PC VS Mac Platforms

Re: PC VS Mac Platforms

First off I would like to say these debates are always fun. I go through this debate at least every 6 months with our IT department as to why we have to use Macs instead of PC's and have another one coming up tomorrow. I would like to throw my 2 cents in here on this debate and also ask a few questions to start some more discussion on this topic. Just as a little background I work for a large publishing company that specializes in Offset printing and working with designers that believe they know about the Printing industry.

Reading through some of the posts I see some indicating that PC's are much cheaper than Mac's. Has anyone ever spec'd out the cost of a Mac vs a PC? The comparable Dell is about $1500 more. I have ran tests of our processes on both a standard Mac Pro and what our IT Dept considers to be a comparable Dell and the Mac blows the Dell away.

I also saw a couple of posts indicating that the color management was the same between the Mac and PC. Does anyone on this forum do true color management? When I say true color management I am talking about color profiling your monitors and proofing devices to your presses. If you do this than what you see on your monitor is what is going to come out of your proofing device and your press will be able to match it with little to no make ready. We have people that attend color conferences every year and the top professionals in this field work exclusively with the Mac Platform. Both the users and the developers. Microsoft is trying to develop their own color management which is totally going in the opposite direction of what is industry standard for over 10 years. Windows color management systems also can not load calibration curves from monitor profiles.

If the PC is truly a superior product for file design why do most major teaching and printing facilities use the Mac platform? I find very few designers that are designing for the print industry that are using PC’s.

I do however agree that if a file is properly designed it should work with any platform. The problem is that most people don’t take the time to learn how to properly set up a file and then always blame the other person.

Sorry for the ramble but it would be interesting to know if anyone is doing true color management on the PC.
 
Re: PC VS Mac Platforms

On behalf of Adobe Systems Incorporated ...

If you are using any of the Adobe Creative Suite applications such as Photoshop, Illustrator, or InDesign or Adobe Acrobat, whether you are running these applications on a Macintosh or a Windows systems is totally irrelevant. The features are the same including full support for ICC color management which, to answer your question, I and many others do use color management very successfully on a Windows-based system.

I personally have and use both systems. Both MacOS and Windows have their share of bugs and instability, both that I have encountered personally and that we encounter via customer calls to our technical support organization. And the same is true for the underlying hardware.

Why do many (or most) "teaching and printing facilities" use Macintoshes? The true answer is probably force of habit more than anything else. By the way, the fact that most modern-day PDF workflow systems (such as Prinergy, Apogee:X, etc.) run on Windows-based systems has opened the eyes of many prepress professionals that indeed there isn't anything deficient about running actual graphic arts applications on the Windows platform.

With regards to system cost or total cost of ownership, you can fudge the numbers however you want to make your case. Unfortunately, there are probably relatively few IS folks who are knowledgeable enough about either Macintoshes or for that matter, high end Windows-based systems (such as Dell 5400 or 7400 workstations) to do any better than comparing Apples and Rutabagas! :)

If you love your Macintosh for whatever reason (you worship St. Steve of Cupertino, you hate Bill Gates, you think the Macintosh is cool, etc.), that's your privilege and please enjoy your Macintosh computer. Likewise for users of Windows-based computers. But to claim platform "superiority" either way for purposes of running publishing applications (or at least Adobe's applications), you will demonstrate ignorance, platform bigotry, or both much more than any global truth.

- Dov
 
Re: PC VS Mac Platforms

Dov,
That is perfectly well said. May I copy that reply so I can paste it into every other Mac -vs - PC thread/rant that I run across?

Mark Hoffman
 
Re: PC VS Mac Platforms

The big problem that I don't think will go away soon with native file use is typesetting accents and foreign language. If you are making a pdf, well perhaps it will work but as long as accents are typed differently on Mac vs Windows, and fonts are maintained for editing purposes, cross platform can and will be a nightmare. This one issue may/will cause so much grief and loss of income that IMHO, only one platform should be used, regardless and that platform is the Mac. Why? Because of the ease of typing the accents on the Mac, three simple and logical keys instead of five or six numbered ones for the PC. Example: option e produces the acute vowel, option u, the umlaut vowel, etc.
Now if the work will cross over platforms natively, you're screwed when the copy changes automatically and won't be caught nor seen by the operator.

John W
 
Re: PC VS Mac Platforms

Norcrans: I really appreciate you bringing this issue up once more. I do believe that some deeper issue are being raised now. I really have to set down and gather the points for my own desire to understand this issue-as a designer.

But, everyone, if I use a PC to build a file for print and the prepress office requests only Mac environment produced files what are the risks for the color issues raised (calibration being one, color management being another) and typesetting issue like the accents problems that was also given light-I did not even suspect this could happen. Is there good reasons for any prepress environment to require that my design files be based on a Mac system like many have in their file submission requirements and specs sheets.
 
Re: PC VS Mac Platforms

Fonts seem to comprise the last stumbling block to cross platform compatibility. OpenType fonts are supposed to address this, but I really can't say how successful they are.

