
The 4si (and 4si/mx) took a postscript SIMM. I think that others did as
well, but used different SIMMs.
Pat
--
Purdue University Research Computing --- http://www.rcac.purdue.edu/
The Computer Refuge --- http://computer-refuge.org
The 4L and 4ML are stripped-down
single-user-oriented printers, not
big modular monsters like the IIISi, 4MX, etc. The internal boards
for the 4L and 4ML are entirely different (but the engine is the
same). There is no PostScript SIMM in a 4ML; everything is
soldered to the board, plus the 4L has parallel only, and the 4ML
has parallel plus an 8-pin-DIN AppleTalk/LocalTalk connector.
Which sub-model of 4 DOES take the Postscript SIMM?
I recall one of the colleges that I teach at converted one of their
printers to Postscript using a SIMM. 
8:53 p.m.
New subject: Laserjet 4si Postscript SIMM was Re: LaserWriter Plus
At 07:49 PM 4/7/05 -0500, you wrote:
On Thursday 07 April 2005 19:00, Fred Cisin wrote:
If I remember correctly the 4si takes the C2013-60001 postscript SIMM as
pictured here:
http://tinypic.com/2me5ap
If anyone needs it they can have it for AU$10 + shipping from Australia
(between AU$6 and AU$43.50 depending on who fast you want it).
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Ethan Dicks wrote:
The 4si (and 4si/mx) took a postscript SIMM. I think that others did as
well, but used different SIMMs. The 4L and 4ML are stripped-down
single-user-oriented printers, not
big modular monsters like the IIISi, 4MX, etc. The internal boards
for the 4L and 4ML are entirely different (but the engine is the
same). There is no PostScript SIMM in a 4ML; everything is
soldered to the board, plus the 4L has parallel only, and the 4ML
has parallel plus an 8-pin-DIN AppleTalk/LocalTalk connector.
Which sub-model of 4 DOES take the Postscript SIMM?
I recall one of the colleges that I teach at converted one of their
printers to Postscript using a SIMM. 
8 Apr
8 Apr
12:03 p.m.
You can also do postscript on cheap HP inkjets using hpijs (PS -->
HP) and nenscript (ascii --> PS). Unix/linux, not sure if there's
"DOS" versions. Totally transparent; printcap and a userland
filter.
3:31 p.m.
On 08-Apr-2005 Tom Jennings wrote:
You can also do postscript on cheap HP inkjets using
hpijs (PS -->
HP) and nenscript (ascii --> PS). Unix/linux, not sure if there's
"DOS" versions. Totally transparent; printcap and a userland
filter.
Doing PS rendering on the computer is not the same as having a PS printer.
I program computers for a living. I've never programmed a printer.
-Philip
4:13 p.m.
Philip wrote:
Doing PS rendering on the computer is not the same as
having a PS printer.
True, there is a functional differences. In my case, I've got a PCL-only
printer on one parallel port on a computer running Linux, and a Postcript
printer on another. The print spooling system will automatically render
Postscript files into PCL as needed if I print them to the PCL-only printer.
The functional difference is that when I print complex Postscript documents
to the PCL-only printer, it is much *FASTER*. The computer has a lot more
computons available for rendering than the Postscript printer does.
Eric
4:27 p.m.
Eric Smith wrote:
The functional difference is that when I print complex
Postscript documents
to the PCL-only printer, it is much *FASTER*. The computer has a lot more
computons available for rendering than the Postscript printer does.
I have a similar setup at home, but I still send PS to my 4ML because, in
side-by-side comparisons, the computer-rendered output is slightly worse than
the 4ML's output. The 4ML's curved lines seem anti-aliased or something;
they're smoother. Halftoning looks a bit better too. But that's just my
opinion. Both printers are 300 DPI (the 4ML has "resolution-enhancing
technology", not sure if that is marketing-speak or actual features though; the
PCL printer does not).
Back in 1988, when sending a semi-complex page took tens of minutes to spool,
PS was magic for me -- computer control was returned in less than half a minute
and I could keep working while this complex page was formed on the printer.
--
Jim Leonard (trixter at oldskool.org) http://www.oldskool.org/
Want to help an ambitious games project? http://www.mobygames.com/
Or check out some trippy MindCandy at http://www.mindcandydvd.com/
9 Apr
9 Apr
10:19 p.m.
> The functional difference is that when I print
complex Postscript
> documents to the PCL-only printer, it is much *FASTER*. The
> computer has a lot more computons available for rendering than the
> Postscript printer does.
I have a similar setup at home, but I still send PS to
my 4ML
because, in side-by-side comparisons, the computer-rendered output is
slightly worse than the 4ML's output. The 4ML's curved lines seem
anti-aliased or something; they're smoother. Halftoning looks a bit
better too. But that's just my opinion. Both printers are 300 DPI
(the 4ML has "resolution-enhancing technology", not sure if that is
marketing-speak or actual features though; the PCL printer does not).
