From: dgf1@ellis.uchicago.edu (David Farley)
Subject: Re: Photoshop for Windows
Reply-To: dgf1@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago
Lines: 37

In article <1r85m2$k66@agate.berkeley.edu> aron@tikal.ced.berkeley.edu (Aron Bonar) writes:
>In article <1993Apr22.011720.28958@midway.uchicago.edu>, dgf1@quads.uchicago.edu (David Farley) writes:
>|> In article <C5uHIM.JFq@rot.qc.ca> beaver@rot.qc.ca (Andre Boivert) writes:
>|> >
>|> >
>|> >I am looking for comments from people who have used/heard about PhotoShop
>|> >for Windows. Is it good? How does it compare to the Mac version? Is there
>|> >a lot of bugs (I heard the Windows version needs "fine-tuning)?
>|> >
>|> >Any comments would be greatly appreciated..
>|> >
>|> >Thank you.
>|> >
>|> >Andre Boisvert
>|> >beaver@rot.qc.ca
>|> >
>|> An review of both the Mac and Windows versions in either PC Week or Info
>|> World this week, said that the Windows version was considerably slower
>|> than the Mac.  A more useful comparison would have been between PhotoStyler
>|> and PhotoShop for Windows.  David
>|> 
>
>I don't know about that...I've used Photoshop 2.5 on both a 486dx-50 and a Quadra
>950...I'd say they are roughly equal.  If anything the 486 was faster.
>
>Both systems were running in 24 bit color and had the same amount of RAM (16 megs)
>I also believe the quadra had one of those photoshop accelerators.

I went back and looked at the review again.  They claim there were
significant differences in manipulating a 27 meg test file, but with
smaller files, the two platforms were the about the same.  David

-- 
David Farley                           The University of Chicago Library
312 702-3426                              1100 East 57th Street, JRL-210
dgf1@midway.uchicago.edu                         Chicago, Illinois 60637