If you're submitting PDFs, then someone's gonna' have to really go looking to know whether you worked on a Windows box or a Mac.
 
Re: PC VS Mac Platforms

Windows Vista new WCS (Windows Color Service) is basically useless. Windows ICM from Windows XP is usable from a color management standpoint (see www.colorwiki.com for details). If you're using Adobe apps for the color conversion then it really doesn't matter since WCS and ICM are used to apply the monitor profile to the display. Everything else Adobe does internally.

But Dov is 1,000,00% right. The tools used properly on either platform yield the same high quality results if used correctly. Same thing when using something like Scribus. It may be true that one platform is "friendlier" than the other for certain functions. But Adobe apps are Adobe apps on both platforms. If you print provider requires only Mac files and you happen to work on PC's then send them a final PDF. And when I say final I really mean "final". Or tell them you use a PC and to deal with it. You really shouldn't be taking files cross platform in my opinion. Most of the time it works fine. Other times it doesn't. It's just easier and safer to deal with files on their original platform. I realize printers are loathsome to change work habits but it really isn't the big deal people make it out to be if you think about it rationally. You won't be able to pry my Mac from my cold, dead hands simply because I *prefer* Mac OS to Windows Vista. I *really* like XP SP3, it is definitely "a good thing". But from a purely rational standpoint for production they both work just as well as the other. Except for Windows Vista WCS which is completely hosed I think... But again, if it's Adobe apps doing the conversion it doesn't matter.

So go with something like PDF/X-4 where you can have live transparency and be damn sure you send a final version of the art.
 
Re: PC VS Mac Platforms

It is my belief that with Mac, Linux, and Windows based computers that they are all PC's.

Personal Computers. I understand that thinking won't fly.

IT techs should have NO problems administrating any OS and shouldn't be MCSE certified.

Microsoft Certified Slaves of the Empire.
 
Re: PC VS Mac Platforms

You are absolutely correct BUT really this is an inane comment and not trench reality.
Most of today's humans will take the shortest route to success (they will only do the work that gets them the first job IMO). Then comes the reluctance to handle the other platform. Anyone who does not understand the GUI for each system will fall down. Hardware is nothing compared to working the OS commands properly and with Windows commanding 85-90% of the market, it may be unrealistic to expect IT to know more than Windows. If you're lucky, you will have either a second miler IT person or you'll have a Mac Guru who has lived through the wars and knows in a flash what to do.
Let's face it, we Mac guys like the mystique of our bragging rights and are selfish to that end and perhaps rightly so.

John W
 
Re: PC VS Mac Platforms

It is tough to keep up with several OS's. My skills using Windows based OS's isn't what it used to be and that's alright by me.

Vince Niehaus
 
Re: PC VS Mac Platforms

How do you think the pre-press person can tell if a native Adobe file was produced on a Mac? File info or looking at the XMP information?
 
Re: PC VS Mac Platforms

Fonts will tell them. Open the file with no fonts on and the file will tell you what's missing; those names will give it away.
If pdf, then the properties will tell, perhaps. Careful here though, because it may have started on a Mac, and was resaved on a PC or the reverse and then you may be screwed trying to figure it out!
The same with native files, you really cannot be sure what platform they originated from other than acents and reflow, images saved with one byte order or the other. A stupid example is that on the Mac, simpletons (I use the term loosely) use the icon that precedes the name and figure that is the version when in fact the version shown in that icon is nothing more than the last version loaded into the apps folder on that mac and may have zero to do with the actual version.
I the provider is smart, they will send a job checklist or even a cfo report which if complete, tells you everything that you need to know to take and work the file.

John W
 
Re: PC VS Mac Platforms

Try the Apple key + about InDesign. Then look in the document history, it will tll you everything you nedd to know!
 
Re: PC VS Mac Platforms

> {quote:title=John W wrote:}{quote}
> Then comes the reluctance to handle the other platform. Anyone who does not understand the GUI for each system will fall down.

The interface in Adobe applications is the same on Macintosh and Windows, so for actual work that is not an issue in this vertical market. File management is different between these two popular operating systems, but not so much that you can't figure it out in less than a day.

Personal preference and "used to it" impact productivity, but are not complete road blocks to switching in either direction.

> with Windows commanding 85-90% of the market, it may be unrealistic to expect IT to know more than Windows.

I don't think so. If an IT person is competent, he / she should be able to apply certain general concepts to all operating system administration, and be able to learn the specifics of several OS's. I manage or have managed Windows, Macintosh , Linux, Sun OS, IRIX, QNX, CLIX, DOS, and CP/M. If you are in IT you have to keep learning or you won't be in IT. In 1993 I could say I "knew Windows", but if I hadn't learned anything new about Windows since, I wouldn't be very useful as an IT person now. If you can put the effort into learning each new Windows version, you can certainly learn about Mac OS X, actually any other OS. Many IT personnel don't _want_ to learn about OS X just as some car mechanics prefer to only deal with Chevys and not Fords, or vice versa. It isn't that they _can't_ learn to work on another brand of car, they simply choose not to. Big difference IMHO.

