Has anyone encountered this difference between InDesign on Macs&PCs or is it just me?

[thetinar]

Hello

I have a topic I wish to debate, and since it's the kind of topic that can only be debated with people who have used a lot of InDesign on both PC and Mac, I googled "graphic design forums" and found this. :) Before I begin, I don't want this to be a PC vs Mac debate, I have a very specific question regarding the two, and it doesn't really concern the quality of either system.

So to start from scratch. I've been working as a graphic designer in a magazine for 3 years, and have been using a Mac with Adobe CS(2) for my work all this time. At home I have a PC, and as I recently started working on another magazine project which I do at home, for the first time I actually used InDesign on my PC to design a great amount of pages.

I've always claimed there is no difference in quality between modern PCs and Macs, so I must say I was surprised to see there are actually some performance differences when it comes to InDesign being used on the two.

For example, when placing text, normally it will align itself perfectly to the guidelines, on a Mac. On my PC it appears to do that, but if I zoom in, it's actually slightly out of place. By maybe hardly a millimeter. Also, when zooming in and out, my fonts look crippled even on 100% magnification on my PC, while on my mac they look perfectly sharp. (until I zoom out too far of course, when they become grey lines).
It may seem like a really minor issue to some, but when it comes to magazines, when you have two columns of printed text next to one another, even the slightest misalignment in the lines is very visible, and it's very important for me that the columns are perfectly aligned. (Not that it's impossible to do on my PC, I just need to keep zooming in and out, which is annoying.)

I have noticed a similar problem occuring in Photoshop, when using guide lines. For example, I position them and want to crop the image along those guide lines, since the selection snaps to the guide line, you'd expect it to snap precisely. And it does on my Mac, but on my PC it's always a pixle or two out of place, until I zoom all the way in and adjust it manually.

I have several suspicions as to what may be the problem. First is that perhaps something is just not good enough with my PC, maybe my graphic card isn't good enough. Perhaps it is the difference in screen size and quality? My work screen is a 21" Sony Trinitron, at home I always use a 19" screen, (I had a 19" Sony CRT before, now I have a 19" Samsung LCD, although InDesign behaves the same in both).

Or perhaps it's Adobe? Maybe they optimise their applications for MacOS better than Windows? In such a case someone certainly must have noticed something like this, other than me.

So in the end my question is - has anynone here worked intensively in InDesign on both Mac and PC and noticed something like that?

If not, what do you reckon might be causing the discrepancy?

[colonel5]

i haven't used both but it could be that your dog didn't install Vista correctly ;o)

[thetinar]

XP, not Vista! Anyway... why do you say that, is that how it manifests? I've had my PC for 3 years, works perfectly fine in general, and I didn't install Windows on it myself.

I thought it could be a problem with the CS2 installation on my PC, and I have reinstalled it, but no change.

[mojoprime]

i have a couple of theories on this, since i use a mac at home and pc at work, and have noticed this problem.

on placing the guides, i believe it's more a question as to the sharpness of your monitor. i've noticed on both platforms that sometimes when i place the guides, they can be right-on and sometimes they're off by a point or two -- i tend to work in picas and points out of old newspaper habits. about 90% of the time, it's not that big of a deal. i've set the "nudge" amount for my cursor keys at half a point, so it's easy to select a guide and nudge it over until it's right on the measurement you want.

another way to ensure consistency is the liberal use of master pages and the margins and columns selection in the layout menu. this way, i just set them once and then drag a new page down when i'm ready. need to move some of those guides? select the page in the pages palette and use the flyout menu selection "override all master page items." need to unlock the master page guides on all the pages? click to select all of your pages in the pages palette and override.

it really works well.

now, on to the fonts. are you using opentype, truetype or type 1 fonts? if you're using different formats on the same font, often the metrics or how the font display info is written in the font varies slightly from format to format, and even from platform to platform. some fonts, such as myriad (t1) and myriad pro (ot) have a slight inset in textboxes. it's irritating, but not the end of the world.

are all of your fonts insetting? you may have a default setting for text inset that you're not aware of. select the text box, then object > text frame options. another thought is that you might have a default for text wrap set. select the box and go to the text wrap palette under the window pull down menu. it might be a slight value, but that could be casuing it as well.

finally, there are just some differences between the platforms and how they've handled fonts and evolved to handle fonts over the year. anyone who's been doing this long enough knows that it still ain't an exact science. seems like more problems are caused by faulty fonts than any other problem, other than lack of computer muscle or ram. my suggestion? move to opentype versions of your fonts. they work seemlessly cross-platform and have a greatly expanded glyph set, which will make your over all typography stronger.

as far as aligning columns, if you're working a magazine layout, you just have to use the baseline grid to ensure that everything is lined up and even. you'll have to tweak the settings until you get them how you want them; they're under preferences. in order to make the copy snap to it, select the type and in the paragraph pallette, select the option at the bottom-right hand corner with the two columns on lines that are even. you may have to turn on "show options" on the flyout menu.

