" Hi Mike-
I know I know, you already have at least one million emails on the subject, but I wanted to give you my 2 cents worth-

I personally welcome the macweek change. I'm a graphic designer, and while we have our mac workhorses, we couldn't pass on the bargain of a solid PC box. its running NT, and using maclan and Superprint this box is our office file server, backup server, proxy server, HTTP server, Standalone RIP, and it answers our phone and fax- and push come to shove, I have Quark 4, Photoshop 4, and Illustrator 7 installed on it! (oh, and it doesn't crash very often either)

I am a mac lunatic- but you know what? I've come to depend on independent sources (such as yourself) for Mac specific information, certainly a LOT more than the mainstream publications (who, ironically, still insist the Mac is dying.) But a GA source such as Publish, and now E-media, is a great resource for me, much more so than a Mac-centric publication. And unlike other mac lunatics, I have no faith or respect for Apple (the company) and I have no fear or loathing for wintel boxes (I can retouch a 50 meg file with the same efficiency on our P2-300 or the G3-266- and even the 604e/210, or produce the same Quark layout regardless of what benchmark claims what)

I visit your site twice a day, and sometimes on the weekends. I visit macweek maybe twice a month. Who needs macweek when we have xlr8yourmac?!

Alex Koyshman
Co-owner, creative director, and production grunt
Designamics"

" Heya Mike,
I have a friend who emailed Henry Norr about how disgusted he was with the 'paid' article [Intergraph 3/16/98 review] and he got a very misspelled unprofessional response back from none other than the Editor in Chief himself-David Morgenstern. i'm not a mac bigot, i use pcs every day, but i believe in the mac platform and it hurts to see publications fall over to the dark side.. please feel free to post the message Mike.

hoping you're resting well,

John Vigil
p.s. note the date on this email and how my friend predicted MacWeak's conversion to a PC gfx mag.

------------- non edited------------------
I just received this response from the editor of MacWEEK, I wrote it after being infuriated at the stupid review of the Intergraph NT machine verses a G3 ,it was totally biased, and there was a big hairy Intergraph advetisement on the back of the very page Henry's review was on. The bottom line is David avoids almost all of my issues with double speak. I am not a writer and not a great speller, and don't claim to be, but the editor of a magazine should be both, this response is totally un-edited except for where he uses my real name, note his mis-spelling (among the many other gramatical errors) of the word criticism, something he can't take well obviously! I just found out that David recently was promoted to editor at MacWEEK maybe this is the reason for his defenisve attitude. He is obviously intent on turning what used to be the one and only Mac info source mag into a generic PC graphics mag.

note: the formatting of the paragraphs might be off from the original email according to what app your are reading it in.

By the way The small text is my writing, the big text is his response {No size difference in the email-Mike} for some reason David chose to disect my letter and respond to it bit by bit.

From: David Morgenstern [SMTP:david_morgenstern@macweek.com]

Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 1998 8:39 PM
To: name changed to protect the inocent
Cc: Rick LePage
Subject: Re: Fwd: 3/16 Henry Norr Article

(this is the begining of my email to MacWEEK)

Good job Henry! Your endorsment of Intergraphs NT computer complemented the full page Intergraph advertisement on the back page of your front page "review". I have never seen a better example of advertising dollars influencing reviews or news content, and frankly I am disgusted with Macweek.It's amusing how many different Macs you excluded in your comparison that would have dusted the NT dual processor unit. How about the quad processor Daystars, now being marketed in a sleek black box by another company? And since when is only Photoshop the definiteve benchmark for performance standards? how bout running some other programs too? I am now confident that Macweek is subject to bribary and that the content of its articles and reviews are biased and slanted in favor of those who spend money advertising with the magazine.

