835dusseault
Registered
We are converting our G4s to PC because of the high cost of new macs and the constant upgrades to software. What's going to be the worst quagmire that we're looking at? We're going from Quark to Indesign and CS2.
Losing our Macs to PCs because of $$$$
- Thread starter 835dusseault
- Start date
Natobasso
Tech-Bot 5000
First off, there's no need to upgrade just becase upgrades are available. I'm still using InDesign CS just fine, even though some of my vendors already have CS2...
You're not going to like the PC workflow as much as the Mac; not only that, your virus threats and IT support time just went up considerably. Has your company factored that into their numbers?
Converting Quark files to ID is problematic at the BEST of times, though Adobe InDesign works great on the PC:
http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/product.jsp?product=31&platform=Windows
Q4 files open natively but Q5-7 do not so you either have to back save those or use Markzware's QuarktoInDesign plug in (you'll need this $300 plug in on each computer).
Your company needs to add up the numbers and factor in at least that much more for maintenance and issues. You have to give up all your mac fonts too...
You're not going to like the PC workflow as much as the Mac; not only that, your virus threats and IT support time just went up considerably. Has your company factored that into their numbers?
Converting Quark files to ID is problematic at the BEST of times, though Adobe InDesign works great on the PC:
http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/product.jsp?product=31&platform=Windows
Q4 files open natively but Q5-7 do not so you either have to back save those or use Markzware's QuarktoInDesign plug in (you'll need this $300 plug in on each computer).
Your company needs to add up the numbers and factor in at least that much more for maintenance and issues. You have to give up all your mac fonts too...
835dusseault
Registered
I don't know if my boss factored in the training costs. I am worried about the font conversion as our IT dept. is a little on the light side right now due to loss of personal. Thanks for the info.
nixgeek
Mac of the SubGenius! :-)
The fact that your boss is switching to a completely different platform just makes everything that much more expensive than just upgrading the Macs, or even upgrading to new Macs which can run both Windows and Mac OS X, thereby giving you some scalability as to which applications you can run and whatnot.
Considering that Vista is the only thing you'll find on PCs nowadays (unless the business purchase has a special request for XP instead), you might even come face to face with software incompatibilities. The fact alone that all of the current Mac software would have to be replaced doesn't help matters financially either.
To put it simply, this is a bone-headed decision IMO on your boss.
Considering that Vista is the only thing you'll find on PCs nowadays (unless the business purchase has a special request for XP instead), you might even come face to face with software incompatibilities. The fact alone that all of the current Mac software would have to be replaced doesn't help matters financially either.
To put it simply, this is a bone-headed decision IMO on your boss.
Vista will run the software he mentions with no issues at all, I know I had to test it. Working for an IT department using both PCs and Macs I would have to say that the cost implications of using Macs over PCs is very high, especially if you are looking at Mac Pro over iMac.
The cost of my Macbook Pro would have paid for three PC laptops of very similar specifications that are in use on site here. My feeling is that the boss wants to move from Quark to Indesign regardless of platform and as it runs well on PCs has gone that way rather than replacing ageing Macs.
In this case application training would be needed anyway and training to use Windows rather than OSX should not increase the cost more than the price of a Mac Pro.
The cost of my Macbook Pro would have paid for three PC laptops of very similar specifications that are in use on site here. My feeling is that the boss wants to move from Quark to Indesign regardless of platform and as it runs well on PCs has gone that way rather than replacing ageing Macs.
In this case application training would be needed anyway and training to use Windows rather than OSX should not increase the cost more than the price of a Mac Pro.
Natobasso
Tech-Bot 5000
Natobasso
Tech-Bot 5000
It's very naive to think that computer users are going to just 'learn a new system' without a lot of growing pains. Many IT folks I know are frustrated with users not even being able to work email let alone an entire system!
There are real costs involved with this change not to mention file compatibility, etc. Quark files are notoriously buggy at the best of times...
835dusseault
Registered
Thanks everyone for your input.
The hardware is a relatively minor part of the costs incurred in a platform switch. Unless each knowledge worker in your firm is using only one or two apps, the cost new software licenses will dwarf the cost savings from cheaper hardware. Cheaper hardware is not a given. And then there are the support costs. Typically firms that switch from Macs to Windows also increase the number of support personnel to maintain their new computers. Consider how many Mac Pros you can buy using the salary of each additional employee.
