Xref: utzoo comp.sys.next:14718 comp.sys.mac.misc:10094 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!gsm001!gsm From: gsm@mendelson.com (Geoffrey S. Mendelson) Newsgroups: comp.sys.next,comp.sys.mac.misc Subject: Re: Desktop publishing Message-ID: <1991Mar26.053352.13091@mendelson.com> Date: 26 Mar 91 05:33:52 GMT References: <1991Mar25.024612.1264@mlb.semi.harris.com> Organization: Mendelson Computer Consulting Lines: 121 jdr@sloth.mlb.semi.harris.com (Jim Ray) asks: > >Now to my questions: > >1) What risk is there in going with the Next? I don't expect them to >go out of business any time soon -- but is that an unrealistic >expectation? The risk in buying Nexts is whether or not YOU think they will remain a viable company. That's a matter of speculation and lots of discussion here. What ever machine you buy, you are taking a chance on the company going out of, or out of the business. With IBM and Apple I think that chance is small. With Next? (you have to call that one) :-) >2) Are there "superior" PC solutions in the publishing arena that >would compare? The group is pretty set on using Frame though. In my opinion the best DTP package is VENTRUA PUBLISHER. It beats the pants of all the others. It is available in MS-DOS, WINDOWS 3, and Mac versions. From what I have seen, Frame is the best the "in how much money can I make on this sale" department. You can run Ventura on a 640k PC/XT with a 20 meg disk. I assume the Mac version would run well on a Plus. Don't even think about running Frame on a box that small. What I have heard as downsides: Quark Express: more features than Pagemaker, but publishing people just don't understand it. PageMaker: Good software to produce short documents, one page adds, etc. It made the Mac a success. :-) Ventura: Better than Pagemaker for long documents, cumbersome for short documents (one pagers). Don't expect to do more than quick fixups on text. It assumes that you will do your text entry with a word processor. Frame: Desktop publishing with mainframe prices (and hardware needs). >3) The "consultant" expressed his concern over that although it was >true that MAC's and Next's ( he seem's not not know that the Next is a >unix os ) were easier to use from an user-interface point of view, >once the "user" became more proficient a more "PC" oriented tool ( >somehow he equated textual input to pc's ) would be more efficient for >the "user". I don't buy this, even though I haven't been that fond of >MAC's myself ( I prefer Unix based machines ). I doesn't matter at all if they use the machine only for one or two tasks. If they are going to use the machine for other things, I think that documentation type people (as opposed to programmer types) would prefer the Mac. >4) The "consultant" expressed reservations that any non-pc solution >could not possibly contain a "documentation" management tool. He >wasn't really clear as to what he meant by "documentation management >tool". Anyone have any ideas??? No, he is Bullsh*ting you. I am a consultant too, and I have seen the "dance" before. "If you can't dazzel them with brilliance, baffle them with bull.." Usually you see these types as "free" consultants from a vendor. Avoid them like the plague. The usually know very little, push their wants on you, and disappear after the sale. If he had a "documentation managment tool" he would only be too glad to show you one. Or refer you to its vendor. Or call them himself for brochures. >5) I use Frame on Sun's and Dec's and other workstations, and find it >quite acceptable. If there are some reasons as to not use a Next >machine ( can't come up with any currently ), does anyone out there >see anything wrong with using some Unix system like the above instead >of PC's? The limitations of PC's don't appeal to me very much. If you are using the machines as dedicated workstations (ie only for documentation) I would get the cheapest platform the stuff runs on. Buy usefull things like: lots of printers, full page displays, tape backups: scanners, and huge hard disks. Don't waste you money on computer horespower that you won't need. I don't see why you would buy a $5000 Next to do what a $2000 Mac or PC would do. >6) What features on MAC's and Next's that would be superior to PC's >given a publishing orientation. None. :-) Since you will probably use the machines for word processing (how else does the text get in?), graphic manuipulation, drawing (Adobe Illustrator alone makes a Mac II worth having in a print shop) and lots of other things, I would look long and hard at Macs. Especailly since Ventura is availble for the Mac. I would also suggest getting at least one AMIGA since they do illustrations very well. I think the best combination would be a UNIX fileserver, an ethernet network MacIIs with full or 2 page monochome displays for set up and text entry, MacIIs with color monitors for illustations. Through in lots of printers and other usefull stuff and its still alot cheaper than Nexts. -- Copyright (C) 1991, Geoffrey S. Mendelson. All Rights Reserved. Except for usenet followups, may not be reproduced without permsission. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Geoffrey S. Mendelson | Computer Software Consulting | Dr. | | (215) 242-8712 | IBM Mainframes, Unix, PCs, Macs | Who | | gsm@mendelson.com | | Fan too!| ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- | WANTED: PAL VIDEO TAPES (VHS or BETA) inquire within. | | Especialy "missing" Dr Who Episodes. | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------