QuarkXPress 8 - Will You Upgrade or Switch?
Tuesday June 10, 2008
Shipping in July, Quark is offering a free upgrade to QuarkXPress 8 to those who purchased QuarkXPress 7 in May 2008 and to those who purchase version 7 by August 1, 2008.
While several publications are detailing the new tools, new features, and new look of QuarkXPress 8, some are wondering if it's too little too late. Neil McAllister, writing for PCWorld, says "long-suffering print designers I've met have expressed an almost pathological hatred of Quark over some of its past business practices, such as charging for tech support." But what about you Web designers. Will the new built-in Flash and print/web creation features get your attention?
If you don't want to plow through the overviews, check out this simple 2-page list of QuarkXPress 8 new and enhanced features to see if what they are offering is enough to make you want to upgrade or switch. What do you think? Tell us..
Comments
I swithced a long time ago from Quark to InDesign. Adobe’s creative suite makes it easy to go back and forth from layout to image editing or illustration editing. Also as far as web design I think Macromedia (now part of Adobe) has always had the majority share of uses with Dreamweaver and Flash etc… So Adobe provides the total Design/Web solution in one package.
Every seminar and designer I have come across, even the die hard Quark user’s have switched. In San Diego and many other cities, a designer is considered not up to par if they are still using Quark. It is my thought that Quark will be out of business with-in the next few years. The non-user friendly support, cost and old technology are what has hurt Quark.
Quark is dead. With the development of very good Quark to InDesign converters helping us move old files to InDesign, we will not be using Quark again. Quark wasted years doing nothing to their product. There has been more innovation in the last 5 years with InDesign than what has changed with Quark over the last 10.
As a college, we needed to decide whether we would continue teaching Quark or offer training in InDesign. We made the decision to go with InDesign per advice of our graphic design advisory board, members of the graphics industry. As stated in previous posts, InDesign works seamlessly with PhotoShop, Illustrator, and Acrobat. At this point we have discontinued instruction with Quark.
While I agree with all the negative comments about Quark Xpress and I too am moving the design needs of my company toward InDesign I am not looking forward to the day when one design program has total market share. InDesign is a better program overall but I have not found support at Adobe to be better than Quark including inaccurate information from level 1 and 2 support staff. While I will continue to migrate to InDesign I do so with a cautious eye. I do not look forward to the creation of another Microsoft…
I don’t know if QuarkXPress is dying or not, but I do know that the plural of die hard Quark user ain’t die hard Quark user’s. Lol.
I agree - Quark is dead. Long live Adobe. I never thought this day would come because I was a devout Quark apostle. But no more. You can only take so much before you start another relationship, ya know? So I am in love with InDesign. It has almost made me forgive Adobe for Illustrator Version 7. But not quite.
I was a die-hard QuarkXPress user for about 15 years, because I felt that there simply wasn’t another page layout program that came close to doing what QuarkXPress could do. That’s not true anymore! InDesign is definitely the way to go and I’m delighted to say that I won’t be paying for another over-priced, over-hyped QuarkXPress upgrade ever again.
How do people feel about FrameMaker vs InDesign??
Why people would change to Indesign is a mystery to me. Quark, though it is more simple in regards to functionality, is superior because of it basic approach. I used it for years to produce a newspaper, 16 pages every week, so I am somewhat of an authority. I would say that anyone who disagrees does not do a lot of page layout and I am prepared to put my reputation against anyone who presents valid arguments.
i want to learn more xsl:fo, as long as adobe’s pdf is #1 file viewer, adobes hold’s trump card
I switched to InDesign several years ago, and I have to admit that Quark XPress IS a more useable, more function layout program. Whereas InDesign feels much like a souped-up version of the old Pagemaker, XPress was designed more from a layout perspective. Things just work correctly in XPress, without juggling hundreds of tiny palettes.
