Re: Apple/Epson driver failure.
Re: Apple/Epson driver failure.
- Subject: Re: Apple/Epson driver failure.
- From: Marco Ugolini <email@hidden>
- Date: Sat, 03 Apr 2010 15:05:53 -0700
- Thread-topic: Apple/Epson driver failure.
In a message dated 4/2/10 9:38 AM, Scott Martin wrote:
> You might get work done but issues with printing profiling targets and
> ColorSync issues have caused lots of downtime for a lot of Mac users during
> the last two years while Windows users haven't had these issues.
I am not a Windows user, but I have been hearing over the years that Windows
has its own share of CM problems and incompatibilities. I would not be so
quick to say that the Windows OS spells "CM Nirvana".
> For those of us that oversee a large client base these issues have been a
> *huge* headache.
Does anyone who uses computers professionally really expect not to run into
temporary obstacles and have to implement workarounds? I don't.
Upgrades are meant to introduce progress, but often enough they will also
create trouble. That's why "early adopters" are inherently risk-takers, and
most users hold off for a while before they plunge into the new "waters".
Any critical judgment should be able to evaluate the balance between
progress and accompanying malfunctions. On the Mac, in the 25 years I have
been using this platform, the overall balance has been on the positive side.
(My sense of Windows OS releases is that, over the years, trouble has
weighed massively in THEIR balance, to the point that VISTA actually had to
be pulled from the market.)
With millions of lines of code involved in building a working application
that only gets more complex with time, do we really expect superhuman
results that are absolutely problem-free? Or should we instead be thankful
for what works, inventive about workarounds, and direct (besides patient)
with our feedback?
I do complain, but only so much -- specially if there is a fix that works.
> Less savvy businesses have been getting poor results because of them and have
> had unhappy customers, lots of reprinting, ink/paper waste, etc.
Well, businesses that don't allow for some degree of troubleshooting and
research by knowledgeable operators are not very savvy, in my opinion.
Honestly, how many things work straight out of the box, without allowing
time for training and study, besides trial-and-error?
We are increasingly demanding the impossible of each other, while we slash
budgets and salaries left and right across the board in the software,
hardware, design and print industries, and increasingly hire cheaper (and
inexperienced) personnel in the belief that this will still "get things
done" while improving the bottom line. Something has to give, and it does.
> Lots of frustration directed at Apple which is quite unusual, historically.
> It's surprising that Apple wasn't able to resolve these issues sooner, or even
> better, prevent them from ever being released. I think that's part of what Don
> is saying... There used to be excellent communication between the ColorSync
> group and Apple Consultants and the greater community...
Is there an evil plot afoot? Or is this perhaps a result of the prevailing
business culture? How does Apple's own compare to HP's responsiveness, to
make just one example? Do these problems occur following an intentional
attempt to ignore client needs? Or out of an accumulation of steps aimed at
boosting stockholder returns? We as users don't like to think about it, but,
once a company goes public, stockholders matter more than the customer base,
always.
Whatever the core trouble is, this is bigger than what happens with just one
company, and has systemic roots in the business and financial environments.
I don't work for Apple, don't know anyone in the company, don't hold their
stock, have no financial interest in their welfare (though I work on Macs,
and a failure of their company would obviously greatly impact my ability to
work using the Mac OS.). I am just trying to encourage my colleagues to
remain rational about all this and try not to overreact.
> On top of that WCS has some neat technology (that I don't have time to go
> into) that us geeks would like to play around with on our Macs. For more
> reading visit:
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/device/display/color/default.mspx
>
> and see Steve Upton's as-always excellent commentary here:
>
> http://www2.chromix.com/colorsmarts/smartNote.cxsa?snid=50022&-session=SessID:
> 18E3EF5209d12169CAvHQ206296C
Steve's article was written 3 years ago, before VISTA proved to be enough of
an embarrassment to Microsoft that they had to pull it out of the market.
No one argues that introducing CIECAM models and "smart" CMMs into the
ColorSync architecture (just as WCS attempted to do with Windows) would be
anything but a remarkable improvement -- actually, that is exactly part of
what I'm trying to get across in the ongoing thread on this forum about "The
need for a substantial upgrade of ColorSync".
I'm just not sure that the CM innovations introduced by means of WCS were
implemented in a way that merits emulation, specially given VISTA's
spectacular overall failure. The idea was worthy of praise, the
implementation probably not.
Marco
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Colorsync-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden