--
Mark Ballard
kool-stuf.com
http://www.kool-stuf.com
Subject: Re: AppleTalk zones
From: "Daniel L. Schwartz" <expresso@snip.net>
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 07:14:37 -0500
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
The advantage is that the resources n the Chooser (file
servers, printers,
and Macs with Finder File Sharing turned on) will be isolated by school.
This can be especially handy with printers, where the twerps in
kindergarten don't accidently print their scrawlings to an
expensive-to-feed color printer in the high school. :)
At 05:18 PM 9/15/99 -0500, Jeff Johnson wrote:
>What are the pros/cons of setting up each school in a 5-school district as a
>unique AppleTalk zone? At the present time, there are no zones set up at
>all.
>
>Each school is connected via a WAN and has it's own G3 server running ASIP
>6.x. There are Cisco routers at each site.
>
Subject: Re: X-platform font wobblies
From: "Daniel L. Schwartz" <expresso@snip.net>
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 07:15:22 -0500
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I have to gently disagree with my friend Leonard on this one: I would
stick to the TrueType version due to the metrics (kerning & spacing)
consistency.
You can use the Mac version of Fontographer (part of the=20
=46reeHand package)
to convert typefaces between TrueType and PostScript=AE Type 1, and between
Windows & Mac versions. Fontographer will "read in" anything you throw at
it, convert it to its own internal database format, and then generate
anything you want.
Where the trouble comes in is in the metrics: TrueType has the metrics
integral with the file; while PostScript Type 1 has the metrics in a
separate file (.PFM, Printer Font Metrics for Windows; embedded in the
screen (bitmap) font for the Mac) from the outline typeface (.PFB, Printer
=46ont Binary).
With today's modern PostScript printers able to comfortably handle
TrueType typefaces; .AND. the embedded metrics, I'd stick with TrueType.
Five years ago, I would have advised the exact reverse... But=20
times change.
Cheers!
Dan
At 07:23 AM 9/15/99 -0500, John wrote:
>Hello all,
>
>The powers that be have decided that the firm's new image needs new
>fonts, and we seem to be running into some cross-platform problems.
>
Subject: RE: [WinMac] X-platform font wobblies
From: John Nurick <jnurick@lrconsulting.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 07:15:34 -0500
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Leonard Rosenthol wrote:
[...]
>John Nurick wrote:
[...]
> >When I install the Frutiger fonts on a Windows 9x machine, it
> >automatically groups them:
> >
> >#45, 46, 65 and 66 turn into "Frutiger 45 Light" plus
> italic, bold and
> >bold italic respectively.
> >#55, 56, 75 and 76 turn into "Frutiger 55 Roman" plus italic etc.
>
> Really? Well that doesn't help things, does it :(.
Au contraire, mon ami. Users can type happily away in a word processor
in the document's defaultt font (Frutiger 45 say) and if they want a
word in italics they just hit the [I] button on the toolbar, just as if
they were typing in Times Roman.
> >I know there's Windows software that can poke round inside Truetype
> >files to change this sort of thing; is there a Mac
> equivalent somewhere?
>
> You're just asking for trouble - use Type 1!
I think I'm with Daniel Scwartz on this one - especially as we shall
have to embed the fonts in draft documents sent out to ATM-less clients.
>
> There are TT editors for the Mac, check places like
> VersionTracker and such for a listing.
Perhaps I should rephrase the question:
On a Mac, some fonts (e.g. Times New Roman, Times New Roman Bold, and
Times New Roman Italic) seem to work together: you're typing in the
roman and if you select a word and click on the [I] toolbar button the
word is displayed and printed using the italic (as opposed to the roman,
slanted). Other equally closely related fonts (e.g. Frutiger 45 Light,
Frutiger 46 Light Italic, and Frutiger 65 Bold) don't. How do I make the
latter behave like the former?
Cheers,
John
Subject: Re: X-platform font wobblies
From: Leonard Rosenthol <leonardr@lazerware.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 11:39:32 -0500
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
At 11:28 PM -0400 9/15/99, Daniel L. Schwartz wrote:
> I have to gently disagree with my friend Leonard on this one:
It had to happen sooner or later ;).