True, there was a learning curve to get used to InDesign, but there is no way I will ever be able to produce layouts as quickly with InDesign as I did with XPress, because the process — regardless of InDesign’s power — is not steamlined in a production sense.
So why did I switch? Same old thing … InDesign pretty much came free with my Photoshop and Illustrator, and I couldn’t justify spending several hundred for a new copy of XPress. Further, it seemed that much of the industry was in my boat, and they didn’t have confidence that Quark would update XPress in a timely way.
Ultimately, the decision became a compatibility one … I just wanted to stay compatible with the future of the industry.
Is Quark dead? They’re on the way, that’s for certain, but this is not a done deal by any means. Quark now has a decision to make. They can continue with their business as they have, essentially treating it as a ‘twilight’ product, milking all the last profit out of it before pulling the plug. OR, they take the bull by the horns and update XPress in a way that blows InDesign out of the water.
The fact is, there are still hundreds of thousands of people that know XPress like the back of their hand. If Quark could come out with a new, remarkable product, they could retake the industry.
Now, what would this product do?
- Integrate seamlessly with Photoshop and Illustrator
- Database publishing, built-in. Not an XTension, but a ground-up database publishing system for doing newspapers, phone books, novels, etc..
- Variable data publishing. Not an XTension, but a dramatically simple way to do variable data, and not just plugging in a name here and there, but able to alter color, text, illustrations, photos, and components as decided by each entry.
- Large-Format support. Not just setting the pasteboard to some huge amount, but actually modifying the internal precision to move the decimal point over by ten so that the program can easily manage files up to and past billboard size. It should be able to do one of those Old Navy wallscapes that are 150 feet by 300 feet. I know, because I used to make those as an employee, and doing it with Photoshop was a pure nightmare and very time-consuming.
- Front-end and back-end web management. If I change an XPress page for my book or magazine, then XPress should be intelligent enough to correlate my web files right on the server.
- Drop-down web design - this means that print designs are nearly always different from web-designs. There should be a way of linking text and image boxes, and menus on the web files with the print component. So a change in a sidebar of my brochure, should be able to link up to a change in the ‘about’ page of my website, etc..
I could come up with many more.
But the point is that XPress needs to do something dramatic like this if they want to stay in the game. Right now, I don’t think Adobe will do anything like this because they now own the market and they don’t need to do anything like this.
I know it will be a huge investment for Quark. But they need to have enough confidence in their understanding of publishing to be able to say “hey, we can do this better than anyone else.”
Of course, being the manufacture of Galaxy Gauge desktop publishing rulers and color charts, I would like for them to integrate my colors and measurements into their software, but that might be asking for too much!
Well, i’m a little bit far from the nest of all of these comments, here, at the end of the world but i’m agree with all the users who switched from Quark to In Desing. I work in an editorial design company and we are making several magazines and books everyday. Several years ago we were working with PageMaker and Quark. I think Quark was an idol of the 90’s, more over when it was a competitor for PageMaker. In that scene obviously Quark was the winner. But now the stage is totally different. The main reason to switch was the easy-to-use tools, the way to increase the productivity adding good design tools and the interface between any other graphic software. Obviously Quark or even Corel is out of order.
Now all of my designers are In Design users. It was a choice made thinking about productivity, by be friendly, and also by the prices. There is no point of comparison.
Peter- I have used both Quark and InDesign. Have you used In Design? I didn’t want to like it I know Quark like the back of my hand and I have to say In Design has a lot of the quality of function as Quark, it just is laid out differently than Quark. I do miss some of the Quark functions as image fitting but all in all I enjoy working with InDesign.
I have Switched to InDesign long time ago, for me Quark from the first was not that user friendly software, InDesign CS3 offers a great layout design platform for a graphic designer and it is very friendly to use, and you could produce layouts more faster and effective than XPress, the tools and palettes and shortcuts are easier to use and the integration between photoshop, illustrator is just great, faster editing of graphics and images.
