RMG3@psuvm.psu.edu (01/22/91)
Below are the full responses of the respondents (including those who answered on the net). Thanks again for answering. ********* Robin Goldstone <RGOLDSTONE@oavax.csuchico.edu> For the longest time, I too thought I did not need color. And for the same reason - if I can't print in color, what good does it do to have it on the screen? Lately, however, I have re-evaluated this opinion. I have begun to work with multimedia (stuff like MacroMind Director and Farallon's Media Tracks). In this area, your final output is not printed, but rather a screen presentation or video tape. Color, when working with multimedia, is nearly essential. Well, maybe not, but it certainly is boring looking at 3-d graphics and animation in b&w. Also, I am getting into MIDI music stuff, and with a color monitor, you can make every "track" of your recording a different color, which makes it easier to distinguish between them. So, I now believe that color is a useful tool, for some things. But, like I said, for the longest time I could not justify this. The multimedia and music stuff are toys for me. At work, I do word processing, mail and terminal emulation. For these purposes, I can't justify color. ******* "Ric Anderson" <ric@cs.arizona.edu> I started with color here at work, but have since switched to a monochrome display. We have a QMS color printer here, but I don't do anything that needs color, and some of the things I do benefit much more from the extra screen space you get on a two page display (I have 4 active unix windows up at the moment). The color display found a nice home with one of our faculty members whose research involves color graphics. I did spend the extra money to get grayscale on this display (4 bits of "depth"), so that some programs, which won't run unless there is a "color display", are still useable on this system for cursory looks at things. We do have one person using a color display, because they have some visual problems, and certain color combos are much easier for them to read than just "black and white". If your "job" doesn't need color, and your eyes don't either, then I'd buy black and white (or maybe greyscale). ********* clouds@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Kathy Strong) Heh, I used to be one of those hard-core B&W persons... I do mostly publication design, and while "non-repro blue" guidelines in my DTP package are kinda cute, they're not necessary. BUT... then I got a call from one of my clients requesting that I do a slide show for her. The 35 slides grew to 45, 50, over 60, and I did every damn one of them on an SE. Did I have my fingers crossed when I sent that disk to the slide imaging service bureau? Does a wild bear use toilet paper? I think color slides on a B&W Mac qualifies as "difficult or impossible." So does a digitized picture of three green seltzer bottles on my desktop, for that matter, but somehow I don't think that's what you had in mind. ********* Scott "Lord of Sith" Kajihara <kajihara@mcnc.org> This is WRT some of the things we do with a color workstation, so you may or may not feel that they are applicable to your Mac. First of all, although color is not reasonable for publications, it does well for conferences/presentations. Consider, unlike publications, your audience will only take what they absorb from the talk. Also, the limited time frame almost requires visual cues. As far as output, video cameras and 35mm film are lower cost solutions. Cannot say since not sure of the resolution quality of your screen. Since your work requires modelling and presentation of data, color may actually better help you convey what you have worked on. ********* JAHAYES@MIAVX1 Josh Hayes An excellent question. I have a plus sitting on my desk (and an HP 286, bleah), and it works wonderfully well for what I need, which is word processing (preparing manuscripts), and graphics (making figures for said manuscripts). My wife has a IIcx at home; she is a developer of sorts -- but has a monochrome monitor. No reason to have color. This is especially important in light of the current flap over potential health risks associated with color monitors but to a much lesser extent with monochrome (see the issue of MacWorld devoted to the issue; titled sensationally Is Your Computer Killing You?). Sure, games are better (indeed, often only work) in color. But as serious work machines, macs are just fine in monochrome. The only concession I can see making is going to grayscale. There are print options for grayscale that dont (sorry, my keyboard apostrophe and quote mark are not talking to the vax at the moment...) really exist for color, although there was a review of several color printers in last month s MacWorld. Overall, though, I agree. Still, if your machine has built-in color like the ci, fx, lc, and si, it can of course be turned off if you want. And monochrome will inevitably have some DOS jerk pointing out that Geez, just about every PC clone has color, you must have been ripped off....hmph. Anyway, that s my opinion. Hope this helps. Josh Hayes, Zoology, Miami University, Oxford OH 45056 ********* d88-jwa@nada.kth.se Color looks nice. It's nice to work with. It lightens up the tedious burden of word processing by adding a hilite color instead of just reversing the selection. It's also OK to use as an aid in distinguishing overlaid digrams and stuff. And games, of course. On the other hand, you could buy a 19" b/w monitor and get much more extra space. It's your decision. And remember - color requires more disk and RAM, too. And MHz's ;-) ********* john@newave.UUCP (John A. Weeks III) So you can run AfterDark in color mode!!!