> You can use the Mac version of Fontographer (part of the=20
>FreeHand package)
>to convert typefaces between TrueType and PostScript=AE Type 1, and between
>Windows & Mac versions. Fontographer will "read in" anything you throw at
>it, convert it to its own internal database format, and then generate
>anything you want.
Didn't know that was how you got Fontographer these days - it=20
is a great product for font conversion!
> Where the trouble comes in is in the metrics: TrueType has the metrics
>integral with the file; while PostScript Type 1 has the metrics in a
>separate file (.PFM, Printer Font Metrics for Windows; embedded in the
>screen (bitmap) font for the Mac) from the outline typeface (.PFB, Printer
>Font Binary).
On Windows, that certainly true - the metrics are external to=20
the font, however on the Mac, they are still internal (well, stored=20
as resources in the font's suitcase).
One advantage of external metrics, however, is that they work=20
better with software designed for x-platform font management, and=20
also for producing PDF files.
> With today's modern PostScript printers able to comfortably handle
>TrueType typefaces; .AND. the embedded metrics, I'd stick with TrueType.
Postscript doesn't really "handle TrueType fonts", it handles=20
something called a Type42 font. A Type42 font is a format that TT=20
fonts can easily be converted to that only contains the necessary=20
info that a PS device needs to do the rendering.
LDR
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
=20 You've got a SmartFriend=81 in Pennsylvania
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Leonard Rosenthol Internet: leonardr@lazerware.com
America Online: MACgician
Web Site: <http://www.lazerware.com/>
=46TP Site: <ftp://ftp.lazerware.com/>
PGP Fingerprint: C76E 0497 C459 182D 0C6B AB6B CA10 B4DF 8067 5E65
Subject: RE: [WinMac] X-platform font wobblies
From: Leonard Rosenthol <leonardr@lazerware.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 11:40:53 -0500
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
At 7:15 AM -0500 9/16/99, John Nurick wrote:
>> Really? Well that doesn't help things, does it :(.
>
>Au contraire, mon ami. Users can type happily away in a word processor
>in the document's defaultt font (Frutiger 45 say) and if they want a
>word in italics they just hit the [I] button on the toolbar, just as if
>they were typing in Times Roman.
You are trying to get a word processor that isn't designed to
be "typeface smart" to become so. The [I] button on the toolbar is
designed to apply the "faux" Italic style to the text in the given
font, NOT change the font to the appropriate italic/oblique version
of the font - UNLESS the program is smart about font
formats/naming/etc.
This is why Adobe products don't have a "Style" menu, because
people doing "real" typography would never use a faux style - they
want specific choices of fonts/faces.
>> You're just asking for trouble - use Type 1!
>
>I think I'm with Daniel Scwartz on this one - especially as we shall
>have to embed the fonts in draft documents sent out to ATM-less clients.
Assuming your clients aren't doing editing on those
documents, send PDF!
>On a Mac, some fonts (e.g. Times New Roman, Times New Roman Bold, and
>Times New Roman Italic) seem to work together: you're typing in the
>roman and if you select a word and click on the [I] toolbar button the
>word is displayed and printed using the italic (as opposed to the roman,
>slanted). Other equally closely related fonts (e.g. Frutiger 45 Light,
>Frutiger 46 Light Italic, and Frutiger 65 Bold) don't. How do I make the
>latter behave like the former?
>
ATM is a default part of the MacOS, it does a bunch of
interesting things - one involves using Type 1 font information
(Times is a T1 font) to do the right thing when someone tries to
apply a faux style to a font that has a correct italic/oblique font.
Leonard
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
You've got a SmartFriend in Pennsylvania
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Leonard Rosenthol Internet: leonardr@lazerware.com
America Online: MACgician
Web Site: <http://www.lazerware.com/>
FTP Site: <ftp://ftp.lazerware.com/>
PGP Fingerprint: C76E 0497 C459 182D 0C6B AB6B CA10 B4DF 8067 5E65
Subject: Re: mac-pc networking on a budget
From: John Droggitis <johnd@cybernex.net>
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 12:01:25 -0500
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Tom Roth wrote:
> I think the FTP solution that someone suggested is going to be your
> cheapest option. MacLan makes the Windows do AppleTalk and Dave makes
> the Mac do NetBIOS.