Simply XPress are not up to the challenge with the Adobe Corporation, the Adobe platform is much more powerfull and effective than before, and anyway if by any means the XPress released a version more powerfull than InDesign they still have to edit images in Adobe, so why bother, just get the whole pack of Adobe Platform and you have the ultimate design tool.
Nevertheless, XPress lit the way to layout design, but always remember only the strong survive, and they really need to be stronger than the adobe platform to shine in the market again.
Peter- It is a mystery to you because maybe you had not worked with InDesign, you should try that, and whatever arguments you have to defend the XPress I can lay lots more for InDesign, just look at the numbers pal, ” “, market numbers and users. Come to the light and stay away from the darkening age of XPress, Long Live Adobe InDesign.
Ring, Ring, Quark is Dead!
As an artist is was nothing but a brick wall anyways. InDesign just makes sense!!! If you use it you know that first hand. I do not know any good artist that is still using Quark.
I have used both Quark and InDesign. I have to say In Design has a lot of the quality of function as Quark, but all in all I enjoy working with InDesign.
I teach in a multimedia program with an enrollment of 300 students and 110 computers. I’ve decided we won’t upgrade to the next version of Quark. The features in Quark 8 feel like they’re playing catch up with InDesign. Adobe continues to innovate and move forward. They just held a trainers’ summit, and I remain impressed with their direction.
I’m a high school graphic arts teacher. Until two years ago, I taught both Quark and InDesign. I quit teaching Quark because of the technical problems. Every time a student would plug in their mini drive, Quark would recognize this as a new hardware installation and I’d have to reinstall Quark. The technical support I received was the worst ever. I couldn’t understand the support persons, they were all in India. I gave up and now teach ONLY Creative Suite. Quark, in my opinion, is a lost cause and will soon be gone. It’s their own fault. Most folks use a mini drive, and don’t want to reinstall their software once a day. I would never go back and try Quark again. They lost me with their poor tech support.
I have firsthand knowledge that huge corporate in-house design departments switched to InDesign originally because it was cheaper. Period. I do not understand why an industry of Microsoft-bashing Apple-using designers are now enabling Adobe to become a monopoly. First Corel, then Macromedia. How motivated to continue to innovate will Adobe be when they have no competition left?
Dear Karen, I am very sure they will be motivated and will continue their success, Adobe are simply the new era in media and design, or else they will become like Quark, if ever they failed in keeping up the pace, but that would be pretty far to happen.
There is no question that Quark fanned the flames and pushed many people away over the past few years. In fact, no one knows that better than Quark. But today Quark is a new company, with new people, all striving to again be the software designers loved.
No - Quark isn’t dead. With the new QuarkXPress 8 (http://8.Quark.com) shipping at the end of July and a new dynamic Enterprise platform (http://dynamicpublishing.Quark.com) for designing across different media platforms, Quark is coming back and providing arguable reasons to embrace the software again.
I encourage people to learn more about the new release before discounting Quark as a viable player in the design industry. X-Ray Magazine has an intense look at QuarkXPress 8 http://www.xraymag.com/articles/xray_v5n6_quarkxpress_8_01.html
Watch for the release of a free 60 day Test Drive at the end of the month as well.
Dear Jim,
Well I underatnd that you are trying to defend Quark, I Used to work on that software, but I checked out the new release and checked out the new features, and they to me they are not new in Adobe, already Adobe got them a way back before Quark, plus the current platform of Quark is very “COPYLIKE” Adobe, the guys at Quark simply are copying from Adobe Platform and applying on theirs, well that sound for me like a company who is trying to pace up, no more no less, and Yes “QUARK IS DEAD”, whether anyone likes it or not, Recently upon the latest reviews and statistics done (Which I can Provide the Database for, for this forum) 78% of the majority of Graphic Designers and Artists have switched to Adobe Systems, Simply Adobe is smooth platform that works seemingly among its softwares, so why bother and Get a software that sometimes have bugs, as always it had, and may not work properly with the Adobe Platform.
