Right, and this brings up a pretty good example of what I'm talking about. Photoshop is in the same boat as Mathematica in this respect: it runs perfectly well on both Windows and Mac, so the operating system is irrelevant. Nevertheless, when Tom discovers that a few Microsoft print ads were done using Mac Photoshop, he is compelled to post a message saying "I would not use Windows for such an important job either". What's the point? Where's the value in that? Is there anything to that post whatsoever, other than yet another gratuitous and meaningless slam at Microsoft?
No, Photoshop is hideous on the PC because it doesn't have the color management tools or the video clarity to do fine, accurate details. It also takes many more steps to do the same task on a PC compared to a Mac. I've turned down jobs because they wanted me to use a PC, even though I could have made more money, charging by the hour. Print shops have a terrible time cleaning up Windows files before they can even use the prepress software. Most use Macs for the cleanup, although print shops often use Macs, Windows, and Linux in the same shop.
Sure, Photoshop, and InDesign, and Quark run on both platforms--I've used all three on both. That doesn't mean they run as well because of OS limitations that get in the way.
I am not making gratuitous and meaningless slams at Microsoft. I've used M$ since MS-DOS. When I bid on a project by the job and not by the hour, I can't afford the extra hours it will take to finish a job accurately.
If I did accounting, I'd use Excel for Windows. Betty ************************************************************************* ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *************************************************************************
