*** From the Archives ***
This article is from January 24, 2002, and is no longer current.
Under the Desktop: The Great Platform Debate Continues
Mac vs. Windows. You gotta love it. The inveterate story always provides a dash of religion, market forces, and Lucha Libre.
Given the potential for a no-holds-barred flame war, my recent two-part series on the relative merits of Macs and PCs for content creation drew a lively, well-thought-out response from the creativepro readership. While likely due to the high caliber of readers, my rosy impression could also be the result of the array of email filters I set up on my account. I’m a firm believer in “what you don’t know won’t hurt you.” Whatever. Kudos all around.
So, disregarding the occasional messages that slipped through my guards offering a single-digit salute (thank you very much) and one-liners, I received many interesting observations. Here are just a few of your excellent thoughts on the platform debate along with a dose of my usual blather.
Tell All the People
My creativepro colleague, contributing editor Sandee Cohen, weighed in on several matters, including the transition to Mac OS X.
After reminding me of the OpenType initiative from Adobe and Microsoft that should improve cross-platform file exchange, she asked:
“Given Adobe’s own ACE (Adobe Color Engine), it seems that if a company were to go ‘all Adobe’ that there is little need for ColorSync,” she observed. “This seems to me to dilute one of the reasons to choose Mac over Windows. If I’m wrong, please educate me.”
Sandee is right on the mark about an all-Adobe workflow on Windows lessening the need for the Mac’s ColorSync’s system wide color management.
As I mentioned in my previous column, Windows applications handle color management and content creators must rely on Adobe (or another vendor) to do the right thing with their colors when connecting to scanners and printers. Of course, there’s the rub — you have to rely on your vendor for everything.
The Mac’s ColorSync architecture lets creators use applications from just a single vendor, or pick and choose tools from different manufacturers. As Mr. Natural says: “Get the right tool for the job.” On the Mac some folks may find everything they need from a single vendor — such as Adobe — while others may to try something new from someone else. ColorSync lets everything work together.
Sandee then expressed concerns about the transition of the Mac platform to the Unix-based Mac OS X. “Some reservations: While I agree that the inclusion of PDF within Mac OS X, makes for some nice workflows, it has completely destroyed the ‘user friendly’ feeling of the Mac,” she wrote.
“It used to be that you could reinstall a system by simply dragging a clean backup copy of the System Folder onto a hard drive. Not with OS X. … What I fear is that the Mac OS 9 system will be recognized as a great one for creative professionals, but the Mac OS X system will not.”
dwillson agreed: “I was really non-plussed to see Macworld magazine begin a series on learning to write command line Unix using OS X’s capabilities,” he wrote. “PLEASE, that’s not where I want my Mac OS to go!”
These are concerns that I’m sure must have entered the mind of every Mac user over the past few years, especially creative professionals. (You can read more comments by Sandee and others here.)
I can report that I’ve been using Mac OS X as my everyday operating system for months now, since the release of Version 10.1. Each day, I gain confidence in its future value for content creation. And the more I learn of its technological underpinnings, the possibilities look bright, indeed.
Yet at the same time, our individual transitions will not necessarily be a walk in the park.
Mac OS X is different. At times, very, very different. Yes, there will be some significant growing pains, in particular, learning the new right things to do and unlearning the hard-won past knowledge. While this step will be a big one, we’ve all survived the previous OS changes.
Here’s a brief OS X anecdote: For more than a month and a half, I didn’t need to restart my Mac. I put it to sleep at night and then started working again in the morning. As you can imagine, at times programs crashed and burned, but the other running applications were untouched. That’s a good thing.
I still believe as I did long months ago: Mac OS X is not yet ready to replace Mac OS 9 in professional content creation workflows. Can you say: “Photoshop?” Or instead, pick any other X-less application that’s essential to your business.
Your time to move to OS X will come when you can do everything your business requires under the new OS.
Hardcopy Knocks
Some of you pointed to differences between Macs and Windows when dealing with service bureaus for printing. As you might guess, Mac users were the happier campers.
“The one point I think you missed in this one, is if the content creator is going to print, most commercial printers still use Macs, and many times, Macs only!” David Schwab wrote. “I work for a busy commercial printer in NYC. We do have both Macs and a lone PC running Windows NT 4, but we have so many problems trying to get PC jobs to print right, that now we always just open the files on the Mac! …
“… The other thing I notice, and it seems to be a common trend, is when I do get jobs that were done on a PC — either in Quark, or PageMaker (PageMaker being more common from PC users) — there are always major problems with the way the file was created. Most of the time all the scans are RGB, the resolution is wrong, there are fonts missing, especially from EPS files, the users don’t know what a spot color is! I can go on.