Last But Not Least, YES QUARK IS DEAD, at least within the market I am working in, where Quark was number one, now all Media Houses and Print Houses have thrown it OUT OF THE WINDOW!!!
I say there are a lot of efficiency fools out there! Those who look at few design features vs. a host of true production techs such as:
Multiple Layouts in one project
Synchronized content
Composition zone so several people can work on the same document
Job Jackets
Print Tools
Then you have the killer design advantages of XPress:
Color-base transparency so I can have one character of text with one transparency and another with a different opacity…in one box (Adobe lamely tried to copy this in CS3)
Quark 8 hanging puntionation and Design grids so far blow InDesign wimpy stuff away not to mention BETTER PSD and Illustrator functionality.
For 95% of things you don’t need the 1800 dollar Suite or to ever upgrade again!
InDesign is PageMaker all over again and is yesterday’s news!
I have to laugh at people equating InDesign with PageMaker. Loads of PM users refused to switch for years because InDesign was too akin (and deliberately so) to Quark — a look and feel they really didn’t like!
PageMaker is still alive and well out there and in daily use by many, many thousands of people. Every month, I sell a few more copies of a “legacy” book, “Publication Production Using PageMaker”.
I understand Quark is building some integration into Xpress. That’s the way to go. On OS X, I now do all my DTP in what is now a legacy software, Canvas X (v.11 is still alive on Windows), which is full integrated — DTP, vector graphics, raster graphics, web, presentation … all on the familiar page on a pasteboard interface.
Brilliant — but sadly, ACDSystems, which bought it from the orginators, Deneba, are strangling it.
Cheers, Geoff
Geoffrey Heard, Business Writer & Publisher
“Type & Layout: Are you communicating or just making pretty shapes”, the secrets of how type can help you to sell or influence, and “How to Start and Produce a magazine or Newsletter”, now at the new low price of $29.95. See these books and more at http://www.worsleypress.com or Amazon.
Well Quark lost me after v 4.11 when it failed to migrate to Mac OSX. Not just did that but insulted most Mac users in the process.
InDesign was cheaper and worked better with the Mac. In retrospect I realised that Quark XPress was responsible for most of the incessant bombing of pre Mac OSX systems.
Having said that InDesign is really clumsy for straight forward production. It is good for designers (most of the ones I know) who fiddle, but for straight layout and fast, efficient combining of text and pictures Quark was hard to beat. As was Quark’s well thought out and laid out, positional keyboard shortcuts.
Ignoring the mess of palettes and highly forgettable keyboard shortcuts that don’t quite match those of Photoshop and Illustrator, InDesign is a real stuff up with master pages. I can not fathom why Adobe thinks that is the way they should (but mostly don’t) work.
Quark is a very easy program to learn - much more so than InDesign, however it is a pain to have to reinsall the software over and over again. Tool bars disappear, colour menu disappears and it crashes on a regular basis and when you call for tech support, you can’t understand the person on the other end of the line. They are in India and quite frankly waiting for a whole day for them to get back to you is not good. I have had many problems when saving to an external drive and to my main drive and each solution that they tried to give me never worked. They need to have people who have better technical knowledge and can speak English clearly otherwise they shouldn’t bother to launch any more new versions. I continue to use Quark on some of my publications which were done in this program but am now using InDesign on the new work. It is harder to learn but far more dependable.
Dear Tracy, (#24)
I have to reply to you and sadly I would like to inform you that you lack a lot of experience in InDesign, well Tracy before judging you have to be a real expert, the functions that you called them killer design advantages in XPress are already in InDesign since CS2!! Just to note that you can change the opacity and color of one character in one text and another with other color and opacity, but simply you dont know how to do it, so please spare us the lack of experience in those comments.
Thank You.
