#Publishing on Mac or PC?
16 messages in this thread
To Anyone who has a strong opinion: I'm an author of various coffee table
books, and I recently attended a Mac seminar on publishing for the CD-ROM.
I'm very interested in pursuing the idea. Since I've used Macintosh and IBM
clone computers, I have passing familiarity with both. My question is
which–PC or MAC–is better for multimedia? Which has the larger audience?
According to the Mac seminar, the Mac is a better medium for creating and
playing CD-ROM publications. Any advice to a rank beginnner? Thanks, Naomi
Which is better or MAC or PC can start a war. <grin> For publishing the
MAC has been in the field longer and dominates the field. When it comes to
multi-media what software have you seen? If you can go to a computer store
and ask them to show their best multi-media demonstration. MAC seminars
should promote MAC products like they seem to be doing in this case.
What kind of computer do you have currently?
Thanks for the response. I know it's a tough decision. I'm working on a
Compaq LTE with very little memory now. I'm weighing whether I should get
(don't know what happened there, sorry)–probably a IIci or the new IIvx-or
a 486 pc. I'm not a hardcore computer jock, but I'd like to try to develop
a few CD-ROM titles. I thought the Mac might be a better medium. Apple
claims there are greater numbers of CD-ROMs for PCs out there but that most
are in offices and few are being used for multimedia. The Mac seminar was
quite good. I'm just trying to get an alternative opinion. Are you in a
position to sing the praises of a pc CD-ROM?
Naomi:
Here's 2 cents' worth. In the best of all project schemes, I would use a
Mac to build a production playable in Mac and pc environments. With
careful planning and software selection this is do-able. And it gives you
the pleasure of working with Mac (which, IMHO, still beats Windows by a
mile or two), while profiting from the sales strengths of both platforms.
This idea is not too radical, several publishers have used this strategy
for some time.
Have fun!
Rich Bowers
One could use Quick-TIME since it is on both the MAC and the PC too.
Maybe I can sing the praises of a UNIX cd-rom. <grin> I've seen some very
good stuff on both platforms and its not too hard to do. You could use
Quick-Time for Windows and Quick-Time on the MAC for your multi-media
neeeds. Have you been to a PC seminar for multi-media? I have worked with
just plain data CD-ROM and not multi-media ones.
Naomi,
As Albert said, you could start a war! Let me fire a salvo, then duck &
run. I use PC, Mac & Amiga, and have used Apollo and Xerox workstations.
Of the micro platforms, at this time, given the tools I presently have and
the things I want to do (both things you have to know to make a decision,
IMHO), I prefer the PC. A high-end PC, of course, with Windows 3.1, large
hi-res monitor & 24-bit color, and a good multimedia authoring system, good
graphics programs, and so on. What mix obviously depends on the task at
hand. This decision is also NOT based on cost. That's a different
question.
What I HAVE based this on is the ease of use of the applications I have,
how easy I find it to import/export files or objects between apps, and how
good the results are. Pretty subjective, but opinions are, in my
experience.
Good luck!
Kathy
I own and use both Mac and PC. The Mac appears to be more able and much
easier to set up. Lets see. To play mutimedia on the LC, I drop QuickTime
in the System Folder, stick the CD in the drive, and I'm watching the QT
movie and with sound and motion and looking at the graphics. No MIDI, but
waveform sound. The PC, I install windows 3.0, add the extensions, hassel
with the soundboard makers for Windows upgrades, update to 3.1, try to
install the
640x480x256 volot drivers, search in vain for the windows AVI drivers,
install the sound card,etc. Windows MPC is a nightmare, then find out my
25MHx 386 DX is too slow, the 33MHx one is too slow, and I need a 486 SX
and a faster drive to see the videos, with sound and any motion at all.
The Emperor has no clothes! After a few day messing with getting
everything working, the results were hardly worth the effort. I'd be
willing to bet that there are more people with color Macs willing to buy
the disc than MPC computers. If I can run the same ap on either, I rather
run it on the Mac. If you want to use MIDI, the PC may be better. But
there are lots of people who don't have all the computer needed to do MPC.
Just installing the 256 color drivers is a pain. )Copy the win 3 drivers
to a disk and rename setup.inf to OEMSETUP.INF) The final question is
whether a Mac or PC type is more likely to buy the disc, I tend to like to
ones that play on both. I'D like to see more CD-Audio on the unused space.
