3 ms·
PDF is interpreted PostScript. It is not a programming language as PostScript is. Edit: PostScript has to be interpreted and rendered, PDF only has to rendered
by derrasterpunkt 8y ago
PDF is interpreted PostScript. It is not a programming language as PostScript is.
Edit: PostScript has to be interpreted and rendered, PDF only has to rendered. You can't jump to page 100 in a PostScript if you haven't interpreted page 1 to 99 before. A PDF can do that.
- waynecochran 8y agoPDF is interpreted too -- actually a subset of PS -- in fact you can write programs that work in PostScript that PDF will not handle in the same transparent way. The PS2PDF translator will have to render those pieces ahead of time -- in PS, the printer can render/interpret the code in a way that is optimal for the printer. That's why I used it. Still, advantage PostScript.
- derrasterpunkt 8y agoYou cannot write programs in PDF. As I have written, it is not a programming language. It is already interpreted. For your use-case a PostScript file is better, that's why you used it. But most of the time all graphics for a given page are prerendered and therefore static. If all page content is vector based you can render a PDF in every resolution you need. In my little printing world I like to have control over the page, I don't like that the printer (RIP) can control the page "in a way that is optimal for the printer". I am responsible for the output, not the printer. If something goes wrong inside the RIP, the printer doesn't pay the damages, I am. And things can get costly. It is also pretty resource intensive to work with PS (because it has to be interpreted every time you want to have a look at it). All things considered (and there are a lot more differences) it is simply more pleasant to work with PDF instead of PS. That's why the majority uses it. But it definitely has flaws, too.