I am a Quark Service Plus Customer and with the experience I just recently had with Quark Support just reminded me why I switched to indesign, Quark Supports contacts me and asks me would I like Quark 8, and I said yes being a Service Plus member (I bought version 7 & 8 in 2005) I though that I should at least get it on the day they released it…. As of this post September 3 of 2008 I have still not received it!
Mind you Quark 8 came out July 31, but no one would know that, because when I inquired when the product was to be released they couldn’t tell me. I guess it was a big secret.
I feel Cheated by this company and treated unfair. I had promised to pre-buy two upgrades and was never contacted about when they were to be released and had to call to receive one of them version 7(they never would have sent it, they told me I had to call to get it sent!) I still feel that I should have had it the day it was released! Come on I paid for it almost three years Ago!!!
I have really had it with Quark–I bought the version 7 with a promise to upgrade to 8 free (not really, it cost 19.95 for shipping and handling). I got an email that said it’s on it’s way–not really, the link to a download was supposedly on it’s way. Never got that link, never got the actual box, the link in my records for my form is dead, apparently the email address they have been using for me (I get a ton of junk from them that I specifically said I did not want) is not a real address when I go to check on my quark store account. Called them today and got someone I cannot understand and who cannont understand me. Thanks for nothing, Quark.
I cannot believe you are still in business.
I have not used Quark since the place I TEACH GRAPHICS at made the decision to switch to InDesign. I have only bought it in recent years to make myself aware of the features in case I need to teach it again. Fat chance. I would advise students not to bother anymore.
And I make sure to tell my students about the TERRIBLE, almost CRIMINAL customer support and business practices of this company.
If you think that reasonable customer support and NOT LYING on your business communications is important, then DON”T bother to buy this product.
Still use Quark - under duress. 20 years of heritage Quark files in a busy office with no time to learn new software. Looked at Quark 8. It has so few improvements that they should give it away to all Quark users just for being loyal. I would go onto the Quark forums to complain, but they banned me because they didn’t like my user name (QuarkReallySucks). I used the Free trail of Quark 8 for a week now, and it keeps crashing when I ask it to Quit. Oh joy, Quirk Express all over again.
Dam, i thought this debate ended 2 years ago. Anyone claiming Quark is the better application either, has never used InDesign or works for Quark.
As a longtime graphic arts pro, with prepress, ad agency and classroom experience, the difference between the 2 applications, and the integration experience with the creative suite is night and day.
quark isn’t only dead, it was cremated years ago…
Upgrade? That’s just to waste your money. Quark is so dead. Actually Quark developping its 8.0 is also waste its money, who will buy it?
I used to use Quark nearly every day when i was doing print layouts (CD layouts, Obi-strips, some magazine ads, etc.), but I took about a 3-4 year hiatus for college and to do freelance web development.
I recently went back to work for my former employer again–still doing web development but also the odd print layout. So I was pretty surprised when I found that Quark had been removed from all the workstations. My boss, who’s a businessman not a designer, told me that nobody uses Quark anymore, and that all the printers want layouts in .ai files.
I’ve yet to try In Design, but so far Illustrator has been fine for creating simple layouts (using templates supplied by printers). However, with all the comments I’ve read here, I’m very eager to try out In Design on the next layout project I get.
As a side note, I hope Adobe will integrate GPGPU acceleration across their entire design suite. hardware-accelerated real-time anti-aliasing of vector objects and bicubic resampling of raster images would be a huge improvement over QuarkXpress.
People will continue to buy & use Quark until it goes under. Why? Because there are years of old Quark files sitting around in many design/publication departments. The people working there any longer than a few years aren’t willing to learn new programs, such as InDesign. (sadly) I wish mine would upgrade, but no one else here knows ID. We’ll likely end up getting Quark 8…
InDesign is a big rip off of Quark with a very stupid name too. Without Quark, Adobe and InDesign wouldn’t exist. Adobe is now playing catch up. When I use InDesign it feels like Illustrator bloatware but like really old software. I can’t work with one layout per project and I need to share my work with others at the same time (multiple workers on same document). If you say these features are in InDesign then please tell me how to access them.