[editor replies] First, I want to say how insulted I am at your accusations of MacWEEK's editorial integrity and your smear of Henry Norr. Anyone would wish to have the reputation for honesty, accuracy and hard-hitting opinion in any profession that Henry has in this industry. I am baffled by some of your critism, as well. Am I supposed to only review products of companies that donÌt advertise in MacWEEK? Or only products that pass your test? You don't seem to be bothered by all the reviews of Mac products. Actually, I'm the editor and I don't know what company advertises on a particular week or when an ad will run. Nor does Henry, who was assigned the review by our reviews editor. It has no affect on our editorial planning. In addition, MacWEEK has run news articles on a number of NT systems over the past half a year, as PC companies have started to target the content-creation space. Let me clear up some points about your more general charges. MacWEEK is a newsweekly for the buyers of graphics systems for Web, digital video, multimedia and print publishing. It's not a general interest book for everything in the Mac market. Now, we're not dismissing the Mac platform by providing coverage of workstations offered into the publishing space -- instead, we're giving information that helps readers decide on the best way to get their jobs done. That solution may mean a Mac and sometimes another platform, like WIndows NT or Unix. MacWEEK readers are interested in other platforms and more than two-thirds of subscribers have PCs and workstations installed on site. I spoke the other day to a QuickTime author the other day-the longtime Mac user was sitting in front of a Power Mac G3, a Windows NT workstation and a Unix box. He said he has to know what's happening with all three platforms to get his jobs done in the quickest way possible and with the best results. My observation over the past year, attending trade shows and talking regularly to owners of prepress, multimedia and Web shops, is that some tasks are increasingly being done by NT and Unix workstations on a network. Some are server side operations, while others are standalone applications that benefit from NT's built-in symmetric multitasking. And finally, our readers need to know how to hook all these platforms together with the best performance. We would be doing them a disservice if we confined ourselves only to the news coming out of Apple. That's why you'll occasionally see stories, reviews and analysis about NT and Unix systems aimed into the content market. I agree with your thought about Photoshop and we are looking at a larger test suite of several applications. But PS is the application for the performance crowd. I have found that content-creation buyers (our readers ) are smart people, who can decide for themselves if the price/performance and compatability issues are worth it. And Henry laid out this proposition very well in the review.

[begin of mine] I work at a high end video/graphics supplier and we sell both Apple and Intergraph, if you ask any PC tech about the Intergraph they will tell you that it is nothing more than a marketing scam and the computer is actually an inferior product compared to other PC companies or to what a person could build for half the price on thier own. [end of mine]

There is a point to marketing and most Mac shops will look at what experiece they will receive from a PC vendor bearing the content flag. Intergraph, Digital or yet another vendor. Or do-it-yourself. But that's the world of business, no?

[begin of mine] I guess I will be reading another Mac Mag from now on. Thanks Henry for opening my eyes to how unethical and biased Macweek really is! I buy Macintosh magazines to find out info on Macs not PC's, I know about NT systems and read magazines dedicated to those systems to find out new info on PCs.I will be sure to advise my Mac customers and relations of the Macweeks tendency to supply unreliable information as well, they obvioulsly wont be able to trust any of Macweeks advertisers either, such as Intergraph. [end of mine]

I will ask our publisher to remove you from our subscription list. The many people on our waiting list will be glad for the opening.

[begin of mine] Please email me when a new editor has taken control of Macweek if they are more honest and ethical maybe I will start reading it again. [end of mine]

Good luck to you and goodbye.
Sincerely,

daviD m., MacWEEK editor "

" Allow me a couple of observations as a Mac user who only jumped aboard the "CyberTrain" 3 years ago. My choice then was a PowerMac 7500/100 based on the fact that I was unable to do PrePress/Digital Art work on a PC.

Prior to purchasing the Mac I talked to numerous corporations both local and national in order to find out what platform was in use throughout the business (PCs) vs. the Art Departments (Macs). I even went so far as to have PC manufacturers I spoke with convince me that I should buy a PC over a Mac - they couldn't - so I bit the $-bullet and got the PowerMac - took out the insurance at a friend's recommendation - and the first year had to have the Logic Board replaced TWICE!! on a $2000 investment not even a year old!!!