Probably actual features, if you can see the difference. I suspect
that the smoother curves and better halftones are exactly what the
"resolution-enhancing technology" does. (I'm not sure in what sense
it's still 300dpi; perhaps if I knew the guts of the thing I'd be able
to say something more definitive.)
Back in 1988, when sending a semi-complex page took
tens of minutes
to spool, PS was magic for me -- computer control was returned in
less than half a minute and I could keep working while this complex
page was formed on the printer.
I still remember the time, soon after we (at the university lab I
worked for at the time) got our first LaserWriter, when I wrote PS code
to print a plot where a point (X,Y) was white or black according as X
and Y were relatively prime or not. (Experimenting with an unusual
data procedure to the image operator.) I printed a few sheets at low
and medium resolutions (eg, 100 pixels each way on an 8" square), then
cranked it up to full 2400x2400 dots (300dpi * 8"). Sending the file
took moments (9600 baud serial line) - but the printer just sat there.
I had to leave it overnight. :-)
/~\ The ASCII der Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
X Against HTML mouse at rodents.montreal.qc.ca
/ \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B
10 Apr
10 Apr
10:49 a.m.
At 09:19 PM 4/9/2005, der Mouse wrote:
Well, back in that day, the Laserwriter had a CPU quite comparable to
what was in the personal computer. Same for the Commodore 64 and its
1541 disk drive. :-)
- John
Back in 1988,
when sending a semi-complex page took tens of minutes
to spool, PS was magic for me -- computer control was returned in
less than half a minute and I could keep working while this complex
page was formed on the printer.
I still remember the time, soon after we (at the university lab I
worked for at the time) got our first LaserWriter, when I wrote PS code 
1:02 p.m.
On Sun, 10 Apr 2005 09:49:23 -0500
John Foust <jfoust at threedee.com> wrote:
At 09:19 PM 4/9/2005, der Mouse wrote:
Well, back in that day, the Laserwriter had a CPU quite comparable to
what was in the personal computer. Same for the Commodore 64 and its
1541 disk drive. :-)
The LaserWriter had one of those massive 64 pin DIP package 68000 chips
on it. Often the LaserWriter had a more powerful CPU than the Macintosh
connected to it.
-Scott
Back in
1988, when sending a semi-complex page took tens of minutes
to spool, PS was magic for me -- computer control was returned in
less than half a minute and I could keep working while this complex
page was formed on the printer.
I still remember the time, soon after we (at the university lab I
worked for at the time) got our first LaserWriter, when I wrote PS
code
3:59 p.m.
On Apr 10, 2005 1:02 PM, Scott Stevens <chenmel at earthlink.net> wrote:
The LaserWriter had one of those massive 64 pin DIP
package 68000 chips
on it. Often the LaserWriter had a more powerful CPU than the Macintosh
connected to it.
The size and internal arrangement of the 68000 CPU was identical
between the Mac 128/512/Plus/etc and the LaserWriter (64-pin DIP, 8
32-bit D registers, 8 32-bit A registers, 23-bit address bus, 16-bit
data bus...). The difference was that the computers ran at a nominal
8MHz (less effective speed due to video-induced bus blockages), and
the printers ran at 12MHz.
The 64-pin DIP was the standard 68000/68010 package, and only came in
a Z package (square with pins underneath), and a PLCC package (square,
SMT pins on the sides) later.
I think Eric Smith has the RAM/ROM differences right. The original LW
had 1.5MB of RAM and 512K of ROM, and I _think_ the Plus had an
additional 512K of ROM (more PostScript fonts, IIRC).
-ethan
4:11 p.m.
Ethan wrote:
The difference was that the computers ran at a
nominal
8MHz
7.8336 MHz (divided down from 15.6672 MHz crystal).
(less effective speed due to video-induced bus
blockages),
About 15-20% less, effective.
and the printers ran at 12MHz.
12.5 MHz, if memory serves.
In 1987-88 I worked on a design for an accelerator for the LaserWriter,
using a 68020 processor and faster 32-bit wide DRAM. The hardware was OK,
but it took too long to reverse engineer enough of the firmware to patch
the exception handlers to deal with the '020 exception stack frame format.
The project was cancelled before completion.
Instead we built an adapter to use ADB keyboards and mice on the
pre-ADB Mac models, or the early keyboards and mice on the ADB Macs.
It was called "ADBridge". Not many sold. Unfortunately I don't have
one any longer.
Eric
1:16 p.m.
Well, back in that day, the Laserwriter had a CPU
quite comparable to
what was in the personal computer. Same for the Commodore 64 and its
1541 disk drive. :-)
Wasn't there a time when the Laserwriter was the most powerful computer
Apple sold? It used a 12MHz 68000, the Macs of the time used a 8MHz 68000
-tony
1:57 p.m.