I cannot disagree that Quark have, over the years, treated their customers shabbily but the main reason for the drift from Quark to InDesign was the price. Initially upgrades to Creative Suite were very attractive but as time goes by we’re seeing a different story. In the UK just now the upgrade from CS3 to CS4 (Design Standard) is about £450.00 on average. That’s $652! God help us if Quark does go down the tubes. Speaking as a compositor/bureau operator (you know the ones who sort all the errors that you graphic designers hand over!) some of the rubbish coming from graphic designers since the advent of InDesign is truly awful. Pages of body text with outlines and drop shadows – I’m sure you’ve seen it. I’m fairly proficient in InDesign now having had it since its inception but I reckon I can create a piece of work in Quark in about one third to half the time it takes in InDesign. It’s always handy to have ID though as sometimes Quark’s print engine leaves much to be desired. This is an aspect of the application that could well do with overhauling – it would certainly make my life a lot easier!
I run a small book design company and we have to be pretty proficient in both apps, we all enjoy using InDesign more than Quark despite (as many others do) knowing Quark like the back of our hands. Not because of a functionality issue but because Quark regularly crashes, and does odd things, for this it must have been cursed all around the World. We could do all we needed with Quark 4, and I must admit I sometimes fire it up on my legacy G4 - for a hit of that old familiar feeling. Some of the suggestions above are excellent I’d love to find that Quark 8 could do them all, but it won’t. And most of all, give it a decent backsave so we can upgrade slowly.
I’m looking for an objective opinion on whether switching to InDesign makes sense for me.
I’ve read thru all the comments posted, but am still left wondering.
Here’s my situation. I’m currently doing a tremendous amount of page layout design that doesn’t require special effects. Just picture placement, text following style sheets, basically wicked fast desktop publishing.
I frequently need to pickup copy from old Quark documents going back to Quark 4.0. Most of my layouts are produced in Quark 6.5.
I use InDesign for cover comps and ads, but not for the design of the body of my projects. I like the way InDesign prints a comp better and the quality of the way it displays images in comps on screen. However, I find the production tools frustrating in terms of doing things fast. I use many keyboard short cuts in Quark to format text and pictures and find all the many palettes in InDesign slow down my production (and I clearly need a bigger screen to display them all). My question is….
Does it make sense for someone who is not doing a lot of fancy design, but instead a lot of production to switch to InDesign?
Does production get faster the longer one uses InDesign?
Are there hidden keyboard commands I haven’t found yet that would speed up my production? For example: an equivalent to Quarks command shift F, tab 5 times, enter field, for applying space after paragraphs. Or is Quark just more streamlined for producing tons and tons of pages?
Also, is there an easy way to convert the years of old Quark documents that I draw styled text from into InDesign?
AND…
Has InDesign fixed the problem of it being difficult to open newer version with the older ones. We have both InDesign CS2 and InDesign CS3 in the office and the CS2 version won’t directly open the CS3 files. Has this been fixed in the CS4 version…is it downward compatible?
Lastly, I’ve heard that Quarks Customer Service stinks, but honestly, having used Quark since 1990, I’ve never had to call customer service, because I don’t have any problems with the software. Worst that has ever happened to me is a handful of “end of file” errors where I lost a file and had to revert to backup. I guess I’m just lucky. I find InDesign crashes more on me, especially when importing large photos into a layout, but I don’t know if that’s an embedding issue or if I just need a system upgrade.
Your advice would be greatly appreciated since I have layouts to get back to and no time to research this.
Thanks!
