So if the client used Macs it wouldnt have been an issue?
So if the client used Macs it wouldnt have been an issue?
If the client had used macs there would have been no data conversion charge.
Data conversion in 1995 wasn't the simple issue it is now. It took time and resources (a system set up to do the work and someone who really knew what they were doing) to accomplish.
Printers who would do it charged a premium because they had the extra overhead in both equipment and personnel to do the job.
The one eyed man in the kingdom of the blind wasn't king, he was stoned for seeing light.
I whole heartedly agree, and not just for graphic arts. From what I hear hear Macs are far and away better then Winblowz for audio and video mixing.
But in 1995 did Mac have a big enough market share to even be considered a industry standard? Mac dosent have more then a 10% market share today.
Last edited by blue; 08-08-2010 at 03:29 AM.
In 1995 if you walked into any graphics shop there were Macs, and only Macs.
Remember, the "killer apps" for Macintosh were the early Adobe creative products and Quark Xpress. They weren't even in play in the PC world. In 1995 there was enough of a PC inroads in those areas to have to be considered (hence the data conversion issues), but Mac was it.
Jobs had left Apple, they were licensing Mac platforms, and life in the Mac world was good.
The one eyed man in the kingdom of the blind wasn't king, he was stoned for seeing light.
I get it now. A week late but I get it. Next time try to be more obvious.
Macs are still the heavy hitter for graphics and video editing, Im sure if Im wrong someone will try and show their superior knowledge here.
Back on topic, I did some searching and if we jump in the way back machine to '96, movies show the good guys using Macs.
Im sure if we were talking movies made in the countries that have the Euro as currency Macs would be the PC of choice for the Evil doers.
Copyright © 2001-2013 Pet of the Day.com
Bookmarks