As I tried to make clear, it will depend on what is driving the change of platform. If the firm is going to migrate to Indesign anyway any costs associated with that can be factored out as they will exist on whatever platform is is based.
As an IT professional I do not think I am being naive in thinking users will 'learn a new system'. This might have been the case 10 years ago, but the majority of people now do not find computers as daunting as they once did. It should take little more than a couple of hours basic tuition to allow users to make the move from Mac to PC or vice versa. The only problem I have ever encountered when getting users to make the switch is to get past platform bias for whichever system they were using before.
As they don't specify how many users or systems would be involved it is difficult to say how much could be saved on hardware. If it is only a few then I agree it may well be exceeded by other costs incurred such as extra staff. If however it is a large publishing house with hundreds of machines those extra costs will offset the saving on hardware.
As an IT professional I do not think I am being naive in thinking users will 'learn a new system'. This might have been the case 10 years ago, but the majority of people now do not find computers as daunting as they once did. It should take little more than a couple of hours basic tuition to allow users to make the move from Mac to PC or vice versa. The only problem I have ever encountered when getting users to make the switch is to get past platform bias for whichever system they were using before.
As they don't specify how many users or systems would be involved it is difficult to say how much could be saved on hardware. If it is only a few then I agree it may well be exceeded by other costs incurred such as extra staff. If however it is a large publishing house with hundreds of machines those extra costs will offset the saving on hardware.
nixgeek
Mac of the SubGenius! :-)
Tommo, I work in IT as well (in the educational field). I constantly have to deal with people that are supposed to know how to use a computer but still come to me with the silliest of questions. If I were to switch them to another platform (be it Mac OS X or a graphical Linux desktop environment), their heads would explode. You have to look at it from your end users' point of view, which is not easy when you already know how to use a lot of operating systems and understand the OS concepts very well. The same thing can happen with end users going from Mac OS X to Windows. There are differences, albeit small. But they are differences.
End users don't spend all that much time on the computer unless they have to. They just use it to perform a needed task. Because of this, especially at work, they get used to a particular system and are very hesitant when it comes to change. So because of this, there is eventually going to be some sort of training involved (formal or informal) that will not only cost them monetarily, but in productivity as well. Such a drastic change as this even though initially the lure of cheaper hardware is there ends up being more expensive than any Mac that Apple sells in the long run.
End users don't spend all that much time on the computer unless they have to. They just use it to perform a needed task. Because of this, especially at work, they get used to a particular system and are very hesitant when it comes to change. So because of this, there is eventually going to be some sort of training involved (formal or informal) that will not only cost them monetarily, but in productivity as well. Such a drastic change as this even though initially the lure of cheaper hardware is there ends up being more expensive than any Mac that Apple sells in the long run.
Nixgeek, like you I am employed in an educational environment. I agree with what you say to a point, but maybe my experience is different because of the mixed platform setup we have here.
A lot of our users already switch between Macs and PCs depending on what is available in their group. Most of them do this with very little effort or training. We do get the odd silly question, but in the main day to day use of the machines and software does not generate that many questions to our support desk.
The impact on productivity in this case is going to be mostly caused by the change in software rather than the change from OSX to Windows.
As I said before a lot will depend on the scale of the business and whether or not this is a long term strategy for the business involved. Also the original post did not say whether the whole infrastructure was Mac based or just the user desktop end, which would impact more heavily on costs in terms of extra staffing requirements.
A lot of our users already switch between Macs and PCs depending on what is available in their group. Most of them do this with very little effort or training. We do get the odd silly question, but in the main day to day use of the machines and software does not generate that many questions to our support desk.
The impact on productivity in this case is going to be mostly caused by the change in software rather than the change from OSX to Windows.
As I said before a lot will depend on the scale of the business and whether or not this is a long term strategy for the business involved. Also the original post did not say whether the whole infrastructure was Mac based or just the user desktop end, which would impact more heavily on costs in terms of extra staffing requirements.