I use the personal web server (or whatever it's called) on the mac now, and it
lets me transfer files from the mac to the pc pretty well. I guess I'll set up
ftp eventually.
> If the HP supports AppleTalk then get a cheap hub and plug the printer,
> Windows computer and the Mac into the hub. That may require an
> etherprint device from Asanté on the printer. If you can find one used
> do so as they are $200 new. You might try using LaserWriter Bridge. I
> know it works with Mac printers so it might work with the HP. Running
> that on your Mac with the HP connected serial to the Mac makes the Mac
> broadcast the HP's presence on the network. If you then had WinNT you
> could install the AppleTalk protocol which allows NT to see AppleTalk
> printers only.
The HP supports appletalk. But for the cost of getting a hub and an
appletalk-ethernet bridge, I may as well buy another printer. This is a cheapo
inkjet I have here, so it's not worth the cost of any additional hardware.
I think my best option so far is to install pc maclan on the PC, use appletalk
as my network protocol, and use either appletalk bridge or printer share on the
mac (I'm not sure if either will work) to put the printer on appletalk.
> Unfortunately networking usually costs somewhere if you want to do it right.
Yes that's what I'm coming to realize, and it's unfortunate. I've always used
macs at home, which I like a lot. But at work I program and administer unix
machines, which are inherently networkable, and wonderful to use in
cross-platform networks, since everything you need to do ANY kind of networking
either comes with the machine or you can get a free/opensource program to do
the job. Now I got a PC at home, and I was taking the ability to do printer
and file sharing for granted, and it's dissapointing to find out that it's
extra.
This is a good learning experience for me however, and I appreciate the help of
everybody that responded.
--John
Subject: [WinMac] Re: mac-pc networking on a budget
From: Leonard Rosenthol <leonardr@lazerware.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 13:41:43 -0500
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>The HP supports appletalk. But for the cost of getting a hub and an
>appletalk-ethernet bridge, I may as well buy another printer. This
>is a cheapo
>inkjet I have here, so it's not worth the cost of any additional hardware.
>
>I think my best option so far is to install pc maclan on the PC, use appletalk
>as my network protocol, and use either appletalk bridge or printer
>share on the
>mac (I'm not sure if either will work) to put the printer on appletalk.
If the HP does NOT support PostScript, it won't help.
PCMacLan ONLY supports sharing Postscript devices over the net. So
even if you got all the hardware listed above, you still couldn't
share the printer - sorry!
Leonard
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
You've got a SmartFriend in Pennsylvania
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Leonard Rosenthol Internet: leonardr@lazerware.com
America Online: MACgician
Web Site: <http://www.lazerware.com/>
FTP Site: <ftp://ftp.lazerware.com/>
PGP Fingerprint: C76E 0497 C459 182D 0C6B AB6B CA10 B4DF 8067 5E65
Subject: RE: AppleTalk zones
From: "Harris, Matt" <HARRISMA@Mattel.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 13:41:46 -0500
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
There would be some speed advantage, however, You would be better off still
to set up an IP subnet at each site and not route Appletalk over your WAN.
You can set up a web page with the Server URL's and use AFP Engage on each
system which may need cross WAN server access. This will increase both
speed and security, and you can still use Appletalk Locally for printing
(and peer to peer file sharing if you must offer that).
________ o0O0_____@^@_____0O0o _____________
Matthew Harris, Mattel Inc.
>>>>>>>>> Advanced Graphic Technologies
>>>>>>> Sr. Analyst, Applied Systems
>>>>> HarrisMa@Mattel.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff Johnson [mailto:jjohnson@wi.net]
Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 1999 3:18 PM
Subject: AppleTalk zones
What are the pros/cons of setting up each school in a 5-school district as a
unique AppleTalk zone? At the present time, there are no zones set up at
all.
Each school is connected via a WAN and has it's own G3 server running ASIP
6.x. There are Cisco routers at each site.
Jeff Johnson
Technology Coordinator
Greendale School District
Greendale WI 53217
End of WinMac Digest
* Windows-MacOS Cooperation List *