NMR: Quark and IBM's Processor Plans

[MacRumors]

MacEdition updates (http://www.macedition.com/nmr/nmr_20021126.php) with a NMR report which disappointing rumors for Quark users:

that a Mac OS X-native version of XPress may still be writhing in the tarpits of alpha for many months yet, and that Quark is still nurturing its decade-old pipedream of breaking free from Apple technology in favor of a cozy niche in the Windows ecosystem.


This, along with a disturbing account of Quark's CEO's anti-Mac sentiments. This is contrary, however to an interview (http://www.pcpro.co.uk/front_index.php?ip=1&page=%2Fnews%2Fnews_story.php%3Fid%3D34724) with Jürgen Kurz, Quark's director of product management on November 4th, 2002.

On a more positive note, they report that IBM's server plans are pushing PowerPC development towards 6GHz "within the next couple of years" and that this push should trickle down into the future successors to the PowerPC 970.

[arvidvdb]

Hmm, wonder how Adobe feels about this.. ;-)

btw... 6 gHz, does have a ring to it doesn't it...

cheers

[dricci]

Which to vote for!? You can't put a positive and negative in the same topic! ;)

[Thirteenva]

Are we still waiting for quark.....:o (yawn).

Quark is digging its own grave. I use indesign 2 and its great. I couldn't see going back to quark and its dated interface. Graphic designers are quickly migrating to OS X and quark is going to be left behind. Indesign is quickly becoming a more viable alternative.

[ffakr]

Now if Adobe would ease up the Indesign licensing, I'm sure they would get more installation in University labs. Indesign is a royal pain in the arse to deploy if you try to push an image to lab machines (about as bad as Final Cut Pro).

I understand that this is expensive software and Adobe [and Apple] want to protect thier investments... but Indesign is the type of software that people need or they don't. Joe user doesn't need a warez copy of Indesign... It is only really useful to graphic designers...
Let the students swipe copies here and there so that they are 'hooked' when they graduate and begin to move into positions where they have purchasing power. Real firms will likely buy the software (or they can get their pants sued off).

If Adobe would do this... they'd push Quark totally out of the market in half the time (that it is currently taking them to push Quark out of the market).

[Wash!!]

Quark was dead when InDesign 1 came out.

Quark takes 3 years to update to 4.01 come on!!! InDesign 3 its just around the corner and they still standing still.

Come next year around this time Quark is going to be as usefull as door stop.

[copperpipe]

I can't beleive the nerve they have thinking Quark can survive without Apple. Ha! And they are saying that at a time when InDesign 2.0 currently kicks the ***** out of Quark. These guys need to take a pill so they can experience the REAL WORLD, and then they'll wake up and realize they are already dead. Ego's will do it every time.

Long Live InDESIGN!!!

[Mr. Anderson]

Why even bother with mentioning that 6 GHz Power4 is in the works, we haven't even seen a Power4 in the Mac arena yet. This seems to be the way of it though, all this talk about wonderful power we'll have, yet were still dealing with requiring dual processors to try and stay in the game.

Ok, no more ranting....;)

D

[MM2270]

Well folks, if there were EVER a clear sign it's time for XPress users to move on to something better, I'd say this was it! Heck, the man Ebrahimi practically said it himself, but of course, what else COULD he say about InDesign except that it was a "death sentence" as he put it. I mean, Quark's got their collective heads shoved so far up their own asses, it's impossible for them to see the truth- that InDesign blows their crappy Neanderthal ap out of the water!!

And if you ever needed proof that Quark, Inc lives in it's own dreamworld, the thought that they could develop a "niche" in the Windows world is totally laughable. It's also very sad! They've really lost it.
Well, I for one, will not put a sinlge penny more towards any future products from Quark. They've really gone off the deep end! And I say good riddance to them and their glacial upgrade cycles and their 1980ish application.

They're already dead. Now they're beginning to stink up the place. It's time to bury them!

[e-coli]

This is the best news I've ever heard!!!!


I'm finally rid of that God-awful program forever!!
Party at e-coli's house!!!!!
:cool: :D :cool:

oh yeah...shake your booty..get your groove on.
*BeeGees plays in Background*

[chubakka]

Goodluck to Quark ... publishing is dead? Last time I checked the Magazine shop was full of things printed on paper and full of ads... and created on a mac.

Apparently they would be happy if mac users and shops just stuck with OS 9 so they wouldn't have to be bothered with updating thier software.

