Re: parallel card

[supertimer@aol.com (Supertimer)]

Joe Kohn <joko@GotSpam?crl.com> wrote:

>TEXAS II - AppleWorks <a2mg@aol.comNomail> wrote:
>
>>> It's not faster with a IIGS using classic AppleWorks. In my tests I found
>
>That's easy enough to prove. If you have an HP printer that sports both a
>parallel and serial port, could you do a simple test and print out one page
>from the AW word processing module and report the times that it took to spit
>out that page, first using the parallel port, then with the serial port?
>
>Please time how long it takes to generate a page via the parallel card versus
>the IIGS built-in serial port.

I can't run this test because I no longer have a parallel card or
classic AppleWorks, but my recollection agrees with Bev.
Unlike graphics mode printing, AW's text documents are very
small so they get zapped across a link, parallel or serial, fast.
With text based programs like classic AW, the interface is
not a bottleneck.  Only the speed of the printer affects print
speed.

The reason graphics programs demand more of the interface
is pretty evident if you think about it.  In a text mode program,
each character is zapped across.  In a graphics mode program,
each pixel takes as long to zap across as a character in a
text mode program.  That means a graphics mode printed
page is many megabytes in size while the text mode printed
page is only several kilobytes in size.