386ix and Parallel Printers

[Warren Tucker]

In article <7813 at dmshq.mn.org> pnessutt at dmshq.mn.org (Bob Monio) writes:
>In article <1990May6.152012.14804 at ddsw1.MCS.COM> karl at mcs.MCS.COM (Karl Denninger) writes:
>>In article <1990May3.111446.2879 at oct1.UUCP> mason at oct1.UUCP (David M. Mason) writes:
>>>In article <15427 at bfmny0.UU.NET> tneff at bfmny0.UU.NET (Tom Neff) writes:
>>>>My advice: If you're not really running multi-user, ditch the spooler.
>>>>It's a pain in the caboose.  Just pump to /dev/lp and have a nice day.
>It's not just accounting.  The company I do some work for has a
>wholesale distribution package that does both; write directly to the
>serial printer and also use the spooler.  I'm not sure why it was
>originally done this way, but we are in the process of changing it.

Most of the check writing programs I have run into want more a
better feeling that check # blah-dee-blah has been printed than
just knowing it has been spooled, especially when printing on
checks with preprinted numbers.

Now as to the usual MIS daily/weekly detail tomes people rarely look at,
spoolers are more trusted :-).
 
------------------------------------------------------------------
Warren Tucker, TuckerWare gatech!n4hgf!wht or wht%n4hgf at gatech.edu
McCarthyism did to cinema what ANSI did to C,  cast a great number
of characters into the void.