Check this link out for comments on Quark 8: http://www.unlimited.com/cu/education/GB/news/documents/QXP8-ObjectionsandResponses.doc
Well, you guys who just love InDesign vs. Quark… you just go ahead with your bad selves. As for me… I have used Quark since 89. Love it and will never leave it. I have InDesign also and cringe when I have to use it due to files being sent from other design sources. I tolerate it at best. Quark is not dying. Don’t kid yourself. They have been saying that for years… and it hasn’t happened yet. I find ID to be overly busy and too complex on the simple things. If I wanted to design in Illustrator, I would…. For me it isn’t much different. So, there… A dyed in the wool Quark lover has spoken… and to the person who commented that there was only one user out there…. trust me that tain’t true!
Adobe was brilliant bundling InDesign with their other graphic arts programs. Who wants to pay an additional fee for Quark when InDesign works flawlessly with other Adobe products?
It used to be an issue of what program you created your art in because printers wanted the Quark files. Now all that matters is the high res PDF… and InDesign creates them very simply.
I made the switch 2 years ago to InDesign.
Goodbye to Quark and their poor tech support.
I started out 18 years ago with PageMaker then switched to Quark. About 5 years ago I started the switch from Quark to InDesign. For 12 years I worked in an office with 2 designers that supported 60 people in 5 departments. The terms “busy” and “fast” would be understatements. I created booklets, annual reports, brochures and dozens of forms, posters and flyers. The workflow with both products is very good.
I believe Quark diehards should ask themselves honestly if the difficulty in using InDesign is the learning curve. If it is, consider that shortcut keys can be altered in CS3 to allow the user to adjust shortcuts to those you are more familiar with.
Those “small end-of-file” errors is what drove me to InDesign. That instability hits hard the day before you go to press and have been through 4 sets of edits from 3 departments in the last day. It becomes to easy to miss an edit here or there when recreating a file…
Also consider that Quark customer service is extraordinarily bad. They will blame your system, your fonts, anything rather than admitting that Quark is just unstable. It does not matter that no other software is affected by the so-called system problems. I do not need to rebuild or reinstall fonts when I have a deadline. I need software that works. I believe that when a company can be founded on software designed to recover corrupt Quark documents (Markzware) and Quark knows about the problem but won’t bother to fix the issue themselves, you gotta ask yourself if their software is worth the tag.
Admittedly, I have to work fast and with people who make many changes to format on 200+ page documents so I rely heavily on styles. Is this what took Quark down for me so many times? I don’t know. Of course if a program claims to handle styles it shouldn’t. I do know that most of the designers I talk with and those whom I have trained do not use styles in the way or to the extent that I do. I also know that I rarely crash with InDesign regardless of how many styles I use. Also, when I crash, I can recover my document unlike Quark.
In it’s favor InDesign is a far better WISIWIG program. It is also very flexible where design is concerned. I can often do everything in InDesign without switching to Photoshop or Illustrator. In otherwords, creativity doesn’t take a break while you handle necessary technical stuff.
On the matter of InDesign copying Quark? Tracy you seem to have no historical reference here… InDesign (and yes Quark) take more from PageMaker than anything else. Kind of like Windows borrows heavily from Mac visually (That’s a different arfument. I can say that ’cause I started out on Windows before moving to Mac.) I own both and use both now. Current incarnations of InDesign borrow from and work nearly seamlessly with Photoshop and Illustrator.
I keep both programs on hand. My preference is InDesign. People don’t make yourselves dinosaurs. InDesign will become the industry standard.
Peter Rosengren #9
16 pages a week - an authority?
I used Quark for 14 years and now have used inDesign for 8 years.
Quark crashed most macs and was a basic paste board and v. limited. I used to skip to FreeHand to get certain things done.
Quarks first mistake was that they thought they could hold back the migration to OSX and that the new OS could not move forward until they were good and ready…big mistake. It took them about 2 years to get that together.
InDesign is fluid, customisable and intuitive.
Look at the Transform palette against Quark’s. No comparison. And no monopoly worries. Photoshop has been a monopoly for years and never abused the position like Quark Muppets.