Natobasso
Tech-Bot 5000
You make some good points. However, how can your publishing house make such a huge change without doing due diligence?
Does your firm do its own printing? If not, they might also want to figure out if their print vendor/s can take collected pc files. Not all service bureaus can.
If you are talking about students, then I agree. If you are talking about hourly workers and salaried employees, then I disagree. If you make even a minor change, then they want to be retrained. Some will be OK, but many will not work on the new system until they receive formal training on it. Because the pay is the same for productive work, training sessions, and sitting around waiting for training sessions, you dare not change the work environment unless you plan to offer training on the new systems.
mersyone
Registered
Wow, great post. I've been using both PCs and Macs my entire life. I don't want to try and steer you one way over the other, because both have advantages. On one hand - if you go the PC route, much cheaper! ...lol!. On the other hand - BE PREPARED! to send alot of time wiping out the system of spyware, system bugs, registry bugs, etc. I've RE-FORMATTED my PC at least 9-10 times within the past year, ...the MAC, however, only once (and that was to upgrade to OSX 10.4.
I believe there is a way you can use MAC-based fonts on Windows. Don't quote me on this but if you have ATM Lite installed (Adobe Type Manager), the FREE edition, they'll work.
We'll, good luck! As I always like to say," PCs are for GEEKs, and MACs are for HIPPIEs!" I'm kinda both.
P.S. The new Windows Vista seems to be dominating the market right now. Perhaps it's something to look into to see if it can handle the differentiation.
I believe there is a way you can use MAC-based fonts on Windows. Don't quote me on this but if you have ATM Lite installed (Adobe Type Manager), the FREE edition, they'll work.
We'll, good luck! As I always like to say," PCs are for GEEKs, and MACs are for HIPPIEs!" I'm kinda both.
P.S. The new Windows Vista seems to be dominating the market right now. Perhaps it's something to look into to see if it can handle the differentiation.
835dusseault
Registered
It's me again. We are a printing company consisting of 20 Macs in the production side using Quark 4 and the Adobe products. We are so far behind technologically now that any department upgrades mean huge learning curves anyway you look at it. My department would prefer to stay with Macs and learn Indesign. While everyone else is still on OS9, I am working with OSX and CS2 and found the switch easy to take. On the other hand, I have Illustrator and Photoshop at home on the PC and don't find it too bad either, but then I don't use it extensively at home.
Our graphics department does a lot of it's own printing in house, but does occasionally send jobs to external printers. When I started here the department was exclusively Mac as it was 'the industry standard' at the time. It now runs both Mac and PC, but this is driven by the fact that we have both Mac and PC users on site and it resolves problems of file format incompatibility rather than what the external publishing house can handle.
Looking at the size of the firm in question and the fact that they are going from OS9 in almost all cases to OSX then, based on costs here in the UK they would save a significant amount. As all users will need to be trained on a totally new OS and application it pretty much comes down to hardware cost.
UK pricing for the base model Mac Pro is £1700 not including a screen. Base model Windows systems can be had for £700 less including screen. Simple maths says 20 x £700 is £14,000. Quite a chunk of cash for a small company.
You guys in the US get the same Mac model for the equivalent of of £1294. At that price it doesn't make quite such a big saving.
Looking at the size of the firm in question and the fact that they are going from OS9 in almost all cases to OSX then, based on costs here in the UK they would save a significant amount. As all users will need to be trained on a totally new OS and application it pretty much comes down to hardware cost.
UK pricing for the base model Mac Pro is £1700 not including a screen. Base model Windows systems can be had for £700 less including screen. Simple maths says 20 x £700 is £14,000. Quite a chunk of cash for a small company.
You guys in the US get the same Mac model for the equivalent of of £1294. At that price it doesn't make quite such a big saving.
powermac
iMac Dual 2.0 17'
In the short term, your company is going to spend significant amount of money on new computers, software, and set-up. In the long-term, upgrade path is always more expensive on the PC side, especially if your company aggressively pursues new software frequently.
They should look at what they have now, and what they need in future, and apply a progressive upgrade path and eventually phase out older systems and software.
They should look at what they have now, and what they need in future, and apply a progressive upgrade path and eventually phase out older systems and software.