TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:RE: graphic artist work From:"Humbird, LenX" <lenx -dot- humbird -at- intel -dot- com> To:TECHWR-L <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com> Date:Thu, 22 Jun 2000 15:14:16 -0700
> From: Todd Sutherland [mailto:TSutherland -at- DERIVION -dot- com]
> From: Glen Warner [mailto:gdwarner -at- ricochet -dot- net]
> Subject: RE: graphic artist work
>
> Yeah, I think that was the most short-sighted move
> Apple ever made.
> If they had licensed the Mac for cloning in 1984, before
> Windows really took
> hold, and accepted a little less profit, they would have
> cornered the market
> and Bill Gates would just be making Word and Excel today.
Actually Apple did license it's technology to other manufacturers in the mid
90's. After a few years they found out that it resulted in the same Mac
market share trend, but a smaller slice of the Mac market. The clone makers
hadn't grown the market at all!
> If you really want to see the difference between a Mac and a PC, drag
> the Fonts folder from each system to the desktop. Reboot. Which one
> works? That's the one you should buy.
I have no idea why someone would want to do that. How about we take both
machines and delete anything that ends with ".DLL", and buy the one that
still boots up?!
> Bottom line, for graphics people, is this: anything you
> can do with
> a Mac in 2000, you can do with a PC in 2000 (and vice-versa).
> But probably for less money.
If I were a graphic artist, I would first find out what my market looks
like, in terms of tools and platforms, and be versatile in whatever the
market demands the most. In my case, it's BOTH Mac and Win. If the market
prefers one over the other, then I'd adjust my talents accordingly.
Strangely, this also applies to tech writers. It doesn't matter if Microsoft
makes, or I prefer Frame over Word or blueberry over beige. If a company has
Macs for me to work on, well hell, it's certainly handy that I already have
Mac experience. Otherwise I'd try to delete all my fonts and show my boss
which is better. It's what the market wants me to use.
I've written about these decision scenarios before. If you're a freelancer,
go with the tool that gets the job done most efficiently. Those tools will
often dictate which platform you need to specialize in. And if you're an
employee or a client-site contractor, then be sure you know how to use their
dumb-ass tools too!