My preference for OS X or Linux over Windows has a few reasons -- the Windows Registry is a single point of failure that is very opaque, it is difficult to move a Windows installation from one machine to another, and there are more security problems with Windows than other operating systems. Plus, I think OS X has some better bundled software. Compared to Windows, the browser is faster and has better standards support, the mail client uses a standard mail store instead of a single point of failure database ball, the calendar application uses a known standard, you get a PDF reader, and a few other more subtle points. All of that has nothing to do specifically with graphic arts production, it applies generally to any computer use.

When first introduced, Windows was the operating system chosen by businesses because it was cheap, not because it was better than other options. I think that still is the trade-off available in the market. Windows is sort of the Wal-Mart of computing. It's everywhere, it's cheap, but it isn't always the best experience.

With good support for open standards, it shouldn't matter what OS or applications anyone uses. If the printer gets a PDF that can burn plates, who cares what software produced it ? No one cared what brand of blue pencil I used, or what brand of art board or amberlith. If the keyline could make a good negative on the camera, that's what mattered.

There should be no need for "fixing" native files at the printer, particularly if printers adhere to the recent GRACoL or SWOP standards. With broadband internet, generating an updated PDF and transmitting it to the printer is almost as fast as a native file "fix."


Chasd.
 
Re: PC VS Mac Platforms

John W.,

That issue may be valid with older publishing programs and office programs (such as older versions of Microsoft Office), but at least with Adobe's products, once keyed, the characters are stored in the document as Unicode. Thus, typing +e+ with an accent grave on the Mac in InDesign for example shows as the same character when that document is opened under Windows, and vice-versa. The same is true with non-Latin character sets and differing keyboards. Regardless of which keyboard and what characters I create and edit with, those characters are retained in Unicode in the document and are faithfully maintained across the chasm.

Yes, the shortcuts for non-English character entry on Mac differs from Windows, but doesn't mean that you lose those characters when you open up the document "on the other side."

- Dov
 
Re: PC VS Mac Platforms

Thanks Dov.

Correct me if I'm wrong but if the files are old (ie: they were done with older publishing programs including old Adobe programs), then you are at risk using it today with unicode thinking. I have seen accents change so many times and ruin large page documents or unseen reflow end up costing the printer a fortune. I understand the reluctance to "jump in" with both feet time after time when asked to by you vendors, so to speak. Can't really blame us can you?

I recall two adjacent versions of Illy causing this problem and Adobe insisting it didn't happen even when it was proven to them that it does! The mistrust it created in my peers for Adobe is still around years later, sorry to say.

John
 
Re: PC VS Mac Platforms

>There should be no need for "fixing" native files at the printer, particularly if >printers adhere to the recent GRACoL or SWOP standards. With broadband >internet, generating an updated PDF and transmitting it to the printer is almost >as fast as a native file "fix."

Wow, Charles. You generalize brutally IMO.

You seem to have no clue what we prepress people deal with (I know you do). Forget CM for a second. Forget platform for a second. Live in this example of reality:

File originates in Europe. PDF is sent to us in NA. We are asked to modify the file to suit NA pharmaceutical regulations; replace the EAN with a UPC and clone in the background because the KO is smaller now. Change the layout from a tuck in to a seal end or a reverse tuck in. Change the panel width to suit filling NA machinery. Change the German to English and then bilingualize for French and Spanish. Native is the only way this can be done efficiently. You cannot use Juicer or Neo and practically do this. And by the way, the client thinks you can use the PDF and insists you charge little for the alteration. Why? Because they listen to gurus say how updating the pdf is a snap and they simply do not want to understand differently.
There is a huge difference between rebuilding the file competely and just fixing a small part of the pdf. You and I know this instinctively but smart ass print buyers have zero clue and believe the pdf fix is simple; indeed, they believe the pdf is the native file!

John W
 
Re: PC VS Mac Platforms

Yes, this was true for older versions of Adobe applications, although InDesign was fully consistent in terms of character set (it uses Unicode) from release 1! Illustrator 10 and Photoshop 7 (if my memory serves me right) were the beginning of such cross-platform consistency for those applications. (Current versions are Illustrator 13 and Photoshop 10).

- Dov
 
Re: PC VS Mac Platforms

Thank you kindly Dov. You are quite correct. Because we have been burned in the past, we still use Illy 8 (my personal fav of the older versions) and Photoshop 5.5 (I can emulate Max GCR with newer versions and some finagling but that's a completely separate topic - use of GCR as a color management tool for, say, flexo monochromatic beer foam; yelo & Black).

Best regards,

John W.
 

PressWise

A 30-day Fix for Managed Chaos

As any print professional knows, printing can be managed chaos. Software that solves multiple problems and provides measurable and monetizable value has a direct impact on the bottom-line.

“We reduced order entry costs by about 40%.” Significant savings in a shop that turns about 500 jobs a month.


Learn how…….

   
Back
Top