“Another annoying trend among PC users is thinking that if they send a PDF file, that fixes everything. Once again, even though the job is supposed to print PMS 196 and Black, the PDF file is either RGB or CMYK! Or God forbid, they want film output from MS Word files. PCs were made to print to office laser printers!”
In spite of that, some of you using Windows are thankfully finding the support situation improving at service bureaus.
Michael G. chimed in. “As it stands, I feel less of a rebel these days using Windows machines for print and web design,” he wrote. “It’s easier than ever to pass off Windows files to the service bureau and (as long as it doesn’t crash) it’s simpler to be in the mainstream of everything else.”
Certainly, given the divergent histories of Mac and Windows with printing, users of each platform have different levels of prepress education. So there’s no surprise that Windows users might have misguided expectations when heading from the screen to hardcopy and face a communications gap at the service bureau.
And it would seem to be an excellent opportunity for printers and service bureaus to educate their Windows customers and provide the support they need to get the job done.
(Editor’s note: creativepro.com’s parent company PrintingForLess.com accepts all manner of PC as well as Mac files for printing through the online Printing Center and will review your files to for technical accuracy without charge. Find out more here.)
Seeking Stability
Many of you, including Sandee Cohen in her message above, mentioned the relative reliability of the Mac platform over Windows — but remember that’s Mac OS 9 of which they speak.
“Not enough attention was given to how unstable and insecure Windows machines are,” Michael G. added. “If I could afford to buy all new software, I would choose a Mac for this reason alone. But it sounds like the two are converging on this front: Windows is getting more stable, and OS X sounds like it’s getting to be more of a pain.”
Another reader concurred. “One thing that is essential to well-greased workflow, and yet went unmentioned, is the absolutely wonderful environment the Mac provides for easy troubleshooting” dwillson offered. “With a copy of Disk Doctor, non-geek designers like myself can fix 90 percent of any problems that crop up with in 20 minutes.
“Even on an NT network, my department’s Macs always ran efficiently, when the Wintel boxes were crashing like bumper cars … in spite of the fact that the IS manager and I were barely on speaking terms.”
To be fair, comparing the reliability records of Macs and Windows is a difficult proposition. At times, I’ve sworn a blue streak over each platform. My Windows 98 notebook has given me occasional trouble, as have my Mac OS 9 machines. In the statistical long haul, all computers have problems with hardware, software, device drivers, and the list goes on.
Both platforms have similar, easy-to-use diagnostic and repair utility programs that are simple enough, even for designers on Windows machines.
At the same time, I’ve talked to many managers of sites with both Macs and Windows machines. They swear that Macs are easier to support and cost less to support. And I believe them.
In my own experience, I’ve found Macs easier to support than Windows machines. But that could be due to that fact that I’ve spent more time with Macs than I have with PCs. I must question my own judgment on the support matter given a purely subjective assessment. I haven’t filled out a time-task analysis for each hour of the day for the years gone by.
On the virus front, however, there’s no doubt that Windows machines are less secure than Macs running OS 9. (I’m still evaluating Mac OS X.) I felt so strongly about the crisis level of Windows and Internet viruses that I made it my story of the year in our recent collective review of 2001.
Meanwhile, Bill Gates last week addressed the problem of security and reliability in a memo sent to Microsoft employees. He wrote that Microsoft must make Windows a “Trustworthy Computing” platform.
“With telephony, we rely both on its availability and its security for conducting highly confidential business transactions without worrying that information about who we call or what we say will be compromised,” Gates wrote. “Computing falls well short of this, ranging from the individual user who isn’t willing to add a new application because it might destabilize their system, to a corporation that moves slowly to embrace e-business because today’s platforms don’t make the grade.”
Such a goal will be critical for all computing platforms, whether Windows, Mac or Linux. They all need to improve their reliability and security, whether for consumers or professionals.
In Microsoft’s case, I can only add: It’s about time. “You can forget a blow, but not a word,” warns the rabbinical adage. We all will wait for the hopefully effective result of Mr. Gates’ call for Trustworthy Computing.
 |
I’m extremely tired of MAC users trashing Windows/PCs. I’ve worked on both for 12 years and have FAR LESS problems with the PCs than the MACs on an off our network. Also, in Photoshop, Illustrator, Freehand, etc. it takes far fewer steps to perform the majority of creative tasks in Windows than on the Mac platform.
