[94] in Enterprise Print Delivery Team
Re: Follow Up Questions for Moore
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Rocklyn Clarke)
Fri Feb 25 12:28:03 2000
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 00 12:25:24 EST
From: Rocklyn Clarke <RCLARKE@mitvma.mit.edu>
To: Enterprise Printing Delivery Project Team <printdel@MIT.EDU>
Cc: Rachel Sage <sage@MIT.EDU>
In-Reply-To: <10002251256.AA24076@MIT.EDU>
Message-Id: <000225.122815.EST.RCLARKE@MITVMA>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
Hi,
Rachel's question concerned Jetforms and Print Exchange. I am copying her
so that she can comment if she chooses.
Rocklyn
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Fri, 25 Feb 00 07:52:57 EST Dave Lambert said:
>Folks,
>
>Below you'll find my draft list of follow up questions for Moore. PLEASE
>submit your questions today if at all possible. I'd like to complete
>our list of questions and schedule Moore to meet with us within the
>next week or two at the latest. Thanks.
>
>-Dave
>
>Follow up questions for Moore:
>
>- What are Moore's opinions regarding i-data?
>- What are Moore's opinions regarding Jetform & <?> (from Rachel
> by way of Rocklyn)?
>- Do other companies bascially ignore the issue of unencrypted
> sensitive print files traveling over their intranets?
>- We could manage the legacy and Postscript/network attached printer
> worlds with separate tools. What are the real advantages
> to managing these two worlds with a single tool such as IPM?
> You mentioned one or two specific benefits on Pg 4 of your report.
>- If we decided to manage the two worlds separately, what would
> be Moore's top two or three recommended solutions for managing the
> Postscript/network attached world - Dazel & EasySpooler? Do
> either of these products handle AFP print files or AFP printers (either
> channel of network attached)?
>- For what period of time would you predict your proposed architectural
> model to be viable?
>- Does the transformation process require much processor overhead?
>- Should we be concerned about resolution issues if we transform
> 600 DPI PostScript output to 240 DPI AFP?
>- It appears we would have three options for the central
> printing of differing datastream types with the IPM/Barr solution -
> transformation to a single datastream type, provide multiple
> types of printers (i.e. PostScript & AFP), or implement central
> printers which can handle multiple types of datastreams such
> as Xerox. What are the dis/advantages of these three approaches?
>- Are there any restrictions with attaching the Barr or IPM server
> on a channel with both the local (W91) 3827 & 4245s and the remote
> (channel extended) 3160, 4245 and 3174 communication controllers in
> E19? More specifically, can non-printer devices be attached
> on the same channel string with printers via the IPM/Barr server?
>- Do the recommended solutions allow for the delegation of authority
> for queue/printer management, possibly for Help Desk staff or
> end users.
