Philip -- I think in your zeal to promote other machines, you've
played a bit loose with some "facts." But I REALLY didn't want this
to become a platform war, and I'm not going to respond to further
messages on the topic.
From: Phillip Franklin <pfranklin@xxxxxxxx>
Maybe it's easier for you and some other people who use Mac systems
to achieve better color
management.
Yes, and that's ALL that I was claiming.
Postscript is not platform nor operating system
dependent although many misinformed Mac users would argue.
No, I don't think Mac users are misinformed about this. In fact, most
of them -- even many in the creative arts -- have no idea they're
even using PostScript, it is so well integrated! "It just works."
Let me repeat, it's EASIER -- I never claim it's IMPOSSIBLE to do on
other machines.
Anyone who is interested in professional desktop color
management can do it on any platform. PERIOD.
I NEVER claimed otherwise. Anyone who is interested in building a
house can do it with no more than a hand-saw and a hammer, which is
roughly equivalent to my experiences using color management on W95.
(Yes, I know later versions of Windows are improved in this respect.)
Certainly the Windows platform has the same quality tools as the Mac
or SUN or any other
desktop system.
Yes, Photoshop on the Mac is the same as Photoshop on Windows is the
same as Photoshop on Solaris. The same is not true of system-wide
color management or PostScript support. My point is that much
graphics stuff is built-in to MacOS, whereas it is "glue-on" for
other platforms.
Windows has become the platform with the most users in
any given industry.
Not in the graphics industry, according to IDC et. al. Apple still
owns 70% to 900f that industry, depending on whose numbers you
believe. Furthermore, in the IDC study I read, the recent gains of
Windows in the graphics industry have almost exclusively been via the
introduction of NT servers -- the designers still insist on Macs on
their desktop. I expect this trend to quickly reverse once UNIX-based
MacOS X is out.
Personally I see a resurgence in RGB output...
This imaging technology is based on RGB so there is
no proofing or postscript coding necessary for cross platform capability.
Well, if it's printed on a reflective media, something somewhere is
still doing an RGB-CMYK conversion. Discriminating people will still
want to control that process. I'm now using Hexachrome(R) inks that
include colors that are outside either the basic RGB or CMYK gamuts!
Once again, I didn't mean to insult anyone's platform of choice, and
I have no intention of "converting" anyone -- especially if, like
Philip, they have invested the time and energy into a particular
platform's learning curve.
Windows is perfectly good for many things, but there is the weight of
decades of graphics orientation behind the Mac. In many respects,
Windows has flourished by being a generalist, while the Mac remained
specialized -- and it is a documented fact (through industry studies
by independent organizations) that graphics specialists still prefer
the Mac.
This discussion has turned religious, and I'm outta here. If someone
is really interested in documented facts, contact me privately and
I'll go dig up the references.
: Jan Steinman <mailto:Jan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
: Bytesmiths <http://www.bytesmiths.com>
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|