Well, thanks everyone for your advice. I’ve begun teaching myself InDesign even though my company is still officially using Quark. I’ve found that InDesign has many “cool” features that Quark 6.5 does not. Of course, I don’t know what Quark 8 has. Still most of these cool things I’ll never use in my daily work flow, but I’ll sleep better at night knowing they are there. LOL
Seriously, though. Isn’t it in all of our best interests to know both packages, so we, as designer, are more marketable no matter where we go? And in this economy… who knows what that might mean. Do you have to like just Merlot or Cabernet? Why not have both?
I’m enjoying learning InDesign and comfortable enough with the program that I won’t be upset if we switch, but I probably won’t buy it for home. I’ll just keep Quark there and procrastinate as long as possible regarding making additional software purchases. I DO find it annoying that Adobe upgrades there programs every year. Who has the money to stay on the bleeding edge? I don’t. Hopefully they will keep downward compatiblility possible so we don’t all become slaves to the annual upgrade costs.
Another note on all the “cool” things InDesign does… use them in moderation lest your design work become gastly!! Just cos it’s cool and it’s there, doesn’t mean you should use it, unless you can use it well. I think you’ve probably all “seen” what I’m talking about.
Again, thanks for the feedback.
Cheers!
If Quark dies better be prepared to pay whatever Adobe demands for their software.
Here in Canada CS4 is over $2,000 now.
I’m not an InDesign basher but the program really needs to simplified somewhat. I have used both programs and let me tell you that I can go up against any Indesign user with Quark and produce the same publication much faster and get it to print flawlessly. I have never had a printer complain about my files ever.
I’ve been an award winning graphic designer and pre-press expert for 20 years. I know pre-press and the MAC like the back of my hand. When all is said and done printers just want PDF files. Since there are soo many new so-called new designers using Indesign more problems arise for the printers. I’ve seen this hundreds of times)1,000’s upon 1,000’s of designers have no idea how to create files that can print properly. And since the inception of Indesign it has become rampant.
Most of the designers I know, know Quark and InDesign but prefer to use Quark.
I’m not saying that Quark never had any problems ie: Version 5 & 6 (I never used them)
I have used Quark 4.11 extensively for years producing a bi-monthly 400 pg International Auto magazine along with other major publications with no problems what so ever.
I’v used Quark 7 for the last 2 years with absolutely no problems. And I intend to upgrade to Quark 8. I had training on Indesign CS3 and the expert on Quark And InDesign still prefers to use Quark for larger publications.
I’m not bashing Adobe - Love their programs.
And I still use inDesign for certain projects. But, I prefer to use Quark for the majority of my work and I don’t intend to stop.
In Christ
Quark is dead, more layoffs in Denver this week, this is after a round in January,closing of the entire European office and employees being asked to take a week unpaid furlough. The final nail in the coffin is just a matter of months away it seems. Trust me, I know, I was there.
I am a fan of both Quark and InDesign, but I have to honestly say that I prefer working with Quark. I work as a Graphic Designer here in Nashville and the company I was hired into asked if I worked better with either program, I told them both are used equally but if I had a preference I would ask for Quark. I find page layouts to be so much easier and with the printers I am using (Konica Minolta Bizhub 6500 and 1050), the booklet maker features eliminate the troubles of making different layouts such as publisher spreads and whatnot. I can just set up each page, link the texts and convert to a 300dpi PDF and voilá… I have a book.
Though InDesign has many more bells and whistles, to me it doesn’t make it a better page layout program. Sure you can illustrate with some of the tools… but if you are creative enough you can do illustrations with Quark as well… heh heh, I love using programs for things other than what they are intended for. Sure, it isn’t Vector art, but heck… it is still cool to do.
I am a fan and user of Quark, always will be.
InDesign is great, but to me it is just another tool… useful at times but not my favorite.
:-)