Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 




      :: Filmscanners
Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: filmscanners: Win2K: was Scanning and memory limits in Windows

Win2K may be here and stable, but the PostScript print driver is works
even less well than that of Win95! If you have a page that has an image
with a transparent background, the Win2K PostScript driver will make
the transparent background opaque, while the Win9x PostScript driver
will correctly show whatever is "behind" the image.

I thought the proper way to handle this problem would be to connect the
printer to the Win9x computer then send the page from the Win2K
computer to the "network printer". Wrong: Win2K informed me that I
didn't have the proper PostScript driver on the Win9x computer and
offered to upgrade it for me. I respectfully declined the offer,
especially since the Win9x driver is the one that prints the page
properly and the Win2K does not.

Also, I find the Win2K computer has only half the throughput over the
network as compared to Win9x. This sems to be a "known problem"
according to Microsoft. I wish I knew how to resolve it.
From: Rob Geraghty <harper@wordweb.com>
To: filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Scanning and memory limits in Windows
Date: Thursday, July 26, 2001 4:58 AM

"Lynn Allen" <ktrout@hotmail.com> wrote:
> of one upgrade. Some reporters are already giving Windows "X" glowing
> reviews...but then, some give glowing reviews to everything just to
> free stuff flowing.

XP aka Whistler looks OK, but Win2K is here and now and stable.



Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.