MAC users start out with ingrain assumptions and do not give Windows/PCs the proper objectivity. Security may be the ONLY area in which I feel MACs have the edge.
Printhouses and service bureaus in the Tampa/Orlando area have no problems with my PC files. Maybe the rest of the US needs to catch up.
Obviously, I prefer the PC over the MAC.
The article was obviously slanted towards the Mac.I only use a PC now for graphics, DTP, & pre-press. I have no problems. Running Win9X, WinNT, & Win2K. Mac’s crash also & no, they really are not easier to fix. Stopping & starting services/programs on Win machines is a breeze. There is more software to choose from & everyone supports it. I use Photoshop, Illustrator, Canvas, CorelDraw!, Premiere, Vegas Video, Lightwave, ACDSee, Quark, Acrobat, and a slew of other stuff. CMYK is not a problem, neither is calibrating my monitor, printer, scanner, etc. In the past, Mac ruled, but the King is dead, long live the workflow.
It seems as though the various “Mac – vs – PC” articles that have shown up on this site are not generic,
unbiased comparisons of pros/cons, as much as they are attemtps to justify (or bless) the use of PCs in a
graphics environment. Sure, there are points made that, alone, are useful as a comparative tool, but the
whole of the report always seems to have a slant, or bias, towards “a lot more people are using PCs, you
should too!”. A more neutral summary would be appreciated.
Anne Hardin wrote:
“Also, in Photoshop, Illustrator, Freehand, etc. it takes far fewer steps to perform the majority of creative tasks in Windows than on the Mac platform. “
This really makes me wonder if you have used these programs on a Mac, because for the most part, they are identical, except for where the platforms differ. You see how many books on these programs are for both platforms? Let’s remember that all the programs you listed were originally Mac programs, and were on the Mac long before they were on Windows. The Windows versions even use the Mac style menu bar. Plus all the Mac versions are scriptable using AppleScript. And the Mac has a system wide clipboard, so you can copy and paste anything you like between applications. I use both Macs and PCs at work, and my feeling is most of the time the Mac versions are easier to use and get more consistant results. Could be because you are more used to Windows. I prefer Macs, but I used and owned a PC before I ever had a Mac.
also RichSimmons wrote:
“There is more software to choose from & everyone supports it. I use Photoshop, Illustrator, Canvas, CorelDraw!, Premiere, Vegas Video, Lightwave, ACDSee, Quark, Acrobat, and a slew of other stuff.”
Everything on that list, with the exception of Vegas and ACD is available on Macs, and a lot were Mac first. Poor argument.
Ann Hardin mentioned that there are fewer steps to perform functions on a PC over a Mac using Illustrator, Photoshop etc. How grossly misinformed you are Ann.
That is a statement of in-experience, and must be stated with caution.
Incidentally it’s “Mac” not “MAC”
PC proponents, MPrewitt and Anne Hardin took issue with the assertion that file prep woes at prepress were a result of platform related foibles. I was one of the pro-Mac commentators to the early article, but I heartily agree with them.
The original comment was (as I remember) that there seemed to be more problems coming from the PC side. That may grow less remarkable if Apple’s consumer oriented marketing has any success.
Most of the file problems I’ve experienced come from do-it-yer-self small business people or office publishers. What’s more, detailed e-mail instructions and phone conversations rarely help, because they lack the most basic understanding of RIPing, trapping, font and image formats, etc. … and they often can’t figure out how to get their software to do something as simple as image resolution formatting.
I think a lot could be done by Adobe, Microsoft and others to simplify some of the file formatting issues related to different outputs.
Acrobat has improved in this regard, but there are still several potential pitfalls with a multitude of dialog boxes that occur using PDF print modules. Some third party packages provide for checklist output management, but they are usually geared toward pro shops.
And for years, I have been of the opinion that Microsoft has intentionally kept Office users in the dark about image links, and font and file incompatibilities in an effort to force cross-platform users to throw up their hands in defeat … and use Microsoft products over Microsoft networks exclusively.
I have felt for a long time that graphics and art software are devised by programmers that have not done enough research on the way their customers work. Things have improved a lot … especially over the last 10 years, but the problem still exists.
The thing I like about Apple is that they have a tendency to design from the user experience first. That is the right approach.
It was nice to revisit this issue and get a feel for other readers opinions. Opinions are hotly contested but the upshot that I get is that both platforms are capable of providing a environment conducive to good design.
