[WinMac] RE: Cost/functionality analysis

thomas kase(thomas[at]accessio.com)
Mon, 11 Jan 1999 15:34:03 -0500

> From: Dan Schwartz <expresso@snip.net>
>
> Matt:
>
> Let's look at your analysis, inline.

It even starts out in a condescending way...

> At 10:56 AM 1/9/99 -0600, Matt Shannon wrote:
> >>Subject: Re: [WinMac] Graphic production, which is the better platform?
> >>From: Liam Helmer <liamh@axion.net>
> >>
> >>>The people who put out our newsletter for our company are using Macs
> >>>to do all the design and pre-press stuff. Our company is moving
> >>>towards being PCs. The question is, should the artists switch to PCs
> >>>or keep using their Macs? I know some of this is a matter of
> >>>preference but I need some hard facts on the pros and cons of each for
> >>>this kind of work. Does anyone know of any studies or where I can find
> >>>more info? Please let me know. Thanks.
> >
> >I work for the Marketing department of a printing company. Not long ago
> >we were looking at getting a lot of new prepress equipment (new
> >imagesetter, RIP, proofers, etc...) We were going to need to upgrade our
> >Macs within another year or so and it was decided to go ahead and upgrade
> >those at the same time as the equipment purchase. The IS manager casually
> >brought up the question of replacing those 5 macs with PC's. The reaction
> >from the prepress department was incredible. Everyone of them said they'd
> >quit if they had to switch to PC's, including the manager.
>
> This is a management problem: Who is running your company, the employees
> or the owner/manager(s)? This is more like the inmates running the asylum...

Dan, this is maybe THE best example I have *ever* seen of Wintel techie
attitude (aka 'Computer Support') = screw the user, we know what's best
for you.

Should we call this being Dan:ified?

You must not have any employees Dan - not with that attitude.

> >This was an emotional reaction and I came up with more factual
> >reason's for them not to switch to PC's.
> >
> >1) Files received from outside sources come from who knows what! Macs are
> >better equipped to deal with Windows app version files than the other way
> >around.
>
> Very true

Gracious - a compliment - should we bow?

> >2) They'd have to learn a whole new OS and quickly, which would put more
> >of a strain on IS and add more cost to the company.
>
> Not really: If your company is already running x86, **even in other
> departments,** then the switchover is almost seamless. After all, once the
> operator launches the application the OS gracefully bows out. In fact,
> PageMaker, Photoshop, Illustrator, FreeHand, and (I think) QuarkXPress use
> the same manual for Mac & Windows.

Duh!

How about using the god-forsaken Windows Explorer with all its pranks?

How about lack of true drag and drop between apps?

How about printing shenanigans? Sometimes not even simple things like
a bold font will print predictably under NT.

> >3) We would have possibly had to hire all new prepress department.
>
> Again, this is a *managerial* problem: Who's running the asylum?
>
> Also, ask yourself this hard question: Are these rebellion-prone employees
> worth keeping in the first place? After all, they are not the business
> owner... They are the employees.

Employees, Dan - not slaves - there is a difference.

> >4) PostScript output from a Mac is generally much more reliable than PC's.
>
> False: PostScript is, and always has been since its inception in ~1982,
> platform independent. Just download the latest PostScript drivers from:
> <http://www.adobe.com/supportservice/custsupport/LIBRARY/pdrvmac.htm> or
> <http://www.adobe.com/supportservice/custsupport/LIBRARY/pdrvwin.htm> for
> Mac and NT, respectively;

This defines reason - can you HONESTLY say that Windows apps print
PS output as consistently as Mac?

> >5) Color correction is built into the MacOS in the form of ColorSync.
> >This is not the case on the PC. Color correction on the PC is different
> >for each and every application.
>
> If you use Adobe apps across the board, then you can use the Kodak Color
> Management System across the board.
> >
> >6) The PC's we'd have to get were more expensive than the Mac's we'd have
> >to get.
>
> I *strongly* doubt that. If you compare Apple's "Steveified" tech support
> and warranty to similar PC manufacturer support (such as H-P), then the
> cost for Apple machines is actually higher. Sure, IBM and DIGITAL/Compaq's
> commercial products cost more than H-P... But you get MUCH more in service
> and support.

And with NT you *need* it - with Macs you rarely do.

> >So basically it cost us much less to stay with Macs than switch to PC's.
>
> And how many times per day do the Macs have to reboot?!

When did you last try a Mac? Was it back in the Quadra days?
Perhaps a 6100?

How often does the Windows Explorer crash - forcing you to log off
and back on to get back all the services that went down with it?

Let's face it - for anyone running multiple apps, regularly installing
and "uninstalling"(as it is known by non-Mac users) apps - NT is not
a bulletproof system.

Which will be on the market sooner - NT5 or MacOS X?

> Yours truly,
> Daniel L. Schwartz,
> Electrical Engineer.
>
> Dan's Macintosh Consulting

Thomas Kase

  US-Style.com Inc. 33 south main street, #7, south norwalk, ct 06854
  phone: 203.866.4454 fax: 203.866.4546
  email: thomas@accessio.com

\\\\ the bridge to Japan (TM) \\\\

* Windows-MacOS Cooperation List *
* FAQ: <http://www.darryl.com/winmacfaq/> *
* Archives: <http://www.darryl.com/winmac/> *
* Subscribe: <mailto:winmac-on@xerxes.frit.utexas.edu> *
* Subscribe Digest: <mailto:winmac-digest@xerxes.frit.utexas.edu> *
* Unsubscribe: <mailto:winmac-off@xerxes.frit.utexas.edu> *

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b2 on Mon Jan 11 1999 - 12:40:00 PST