Under the Desktop: Platform Pros and Cons, Round 2

With the constant pushing and shoving over processor performance, it's easy to overlook critical workflow features when deciding which computer to buy. In part two of his look at platform pros and cons, David Morgenstern considers the hidden features.
Written by David Morgenstern on January 2, 2002
Categories: Hardware, Features

Related Reading

Speed is critical, especially for content creators. But is it everything ? The assumption is that performance is the biggest determining factor when purchasing a computer. But when deciding in which platform to invest are there other things to keep in mind?

The quick answer is yes, as I broached in my previous column about choosing platforms for content creation. When standing in your local computer store comparing models you'll often encounter the techno aficionados who know by heart all the figures from the spec sheets -- they're like the guys in "High Fidelity" who know everything about bands and their records. That approach might work for consumers or enterprise buyers, but the purchase decision is more complicated for creators of digital content.

To begin with, we need to evaluate if either platform holds significant technological advantages for content applications. Next, we should consider whether our choice of computing platform will affect our ability to collaborate effectively with other content creators or if it will serve the needs and preferences of our clients.

These ultimately may be the deciding factors.

(In the spirit of full disclosure -- once again -- I remind readers that I use both computing platforms and try to fairly recognize the strengths and weaknesses of each. I have worked for companies focused on the Mac as well as Windows. But my everyday computing is done on a Macintosh.)

Love Me Two Times
Computers are wonderful, multi-purpose devices but they are not created equal. Some computers are designed to be better and faster at performing certain tasks. Features are aimed at specific users or market segments, including sometimes, although infrequently, professional content creation.

Most content pros are familiar with Apple's proprietary technologies aimed at publishing: ColorSync for color management and the AppleScript scripting language. Both architectures have been extended deeply into Mac OS X.

On the other hand, it's difficult to find something in Microsoft Windows -- even the company's latest XP flavor -- that's tailored for the creative professional. Microsoft has focused Windows development on the needs of enterprise computing and the consumer market.

Color management in Windows is "bolted on to satisfy a small part of their user base," said color consultant and creativepro contributing editor Bruce Fraser. "Applications that use color management [under Windows] ignore the OS. They do it all themselves."

Mac programs and peripherals, even ones from different vendors, take advantage of ColorSync. This system-level architecture lets users pick and choose the software and features they want, while maintaining their color management. This degree of integration and selection is unavailable to Windows users.

"To Microsoft color is simply a consumer issue," said Karl Lang, a color scientist based in Madison, Wis., pointing to the sRGB color space standard developed by Microsoft and Hewlett Packard Co. Lang said that while basic factory calibration can be now found on many monitors, "it's not where pros need to be."

A similar conclusion is reached when comparing AppleScript with Microsoft Visual Basic. AppleScript is supported by a wide range of Mac tools and it has evolved primarily to extend creative workflows. A quick tour of the VB website shows its emphasis on enterprise computing, currently Microsoft's .NET client-server architecture.

In situations where color quality and management is important, the Mac holds fundamental advantages over Windows. For production pros who want the flexibility and timesaving automation of a scripted workflow, the Mac also comes out better.

But for many content creators that's not enough.

Tell All the People
Content creation is often a solitary affair. Yet, sooner or later, most images are passed on to someone else for use in a larger work, such as a page layout or Web page.

Can the choice of computer make a difference for this collaboration? Sure. Again, ColorSync comes into the picture.

System-level color management can improve the odds that the colors will be correct and that everyone working on a project is looking at the same colors. At last year's Seybold San Francisco, Apple CEO Steve Jobs demonstrated how Mac OS X lets any imaging program -- even a simple viewer or browser -- function as part of a soft-proofing workflow.

(A brief historical note: Before Jobs returned to Apple, the company planned to port ColorSync to Windows. Some genius decided that if licensing was good for QuickTime, then it must be equally good for ColorSync. As you can imagine, this was very welcome news to publishing hardware and software vendors, as well as to system manufacturers that offered special, souped up Windows boxes to the content creation market.

(After Jobs' regime came onboard things quickly changed. I remember the stunned faces and outrage expressed at a 1999 developer meeting as Apple managers nixed the cross-platform strategy and announced that ColorSync would remain an Apple-only technology.)

To this day Microsoft does not have anything to compare to ColorSync, allowing Apple keep its place in the professional content-creation market. If color quality and image evaluation is important to your content-creation workflow, then you should acknowledge the Mac's significant color management advantage.

People are Strange
Finally, content creators must remember their clients. These are very important people to your business and it's certainly good to keep them happy. Your choice of computer platform could affect your relationship with a client, even a longstanding one.

For example, some of your customers may use server-based tools to track jobs and communicate with remote workers. Odds are likely that these remote services rely on the close integration of a Microsoft server and its client-side Office suite running on a Windows machine. This combination is impressive and the effect can be seamless -- it's just like you're sitting in the office on the wired network, when you're at home playing with the cat.