with that turned on, everything has to line up. in your line of work, i see that as a "must." as a matter of fact, on the newsletters that i do (that require a standard layout) the grid is vital. if i'm doing something more artistic or need free reign of the copy, just turn off the "snap-to" function by selecting those other "uneven" columns in the paragraph pallette.

does this help at all?

one more point on the guides, as far as the monitor is concerned. it may be your eyes, or it may be the monitor. try setting your monitor to the native resolution, if it's a flat panel. things may get small, but they'll be sharper.

and it may not be the monitor; it might be the mouse "jumping" slightly when you're trying to place the guides. try adjusting the mouse sensitivity as well.

[PrintDriver]

Why do you guys set guides using your eyes?
I always set them by the Transform palette. Then lock them.
Same with text boxes or if I'm working on anything in a grid. I never rely on Snap. Especially if the image is being enlarged to any degree. Gappage or overlap at 1200% is a killer.:D
As for the inset, I don't use InD on a pc so can't help you. The only thing I would offer is the same as Mojo. Heavy use of Styles and Masters when using suspect fonts.

[mojoprime]

force of habit is as good as reason, pd. i just never think beyond the habit. but that's good advice i'll try to remember. on the stuff we enlarge, like banners or whatnot, we normally use illustrator. it just seems to be a better tool for that job. but again, i could be wrong.

[urstwile]

I have to say that I'm not a snap girl either, I use transform, or the control palette, in InDesign. In Quark, I use the measurements palette.

A co-worker asked me the other day how to fiddle with the snap feature in InDesign, and I had to tell him that since I never use it, I didn't have a clue.

[mojoprime]

i guess it depends on how you learn, or what works for you. i dunno.

[urstwile]

That's a good point, Mojo. I learned with numbers, no WYSIWYG, so I tend to rely on that more than on snap. Nevertheless, I think that ultimately, if you want things to align, you gotta go with the numbers. The snap thing is useful for the initial design stuff, but for total precision, numbers all the way.

[mojoprime]

makes sense to me. completely off the subject, but when i looked at WYSIWYG in your reply, it made me think of working in -- which was it? -- illustrator 88? where you had to have a separate document open to preview something?

[mojoprime]

i think my different manner of using guides started from doing page layout at the newspaper. all of the templates were pre-designed, and it was sort of mandated that we work a certain way, so that at any point any other designer could step in and finish. not saying it was the right way (not by *any* amount) but that's the way it happened. before that, when i was working an an independent studio...ah, hell, that was a while back. probably in those brain cells i killed in the 80s...

[thetinar]

I'm not sure you got me right mojoprime and PrintDriver, I don't have a problem setting the grid or guidelines or anything like that. I mostly have a problem with snapping, not to grid (that's fine, when I can use it) but column lines and margin borders. Works perfectly on my Mac, but isn't that reliable on my PC. And urstwile, sure, you can live without it but sometimes it's handy and it just intrigues me more than bothers me, why there is the difference between two computers. It's not like I can't work around it, I'm just curious about it, that's all. :)


now, on to the fonts. are you using opentype, truetype or type 1 fonts? if you're using different formats on the same font, often the metrics or how the font display info is written in the font varies slightly from format to format, and even from platform to platform. some fonts, such as myriad (t1) and myriad pro (ot) have a slight inset in textboxes. it's irritating, but not the end of the world.It has crossed my mind it could be the fonts too yeah, mainly because I have to use fonts with Croatian characters so maybe they're not as precise? Dunno. It's mostly Helvetica, Folio and Futura, but I've no idea if they're OpenType or TrueType, on either comps. Although.. come to think of it, I moved the Futura from my PC to the Mac without any trouble.. does that mean it's OpenType? In any case, the same font looks good on Mac, needs zooming in to be seen well on the PC.


are all of your fonts insetting? you may have a default setting for text inset that you're not aware of. select the text box, then object > text frame options. another thought is that you might have a default for text wrap set. select the box and go to the text wrap palette under the window pull down menu. it might be a slight value, but that could be casuing it as well. Ah see you didn't get me at all. I wasn't talking about insetting, or text wrapping. Merely the font being displayed as nearly unreadable unless I zoom in to 200%. On the PC. Not on Mac. Could be a screen size or quality thing, I don't know for sure if that's how it would manifest?

one more point on the guides, as far as the monitor is concerned. it may be your eyes, or it may be the monitor. try setting your monitor to the native resolution, if it's a flat panel. things may get small, but they'll be sharper. Hmm... yeah haven't tried that one! Not sure how it hasn't crossed my mind to be honest!

[urstwile]

To Mojo: Well, I kinda remember that, actually, yes, you're right. Those were the days, huh? :D

[urstwile]

thetinar, I wasn't trying to discourage you from using it. It's true, it's weird that there are differences. Have you asked on the Adobe forums? Have you compared whether there might be different snap defaults on PC and Mac?