They're ignoring the users and industry that supports them. For the first time I'm considering InDesign.

Could that CEO be a bigger A55hole? He's even been sucked into the microsoft .net fantasy.

[jayscheuerle]

Don't get me wrong. I've been an Apple user since the II+ and started into OSX with the public beta, but this is not good news. ID2 is a fine program, but many larger publishing houses (as well as ad agencies/design houses on the fence) would find switching to Wintel boxes running Quark a more favorable option than moving over to the ever-evolving OSX. There would actually be much less of a learning curve and once you were in the program designing, you wouldn't be very aware of what OS you were using. On top of that, many of these shops are running older hardware that may struggle with OSX's overhead. I've you're going to buy a new box, not only is the PC cheaper (the short run matters to bean-counters), but your existing peripherals will probably work fine with Windows (but not necessarily with OSX).

Hate Quark all you want, but they're still the standard. Very slow to upgrade, but never underestimate how well the tortise will do in the long run. As a Mac lover, I take this attitude as a personal insult and I hope Quark falls flat on its face, but unfortunately, they're holding quite a bit of power now... - j

[e-coli]

Originally posted by jayscheuerle
Don't get me wrong. I've been an Apple user since the II+ and started into OSX with the public beta, but this is not good news. ID2 is a fine program, but many larger publishing houses (as well as ad agencies/design houses on the fence) would find switching to Wintel boxes running Quark a more favorable option than moving over to the ever-evolving OSX. There would actually be much less of a learning curve and once you were in the program designing, you wouldn't be very aware of what OS you were using. On top of that, many of these shops are running older hardware that may struggle with OSX's overhead. I've you're going to buy a new box, not only is the PC cheaper (the short run matters to bean-counters), but your existing peripherals will probably work fine with Windows (but not necessarily with OSX).

Hate Quark all you want, but they're still the standard. Very slow to upgrade, but never underestimate how well the tortise will do in the long run. As a Mac lover, I take this attitude as a personal insult and I hope Quark falls flat on its face, but unfortunately, they're holding quite a bit of power now... - j

Actually, I work for the largest advertising agency in the world. In January, we're giving quark the axe in place of InDesign and OS X. Everyone is in love with both.

And 95% of the company would rather die three deaths than use Windows. Quark is an irrelevant product.

[jayscheuerle]

Originally posted by e-coli


Actually, I work for the largest advertising agency in the world. In January, we're giving quark the axe in place of InDesign and OS X. Everyone is in love with both.

And 95% of the company would rather die three deaths than use Windows. Quark is an irrelevant product.

You're a lucky exception then. Quark wouldn't be doing this if you weren't.

Quark is irrelevant? Unfortunately, 95% of the world says the same about the Mac. In this hardball game between stubborn knuckleheads, it's us users who are going to be affected most.

[Mr.Hey]

They would never switch to a wintel box, PC's do not have the ability to reproduce color with same accuracy as Apples boxes do, PC's are regarded as a joke with in the printing/publishing companies. The transition would be enormous and counter productive, you would have to retrain your entire staff to get them to the same level of productivity as they were in OS 9..no company that I've ever worked for would ever do this. And many of the multi-million dollar machines only work with OS 9. Its just not the issue of Quark its getting the hardware companies to create new drives for their printers that will work with OS X. And a set of drives for a particular machine cost 15,000 and up (depending on which one were talking about).


If you were truly an old Mac-Head...you would know better than to make such a ridiculous statement.

[Thirteenva]

The designers are gonna pave the way for the print houses. If designers are choosing Indesign(and they are) they're gonna take there work to printers that are willing to take indesign files. So if the print houses don't switch to indesign there gonna lose business.

THe designers will set the trends, not the print houses. If one print house won't take indesign files, another will.

Also i feel the issue is not Mac versus PC. Indesign can be used on both, so a print house move to PC's is not going to force anyone to use QUARK. Designers will still be asking them to accept indesign files.

Indesign is creating waves, and if more people accept change and try indesign, the more this industry can progress. Quark's R&D suck, what was the big upgrade in Q 5, support for building webpages??? Give me a break, I hate using quark for the print work i do, i'd be damned to use it for my web design work(which is what i do most of).

Adobe will continue to improve indesign year after year, while quark will still have the same problems ten years from now. whe they're on version 6.5 :rolleyes:.

We as designers take the first step and start using indesign, then by requesting that our print houses take it, they'll eventually come around, or be left behind, with quark......