I am now fortunate enough to be teaching Multimedia Technology and Development - at a DOS based school with ONE Mac lab - and have been forced to deal with this platform issue head-on. It is a fact of life that I have to accept - my students are forced to work on BOTH platforms despite their or mine or yours OR YOUR READERS' frustrations and preferences.

Convergence is a fact of life we Mac users had better wake up to. I have colleagues who sound a lot like your readers whom I classify as "MaChauvinists" - we who use, prefer and love the Mac have got to acknowledge the fact that if we continue in this Chauvinistic stance we are excluding ourselves from the majority of the job - and soon the creative - markets.

I'm sorry but I don't see the big fuss here - WE have to change - the world/work/and educational environments WILL NOT (Politics here we have NO control over) . I don't care WHAT PLATFORM WORK IS PRODUCED ON - GOOD WORK IS GOOD WORK. I am also extremely excited over the fact that we who teach Adobe (and other) applications can now easily address cross-platform issues thanks to Adobe's realization: if the majority of computers out there are PCs as opposed to Macs do we really expect Adobe to virtually ignore this market???

What do I tell a student who comes to me and tells me they were closed out of a job opportunity because they don't know how to run these applications on a PC and the art department doesn't use Macs? - "Keep the faith - Jobs will lead us to the Promised Land"?

Am I missing something here or is all this much ado about nothing? - give me a break buddy, do you really give a f*** what MacWeek is called - or whether you're getting the most up to date tech info - what's the big deal - I enjoy working on the PC platform, I prefer working on the Mac platform - Vive la "Differance"! "Think Differance"

Regards to u & K

Carmine Anthony Pasquale "

" Well, I think maybe MacWeek and MacWorld have become irrelevant in a world where sites like XLR8YourMac, MacCentral, MacIntouch, MacLedge have become the goto news sources for countless Mac users. I check them everyday. Who needs month old news from a magazine. It's a shame MacWeek is blaming the Mac for their own irrelevance.

I personally stopped even going thru my MacWorld the moment I started checking sites like XLR8YourMac, MacCentral, etc. I still get MacWorld, but I rarely even open it anymore. The computer world, esp. Apple news, is moving too fast and I think print is becoming irrelevant. I don't even read Time or NewsWeek anymore. Why, when CNN, etc. are such good and complete sites.

PS. I did open my recent MacWorld so I could get the life size Powerbook G3 poster. ;-)

I check your site everyday. Keep up the excellent work! How do you find the time?
Nadeem Malhi. "

" SO MAC WEEK IS GONE. HOORAY! I SPENT $125 a year on what was basically an advertiser. Lately its editorial content occupied about 20% of the page count. No loss! It just couldnt keep up with the net and a site like yours. I am perfectly happy with your site, as well as others and now finding myself almost exclusively reading the Mac OS news sites.

I also like MacAddict but I do not like its layout. It seems the layout is made for the "hip-hop" generation and I find it difficult to read as it bounces around on thepage. But it is a cool mag.
Tom Casselman "

"Macweek is no longer, it will now be called EMedia and it will cover the PC world. I never really liked them and thought their hardware reviews were always weak.

thank god we have you!

Mac on !
Best Wishes
Joe Milano
mac evangelist"

" I'd like to respectfully disagree with "Joe" about the demise of MacWeek. I personally looked forward to each and every issue and I am very disheartened to see it go. While it didn't have the good old fashion foaming-at-the-mouth wild-eyed evangelistic bent of, say, MacAddict, of particular value was the clear and concise, almost "USA-today" organization and compartmentalization of subjects (Multimedia, Internet etc.) and decent and up to date advertisements in the back (when those are called for to find good deals!).

While I, as you know, am a die-hard xlr8yourmac fan, you just can't take your web browser to the local Blimpie's sub shop for a lunch-break read, which I've done often. MacWeek will be sorely missed.
Best,
Peter Bethke"

For the record, I will miss MacWeek and hate to see the loss of any Mac-specific publication.