Tony Duell wrote:
Wasn't there a time when the Laserwriter was the most powerful computer
Apple sold? It used a 12MHz 68000, the Macs of the time used a 8MHz 68000
Ben wrote:
Hey what about memory ... Did not the original Mac
come with 128KB of
memory?
The original Mac had 128K of RAM and 64K of ROM. The Laserwriter had
1.5M of RAM and 512K of ROM.
3:27 p.m.
On Apr 10, 2005 10:49 AM, John Foust <jfoust at threedee.com> wrote:
Well, back in that day, the Laserwriter had a CPU
quite comparable to
what was in the personal computer. Same for the Commodore 64 and its
1541 disk drive. :-)
The original Apple LaserWriter had a 12MHz 68000, 1MB of RAM and 1.5MB
of ROM (the ROM amount _might_ be for the Plus... but it's on that
order)... remarkedly more powerful than the Mac Plus one often found
attached to them... the $5000 price tag also explained why Apple was
big on networked printers early on. It was unrealistic to expect that
a company would buy one printer per user.
The C-64 and the 1541 were more expectedly matched (both 1MHz
6502-family processors, more RAM in the C-64...), but the point is
well taken. In the case of the PET and the 2040/3040/4040 drives,
there were _two_ 6502-family CPUs in the drive, and one in the main
computer, one of the reasons the dual disk drive cost twice as much as
the computer it was attached to.
-ethan
ObFolklore... Don Lancaster used to refer to his Apple LW as his
"PostScript Computer". He described sitting at it with a terminal and
interactively entering PS programs to produce a variety of complicated
outputs. I used that as an inspiration when I devised the minimal PS
to print aligned text on SDLT paperboard label inserts, a year ago.
Following his lead, I turned my project from an OpenOffice document
tweakfest into a genuine programming exercise.
3:37 p.m.
Ethan wrote:
The original Apple LaserWriter had a 12MHz 68000, 1MB
of RAM and 1.5MB
of ROM (the ROM amount _might_ be for the Plus... but it's on that
order)...
original Laserwriter: 512K ROM, 1.5M RAM
Laserwriter Plus: 1M ROM, 1.5M RAM
The original could be upgraded to the Plus by swapping ROMs. The
increased size was mostly occupied by additional fonts.
Eric
8 Apr
8 Apr
9:20 p.m.
On Apr 8, 2005 1:00 AM, Fred Cisin <cisin at xenosoft.com> wrote:
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Ethan Dicks wrote:
The 4-with-nothing-appended, 4+, 4M and 4M+ do. I have one of the latter.
They're physically the same, the Ms just have a network card installed.
To anyone considering buying one of this range: you may wish to avoid
the original non-Plus Laserjet 4 if you pay for your own electricity,
as (TTOBMK) it lacks powersave mode, so will be using full idle power
(~80W) whenever it's on. The Plus models go into powersave mode (11W)
once they've been idle for a short while (display shows 00 POWERSAVE).
Ed.
The 4L and 4ML are stripped-down
single-user-oriented printers, not
big modular monsters like the IIISi, 4MX, etc. The internal boards
for the 4L and 4ML are entirely different (but the engine is the
same). There is no PostScript SIMM in a 4ML; everything is soldered
to the board, plus the 4L has parallel only, and the 4ML has parallel
plus an 8-pin-DIN AppleTalk/LocalTalk connector.
Which sub-model of 4 DOES take
the Postscript SIMM? 
12 Apr
12 Apr
11:55 a.m.
Fred Cisin wrote:
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Ethan Dicks wrote:
I think you're thinking of the 4MP. 3 (or is it 4?) 72 pin SIMM slots,
and the PS on another SIMM. You pull the PS SIMM to turn it into a 4P
--
--- Dave Woyciesjes
--- ICQ# 905818
The 4L and 4ML are stripped-down
single-user-oriented printers, not
big modular monsters like the IIISi, 4MX, etc. The internal boards
for the 4L and 4ML are entirely different (but the engine is the
same). There is no PostScript SIMM in a 4ML; everything is soldered
to the board, plus the 4L has parallel only, and the 4ML has parallel
plus an 8-pin-DIN AppleTalk/LocalTalk connector.
Which sub-model of 4 DOES take the Postscript SIMM?
7113
days inactive
7118
days old
20 comments
16 participants
participants (16)
-
ard＠p850ug1.demon.co.uk -
bfranchuk＠jetnet.ab.ca -
cb＠mythtech.net -
chenmel＠earthlink.net -
cisin＠xenosoft.com -
dr.ido＠bigpond.net.au -
eric＠brouhaha.com -
ethan.dicks＠gmail.com -
jfoust＠threedee.com -
liste＠artware.qc.ca -
listmailgoeshere＠gmail.com -
mouse＠Rodents.Montreal.QC.CA -
pat＠computer-refuge.org -
tomj＠wps.com -
trixter＠oldskool.org -
woyciesjes＠sbcglobal.net