That gives more to the people with older drives and computers that are not
33MHz 486 machines. The windows machine I got last year won't do the new
aps, the LC I got two years ago does a better job when it comes to the
videos. U hesitate to throw more good money after bad in the PC, need
faster video card, sound card, faster cpu, etc. I'd rather get a faster
Mac. The MPC seems to be short lived with OS/2 and Win NT in the wings. The
best thing is not to put all the eggs in one basket, but if you must, I'd
have to go with the Mac, the mindset of the user is different and
represents
Bill:
At MacWorld in San Francisco last Jan, Sculley demonstrated precisely what
you described. He installed "multimedia" capability on a Mac in something
like 97 seconds (he scowled at the time required to copy the files from the
floppy). Then he set a technician to installing an MPC upgrade kit, and
they weren't done by the end of the rest of the hour of presentation. It
was, of course, a set-up, but it was a hoot!
The new video Viewer for Windows has gotten some strong positive reviews
(see the current Byte), and certainly the right sound board adds a lot.
But it does seem that everytime the pc environment takes a strong step
toward an easy standard, everybody starts popping up with complicating
alternatives. It's a tough product, from he consumer perspective!
Rich Bowers
Interesting ploy by Sculley, I guess Bill Gates can do the same if he
insisted that all Windows MPC hardwares are only manufactrued by Microsoft,
how about Microsoft Printer that only prints from Windows (fast) or Windows
that works only with Microsoft sound board, we don't want that, or do we?
No, we wouldn't want Microsoft to be in that position. But mainly because
everything Microsoft has done with Windows, has been done already – and
better – by Apple! (From a confirmed Mac bigot's perspective <g>)
Rich Bowers
point taken, but if only Microsoft makes Windows computer and suing
everybody else who makes hardwares that runs 3.1, then we will have "plug &
play" emphasized recently by most Apple Ads. well, I don't want that, I
want to be able to chose Compaq computer, NEC monitor, HP Laserjet4, NEC
CD-ROM Drive and Media Vision sound card, and hence we pay a price, which I
suspect, most of us are willing to fool around a little bit, despite the
headache that comes with it. but my respect to Apples for a good operating
system, no respect though for locking everybody else, and bad value for
money.
sorry, I think my last message is not clear enough, you can get HP laserjet
and NEC Monitor for Apples, but the manufacturers has to pay Apple for the
interface, they don't have to pay Microsoft for the interface (because
Microsoft don't make the hardwares, not yet anyway, and even if they do,
you don't have to pay for it I am sure, as Microsoft wasn't the PC inventor
anyway?
I certainly respect your opinion! But I enjoyed playing with with all the
pieces and parts for quite a few years. Then I began to find it boring.
While many accurate claims can be made about the increase in power over the
years, the design and complexity of working with DOS-based machines (and
it's fair to lay this on all manufacturers to one degree or another) has
remained as complicated as ever. I consider this one of the great design
disasters of our age. It simply should NOT be so DIFFICULT! (Sorry,
didn't mean to shout.)
>>as Microsoft wasn't the PC inventor anyway?<<
No, they didn't. In fact, Bill Gates and Paul Allen cut their teeth on an
Apple.
Best — Rich Bowers
good point, I may enjoy Windows very much, but what you have said is
agreed, it has been very nice talking to you, hope we have more
opoportunity to chat over Compuserve on any subject
PC or MAC–is better for multimedia >>
There are a couple of cross platform options. We often author on the the
MAC, using Macromind Director, and then use the Windows players (we have
created presentations for Apple and Microsoft using Director with good
results). If you want to include Video, start with Quicktime on the Mac
and inported to AVI (Microsoft Video) on the PC–unlike the PC version of
Quicktime doesn't support MCI control strings, which is how we normally
play audio and video from Director, in Windows.
Since you have published coffee table editions, you should seriously
consider a Kodak Photo CD portfolio disk–available soon. I've been told
by Kodak that the same script, which can contain pannable images, audio,
and text, can be play one several platforms–not only PCs and Macs, but
also Kodak's Photo CD Player or a Phillips CDI player connected to a TV
set.