The "production computer" is your working home base. It needs to function well and be able to run the various software tools you acquire to perform image editing, page authoring, and server interaction. Of course it is also most likely that it will run all other forms of applications you need in your daily life, personal and/or professional. Wed designing is not everything!
I am writing for the novice and intermediate audience so I will not consider a "pure" UNIX/Linux machine as a personal computer. It would simply be too technical despite the potential power of the various UNIX options. However, the Macintosh OS-X is based upon UNIX with a Macintosh interface and has quickly increased the overall market share of the UNIX/Linux OS machines.
For most computer users with skills not derived through the professional
media industry, say as an art director for an ad agency, a Windows
PC is what you were probably given on your desk at work and most likely
what you first purchased for home use. They have typically been cheaper
than the Macintosh, which was a marketing factor that had eroded the
Apple market share. The return of Steve Jobs to Apple resulted
in the release of the first iMac and the development of the Macintosh
OS X operating system. Price issues are still significant today but the
gap has narrowed. The big question remains as it has always been,
how happy and how productive will you be working on one platform vs.
the other.
I will say it right now; I am from the Macintosh camp. I have worked
with Windows (affectionately and not so affectionately, "Windoze")
since the release of version 3.1 but continue to opt for the Mac's
interface, file structure, and overall workability. I will try to
be fair but my bias is out in the open. One thing of great importance
when considering the operating system of the computer you use most
often – "easy to use" should not mean less capable.
In fact, easy to use should mean "work more effectively!"
In terms of usability, Microsoft has mimicked enough of the original Mac OS over the years to have a reasonably easy to operate user interface in the current Windows XP operating system. The "new" Vista appears to be the most blatant rip-off of the Macintosh OS look since the first version of Windows. However, what lies behind Windows remains a dreaded mystery to typical PC users. When it installs programs, where does it put things? And if something goes wrong, which it will with every computer, how do I cope with it myself? Can the average user of a PC possibly know which cryptically named "DLL" is needed for this or that program to operate? No way! Ironically the Mac has also become more complex with OS X.
Fortunately the major professional software producers, Adobe, Macromedia, etc. have produced versions of their leading applications that run on both Macs and PCs and allow users to share files without undue stress. In the world of web and electronic media design, this has been a major improvement for all, regardless of which platform the prefer.
What Windows does still do better (or more accurately put "with
more options") than the Mac, is database interaction. The common
Microsoft database "Access" is not available for the Mac.
Ironically, if it were, most Mac users would want nothing to do with
such a cumbersome program when compared to Filemaker (which is also available
for the PC). But Microsoft has put a lot of its resources behind web
database publishing and a novice user can figure out how to link up
to an Access database that resides on a Microsoft web server (more
about that later) as well as find ODBC connection solutions to most
well known databases. On the Mac side, OS-X is working to change that
domination. Because it is based upon UNIX, there is now a version
of MySQL available for the Mac, which is a very powerful and established
open-source database (free) that is used by large and small organizations,
NASA to name one.
I have tried to be fair to Windows from a professional perspective but now, why buy a Mac instead? The Mac interface remains more elegant. While a Windows user might have a hard time getting used to not clicking on every conceivable place on the screen and resize their windows from every edge and corner, a patient user will find themselves less stressed out and more productive. Spending hours making grotesque color schemes for the interface is not "working" with the computer, getting things done is! The Mac's interface has many options to improve and customize the working environment but making the window color lime green with purple scroll bars is not encouraged. The fundamental concept that Apple originally promoted is that the user should feel comfortable with the interface regardless of the program(s) being run. Most Mac users are competent in the use of more applications than the average Windows user despite the improvements to the Windows interface.
The greatest line of baloney that one hears from salespeople trying
to make a quick buck on a PC is "there's much more software available
for the PC". True ... but most of the stuff available for the
PC is junk. The most important professional applications that have
proven themselves over years of refinement are available on both platforms.
If you want every game that is released, stick with a PC. You won't
be working anyway. Mac users have traditionally been more demanding
of the software they buy. Poorly ported programs from the PC simply
do not sell to Mac users (the well know CAD program AutoCAD for example
was a bomb on the Mac) while the majority of professional applications,
Photoshop, Freehand, Quark Express, and Excel (yes especially Excel)
were developed for the Mac and ported or rewritten for the PC.
Regarding Mac OS X, this release of the Macintosh OS is completely
different than all Mac OS versions in the past. It sports a new look that, while a bit hard to get used
to at first for an old Mac user, is very attractive and easy to use. What is most important about OS X is that it is the powerful but
incredibly complicated UNIX wearing an elegant Apple interface.
All of the standard Mac applications have been upgraded to run on OS-X but new software, many of which
are based on UNIX, is appearing regularly. In short,
the software and functional options for the so-called "power
user" and the average user is on the rise with OS X. The
consumer level programs that Apple produces (iTunes, iMovie, iDVD,
and iPhoto) are well written and very useful.
Last, it is most important to stress that good web design should
by nature work well across all platforms and on all browsers, which
is not always an easy issue. Though the Mac is my primary production
computer, most of my clients are PC-based and
it is certainly understood that 90% of the web audience is also using
a PC. There are significant differences between the way web pages
display type and color on the Mac and on the PC, not to mention among
the different browsers. Unfortunately many PC developers never test
their designs on the Mac but it is imperative that Mac designers
do a good job testing their work on the PC.
Does that mean that Mac web developers need
a PC too? Definitely not. There was a very workable Windows "emulator" called Virtual PC that was purchased by Microsoft and subsequently given the axe. But there are Virtual Machine options that will run on the Intel Macs, such as Parallels Desktop, that run a "real" copy of Windows within a window the Mac. You can
test "virtually" every possible PC setup there is and just throw out the disk image if it ever becomes infected or disfunctional. The new Intel based Macs are revising the issue of Windows on Mac and (with a licensed copy) the new Intel Macs can actually start up running Windows in Apple's Bootcamp beta software. However this is not really as useful as running a Virtual PC at the same time as the Mac OS.
I respectfully remain devoted to the "Build on Mac for use on PC" camp!