If I truly worked cross-platform, I'd be curious too. The thread just got off on a tangent there. :)

[thetinar]

thetinar, I wasn't trying to discourage you from using it. It's true, it's weird that there are differences. Have you asked on the Adobe forums? Have you compared whether there might be different snap defaults on PC and Mac?

If I truly worked cross-platform, I'd be curious too. The thread just got off on a tangent there. :) hehe it's ok! Snap settings are the same! That's the first thing I checked too!

Not been to Adobe forums yet. Maybe if we come to no conclusion here, it's not a bad idea haha.

[mojoprime]

urst: hee hee. thank god. for a minute, i thought i dreamed that. :)

thetinar: i hate to show my inexperience with these types of fonts, but those aren't multibyte characters, are they? don't know why i asked that, just wondering.

on the fonts, if you moved it from pc to mac with no problem, it's probably either OT or TT. you should be able to tell by the icon. if it's TT, i have to tell you that most of those i've worked with tend to be crappy. sometimes, the versions that are included with printer installs or cheap software packages ("1 million fonts for $1") are copies of other fonts, or just hacked up versions. that might be the case here; i dunno. did you try setting your display performance to high quality display and see if that helped?

[urstwile]

I mentioned the Adobe forums because they have different ones for Mac and PC, so maybe someone there could shed a clue.

[thetinar]

urst: hee hee. thank god. for a minute, i thought i dreamed that. :)

thetinar: i hate to show my inexperience with these types of fonts, but those aren't multibyte characters, are they? don't know why i asked that, just wondering.

on the fonts, if you moved it from pc to mac with no problem, it's probably either OT or TT. you should be able to tell by the icon. if it's TT, i have to tell you that most of those i've worked with tend to be crappy. sometimes, the versions that are included with printer installs or cheap software packages ("1 million fonts for $1") are copies of other fonts, or just hacked up versions. that might be the case here; i dunno. did you try setting your display performance to high quality display and see if that helped? aaah! Duh. The icon. Well, the futura is indeed TT. I can see only that one now cos I'm on my work comp. I'll check my PCs Helvetica when I get home. It'll probably be a crappy version cos I never paid for it, it was just...there! haha Oh yeah and high quality display didn't help!

Still, Mac shows the TT futura well, PC doesn't!

oh oh and

multibyte....? :confused:

[mojoprime]

well, the both natively support those formats. i still think it might be how the mac is rendering it. i dunno. post back when you get home and check. i'd be interested to know what you find out.

[mojoprime]

multibyte. japanese and other types of asian fonts have extended characters because their alphabets are so enormous. the characters actually might require multiple keystrokes to generate, if i'm remembering everything right.

[thetinar]

well, the both natively support those formats. i still think it might be how the mac is rendering it. i dunno. post back when you get home and check. i'd be interested to know what you find out. That's pretty much what I thought as well, unless it's just my screen at home, then the Mac must have something that enables it to render the font better, BUT then, does that mean all PCs do it as badly as mine, or does it just mean my PC lacks something? I guess, if you've worked on both enough and never encountered that problem then I guess it's just my comp? Hmmm.

[thetinar]

multibyte. japanese and other types of asian fonts have extended characters because their alphabets are so enormous. the characters actually might require multiple keystrokes to generate, if i'm remembering everything right. aaah! No no, it's just latinic alphabet with several extra accented letters. :) Croatian keyboards have a key for each of the letters, no multiple keystrokes.

[urstwile]

I can't speak for the PC, since I use Mac pretty exclusively, but you raise a good point, which is that the rendering engine for the two platforms is probably different enough to cause an issue.

[mojoprime]

not really. i've got some big honkin' geforce6800 in this dell machine here (that was a little joke, by the way), but the type looks clear as a bell at any size.

i always hated greeking. with modern machines that have more ram and rendering muscle, i always turn it off though it is very useful in determining the balance of the type vs. images on the page.

bottom line is that it might be how your machine is doing it, but that also might be a long shot.

[thetinar]

No no, this is good. It's either my comp or my screen at home, nearly certain now. Well I mean, neither of that is GOOD haha, but I've got the answer I was looking for, more or less! :D Thanks

[mojoprime]

urst, i think you may be right. i know apple beefed it up (font control and support), but then so did the pencilnecks at microsoft when they built in native support for PS.


i've really got to get out of the u.s. more... ;)

[urstwile]

LOL, Mojo, I feel the same.

And I was primarily talking about the way the OS handles it, not the way the hardware handles it. Then again, I don't work on PC's usually so I'm not sure how that all works. Apple put some bells and whistles into their graphics rendering engine that is probably different from the one that PC's have, or maybe not.

[mojoprime]

yeah, i think you're right on the money there.