As always, it’s what you know, not what machine you use. Coming from a print production background, the biggest mistakes I saw, especially in the early days 10 years ago, were from designers who didn’t have a clue about how the print process worked.
No small wonder then, as more people have invested in computers, that we should see more of these ‘designer’ mistakes.
Of course, Microsoft hasn’t made it easier with products like Frontpage and Publisher. There is no substitute for good software and knowledge of the medium.
This debate will continue until who knows when? There are die-hard users of both platforms who will never go back to the “other side” and there are those who use both platforms contently. I started into computers on an old Commodore 64 playing games and writing minor little programs that would make my name scroll up the screen (goofy, but I was a kid!). My freshman year of high school, I took a course in which was basic programming on Apple II’s. I hated that class and swore off computers. My senior year, I was introduced to desktop publishing on a Windows machine. I fell in love with DTP and designing.
After high school, I got a job in a print shop, again using Windows. After a few years, I realized that I wanted to stay in the graphic design field and purchase my own computer for home. When I spoke with persons in design, the advice time and again was to buy a Macintosh. So upon so much advice, I bought one. (Note: I’d never even laid fingers on the keyboard of a Mac, I’d only used Windows 3.1)
My sales rep that came to my house and set up my Mac was a little shocked that I’d never used one and still bought one. For a while, I worked on a PC at work (Windows 95) and then came home to work on my Mac. My Mac was so easy to use and had so many less “freezes” than the PC at work. These were my first observations between the platforms.
Many programs are now available on the Mac side than in those first years of my Mac use, quite a selection now. As time went on, I learned that the security was much better on the Mac and that my creativeness seemed to flow easier on the Mac. The latter is hard to explain. I can only say that now, if I go to a Windows machine to do something in Photoshop, I find the whole interface “clunky”, which stunts my creative approach. The program is really not any different than its counterpart on the Mac, but when I sit down at my Mac, I can start designing right away. I think if persons had the opportunity to use a Mac for a little while, they might see what I mean, it’s the experience of the Mac OS. Yes, I am now a convert to Mac and I don’t ever see myself going back.
To comment on postings:
“…it seems that if a company were to go “all Adobe” that there is little need for ColorSync. This seems to me to dilute one of the reasons to choose Mac over Windows.”
I don’t understand why in a country where we thrive on having choices that anyone would not want the choice to have ColorSync control color instead of letting one program control it. I love Adobe products, but I don’t want to see them become the next Microsoft monopoly.
Several persons commented on OS X and that they weren’t impressed with it and thought that it would be more of a pain than a plus. I admit that I haven’t used OS X much. I understand its reliability is even better than before. I realize that I will moan and groan about a few minor things, but I’m not going to stomp my foot and refuse to go to X. The things I’ve seen have been pretty impressive and I’m a skeptical person. I feel that if only Adobe had made PhotoShop the first application to be X-compatible, there would be a lot more people using it right now. Most of us are just waiting to make the switch.
To end, I’d like to direct persons to a link on the Apple site, which will hopefully clear up most myths. I found it very informative and true. Take a look at: https://www.apple.com/myths/
Let’s face it: Mac is not #1 because the user did not have access to their architecture. PC does. The result is that many iterations of the PC have happened while Mac plods along. I built my computer choosing the motherboard peripherals CPU etc. to customize my machine for Photoshop. I run w2k. Cost? Around $400 + monitor and things like CD-RW and DVD. The equavalent Mac was around $1800. The other advantage to PC is that I can run programs from Cadence,Labview, MATLAB etc that do not run on Mac.
Incidently, the sense of security and robustness do not accrue to Mac because it is Mac. Hackers hack MS because:
They hate MS
90+% of the PC users are on PC. Why hack a platform that nobody uses? (Their comment, not mine!)
The problem that service bureaus have with PC is due,in my opinion, to the fact that more new users are PC’s and are novices. I can’t believe that a similar circumstance didn’t occur with novice Mac users. I suppose that the srvice people “indulges” Mac users while minimizing PC users. They probably are afraid of PC.
Concerning crashes: Recently, I had problems with a scanner I rented. One of the problems was the software crashing, another was a mechanical problem. As I tried to explain the mechanical problem to the rental people, we loaded the scanner software on Mac, and checked out the unit. As the program came up, it crashed, The error messages were virtually identical to the PC crash! So much for ragging on MS.
The Windows 2000 is very robust. On it’s own, it never crashed in several months of operation. What takes 2000 down is bad 3rd party software, which could be subject of an article for Creative Pro