[264] in Enterprise Print Delivery Team
Re: 3827 conversion scope issues
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Rachel Sage)
Fri Jun 2 11:22:47 2000
Message-Id: <10006021522.AA24033@MIT.EDU>
Date: Fri, 02 Jun 00 11:15:05 EDT
From: Rachel Sage <SAGE@MITVMA.MIT.Edu>
To: "David F. Lambert" <LAMBERT@MITVMA.MIT.Edu>,
Enterprise Printing Delivery Project Team <printdel@MIT.EDU>
Cc: Karen Fortoul <FORTOUL@MITVMA.MIT.EDU>, Peter B Kelley <KELLEY@MIT.EDU>,
Roger A Roach <RAR@MIT.EDU>
In-Reply-To: Message of Thu, 01 Jun 00 19:02:35 EDT from
<LAMBERT@MITVMA.MIT.Edu>
On Thu, 01 Jun 00 19:02:35 EDT you said:
>
>Thanks for the additional conversion details, Rachel. On the topic
>of resolution, it seems to me we shouldn't do any extra work to
>increase the resolution to 300dpi unless the customer really requires
>it. I agree that we should proceed by doing some testing and checking
>with customers. Lynne thought there was a chance we are no longer
>using in home grown fonts. Can you confirm this one way or the other
>without doing any additional research?
>
You should probably check with Art on this.
>re hole placement on separators: do you have any feel for the amount
>of work it would take to rotate the duplex jobs? I agree that we shouldn't
>suck up an alternate input hopper just for hole alignment for the
>separators. Would it be possible to have two types of separators, one
>for simplex jobs and one for duplex? Worse case seems like we simply
>live with the misaligned separator holes with duplex jobs. I wonder
>if customers file their hole output with the separators???
>
Separator pages are specified at the printer level, not at the job
level, so we can't have separate sep pages for different job types.
As for how much work is involved, we have to go through each form
to see how it is produced. It may be a matter of specifying tumble
duplex at the formdef/pagedef level. But I don't know how many jobs
are affected.
>re paper loading: Worse case here also sounds like we live with
>oper forms such as -HL & -HR. Not a big deal in my mind. However,
>if the rotation trick solves two problems, it might be worth the
>effort. Lynne certainly has a better handle on the work involved
>(I hope). She was out yesterday but I'm sure she'll have some comments
>on your note when she has time.
I think there are two different rotation tricks for the two problems.
We'd need to do some investigation to see if we can fix everything.
>
>I did think of one other issue after last week's meeting. Can you
>(Rachel) confirm we're running the most recent release of PSF/VM?
>My concern is that we have the appropriate release installed to
>apply the PTF which allows the printing via TCP/IP.
>
>Thanks again for helping clarify the conversion issues!
>
>-Dave
We are at the most recent version of PSF. (There hasn't been a new
version or release in years!) We don't have all of the new features
that are offered via ptf but they shouldn't be necessary.
Rachel
