>>I think it's the PostScript driver that's used to generate .ps files for GhostScript, that Adobe didn't update since 1991, and won't install on 64.
>
>Interesting - I don't use Adobe on any platform.
>
>I think you need to look at other solutions - you know you can call python stuff from other languages (I haven't had the need but I've seen it done). One of the early issues I had was printing reports because ReportLab only creates PDF's. But I soon discovered converting was easy with several of the python solutions. And of course the Linux guys had plenty too with CUPS. But I ended up with Ghostscript because it did every thing. To my knowledge there is nothing from Adobe in Ghostscript (my google check reveals nothing). I believe Ghostscript to be completely open source and free of license.

My task was to convert .doc files (generated as reports) in an overnight batch. To do that, I needed something that would convert them into postscript files which I could then pass to GS, and for that I found Print2Pdf here on UT, which comes with an installation of Adobe's postscript driver. However, this driver won't install on 64, and after hours of googling and zigzagging through Adobe's site, I didn't find anything newer.

The other reason I had to drop the approach is the instability of Word. Automation may work fine if you keep it short and interactive, do a document or two, and quit Word ASAP. When you open 20 or 200 documents, Word accumulates the list of "bad" documents, springs a bunch of nonsupressable dialogs, eats memory and requires manual intervention. Not good for overnight batch.

>As far as speed is concerned - I've never checked or tested any other solutions (maybe I should). Obviously I didn't consider it a problem. But I did note many of the other commercial solutions were based on GhostScript.

I once wrote a routine which drew a natal chart (yup, for a horoscope) in raw postscript, then passed it to GS to convert it into a .png to serve on a webpage. It was more than sufficiently fast for that.