Unfortunately, the same easy integration is unavailable when using a Mac instead of a PC. Some service or other usually has trouble. Information may be readable via a Mac browser, for example, but a critical interactive feature may break. And corporate IS types are reticent to provide support for a Mac inside the company, let alone for an outside contractor.

"You really need both [Macs and Windows machines] in this world," said Leith Speights, sales manager at ProMax Systems' new Hollywood store. "The enterprise databases and calendars are all done better with a PC."

Break on Through
The question that started this screed asked for the "pros and cons of Windows machines vs. Macs." The more difficult, unspoken question was perhaps: "What computer should I buy?"

The Talmud provides some wisdom on that front: "We cannot learn everything from general principles; there may be exceptions." Only after a close examination of your specific workflow and clients should you make the call. Then try to be pleased with your purchase.

Read more by David Morgenstern.

1

Yes ... OSX is scary

I was the first respondent to this article. After reading Sandee's post, I feel like I should weigh back in. I agree totally about OSX. Not only do the issues she raise concern me, but I was really non-plussed to see MacWorld magazine begin a series on learning to write command line Unix using OSX's capabilities. PLEASE, that's not where I want my MacOS to go!
With the introduction of the ludicrous new iMac (is that all there is?) it's obvious that Steve Jobs is going to have to drag pro designers like myself into his vision of the future, kicking and screaming.

2

Yes, but...

Color control is a big issue and I do envy the Mac Users their ColorSync. But Bruce or David, I forget which, also talk about achieving consistent color on Windows machines albeit with more difficulty.
I agree with Sandee Cohen's response that using Adobe products with their integrated color control lessens Mac's color calibration superiority.
Not enough attention was given to how unstable and insecure Windows machines are. 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, OS X sounds like it's getting to be more of a pain.
As it stands, I feel less of a rebel these days using Windows machines for print and web design. 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.

3

pro mac

Whenever the platform debate comes up, I always like to mention the biggest worry I have- do we really want one company controlling the entire digital world? A company arrogant enough to try to set it's own punishment for being declared a monopoly!

As long as Apple presents any alternative, let alone one that works better for me and looks better, I gotta stick with the mac.
As example,I use Freehand on both platforms and even within that program, I find the ease of use noticeably greater on mac- menus are easier to navigate and selections are easier to see. Jeff

4

So convinced about Mac's

I currently run 3 computers, a G4 450mp, a G3266mhz & a dual 600PIII. all with 512mbram.

I have found with out a doubt that color calibration and color matching to be much easier on the Mac's than the PC. All apps run better on my G3 than the PC.

In regards to OSX, once all major apps are native I can't help but imagine that life in OSX will be a charm. And using ColorSync is a must for me, even with IE5 in OSX. You will be amazed on how images show with this option checked "on". I truly can't make a wintel machine my primary platform and I'm not alone in that.
Every service bureau I deal with in the Detroit area are polite about the PC files but are hardened Mac supporters.
Apple does what it does and does it better than any PC out there with a very good OS9 and very soon OSX.

5

Much better than Part 1

I took the author of this series to task for the lack of specific insights in "chapter 1". So I must now congratulate him on extending the scope of this feature, and focusing on the particular advantages of each platform for different creative applications. I look forward to reading further chapters...

6

Troubleshooting Factor

The other writer is absolutely correct. Macs are much easier to deal with other the hood and when Wintel systems go down, you can be in for some real downtime. Even with a fair knowledge of Window systems, it is always an adventure to figure out what is going wrong. Mac systems are much easier to work out.

7

I agree, but. . .

I agree with the scope of the article, but do have some comments and questions and reservations.

First, a comment: With the introduction of Open type technology which is cross platform compatible, it gives Windows users less of a fear that their documents will reflow if ported over to Mac (and vice versa).

Second, a question: 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. This seems to me to dilute one of the reasons to choose Mac over Windows. If I'm wrong, please educate me.

Third, 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.

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.

It used to be that if a system was behaving strangely, you could reinstall the system from the installation disk. Not with OS X. Apple recommends reformatting the entire disk drive!

It used to be that you could easily move applications from one partition to another, or to other levels of the hard drive. But I've read some people recommend not moving an applicaiton once it's installed in OS X.

It's much too early, though, to really see how bad OS X will be because so few people are using it for "real work." Yes, every publishing house I've spoken to has it on "ONE" machine. But that's for testing only. No one wants to run Quark, Photoshop in Classic and they're waiting for drivers for their pressure-sensitive tablets.

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.

8

Workflow is about work flowing

One thing that is essential to well-greased workflow, and yet went unmentioned, is the absolutely wonderful environment the Mac provides for easy troubleshooting. With a copy of Disk Doctor, non-geek designers like myself can fix 90% of any problems that crop up with in 20 minutes. Even on an NT network, my department's Macs always ran effeciently, when the Wintel boxes were crashing like bumpercars ... in spite of the fact the at the IS manager and I were barely on speaking terms.

Post a Comment

  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <p> <div> <br> <center> <img> <h2>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Use <!--pagebreak--> to create page breaks.

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Image CAPTCHA
Copy the characters (respecting upper/lower case) from the image.