[jayscheuerle]

Mr. Hey

I've seen this happen to friends firsthand and I understand your comments in relation to OS9, but the transitional difficulties and productivity loss are going to be just as tough moving from 9 to X as from 9 to XP. At least the app would remain the same. Retraining to learn ID2 would be an even greater loss of productivity.

In the simplest terms, Quark would not be going this route if they weren't happy with how many and how effectively PC users are using their product. Bottom line...

That light should have a speed limit and that the sun is the center of our solar system were once considered ridiculous statements too. Let us hope that time is less kind to me.

Remember... I like OSX and ID2...

[Mr. G4]

Originally posted by jayscheuerle
Don't get me wrong. I've been an Apple user since the II+ and started into OSX with the public beta, but this is not good news. ID2 is a fine program, but many larger publishing houses (as well as ad agencies/design houses on the fence) would find switching to Wintel boxes running Quark a more favorable option than moving over to the ever-evolving OSX. There would actually be much less of a learning curve and once you were in the program designing, you wouldn't be very aware of what OS you were using. On top of that, many of these shops are running older hardware that may struggle with OSX's overhead. I've you're going to buy a new box, not only is the PC cheaper (the short run matters to bean-counters), but your existing peripherals will probably work fine with Windows (but not necessarily with OSX).

Hate Quark all you want, but they're still the standard. Very slow to upgrade, but never underestimate how well the tortise will do in the long run. As a Mac lover, I take this attitude as a personal insult and I hope Quark falls flat on its face, but unfortunately, they're holding quite a bit of power now... - j

What learning curve are you talking about? In Design2 has the same interface as photoshop, furthermore, ID was mimiquing Xpress to attract more xpress users.

ID read Xpress files without any problem. On the other hand when you open Xpress file on a PC from a Mac there is a mess in converting the fonts. Again, how much money to buy new fonts, new programs to run on PCs.

The only reason that the printshop doesn't have ID is that not that many people request them....if more and more people request them, it makes a business sense for them to have ID.

Don't forget you get ID for FREE untill Dec 31, 2002, when you buy a new Mac, you just have to request it.

[jayscheuerle]

Originally posted by Mr. G4

ID read Xpress files without any problem.

Let's just say my experience is not the same. I've often found it easier to start over than to try to fix a layout that ID2 has mangled during the conversion.

[Thirteenva]

Originally posted by jayscheuerle


Let's just say my experience is not the same. I've often found it easier to start over than to try to fix a layout that ID2 has mangled during the conversion.

Yeah that does happen, some project get a little jumbled in the conversion. Maybe that will be improved with ID 3.

[Matthé]

pagemaker?
haahahahahah
oh boy

[GPTurismo]

Originally posted by jayscheuerle


Let's just say my experience is not the same. I've often found it easier to start over than to try to fix a layout that ID2 has mangled during the conversion.

50/50 here. I hate quark because they are the pure example of bad coding and lach of inovationan and drive.

But I can't (really couldn't since I got out of graphics commercially last year) figure out what causes it to mess up :\

[Mr.Hey]

Originally posted by jayscheuerle
the transitional difficulties and productivity loss are going to be just as tough moving from 9 to X as from 9 to XP[/B]

LOL


I'll have to disagree with you and just leave it at that.



p.s.. 6 Ghz.. :) ..I think I'll be staying with
Apple/OS X/IBM...I like the sound of that and the way it just rolls off your tongue.

[scottlee]

I work as a graphic designer/prepress tech for a commercial printer and have switched to OS X and InDesign for a year and they both rock. I used to hold Quark high above all other DTpub apps but not anymore. InDesign is a much more efficient app and in OS X, more reliable. I could go on and on about all the features that I like from ID2.

[mrsebastian]

are you kidding me? indesign is a vastly superior product, but for quark to make comments like "publishing is dead" is plainly suicide!

stick a fork in your quark, 'cause it's done and I'll tell you why. publishing will not die, it's evolving to use our latest and greatest technologies... why do you think id3 will incorporate so many features for electronic publishing? the formats may change from paper to e-paper and the like, but there will always be publishing in one form or another.

so what the hell's quarks business strategy here? if you ask me, they can alienate us mac users all they want, i for one will not touch that dinosaur with a 10-foot pole since i've been using indesign. does quark going to a pc only format make any sense? 90% of the graphics world is on mac, so who will their clientele be? "do it yourselfers" looking to save a couple of bucks and do their own graphics work? kind of reminds me of an absolutely horrible program called publisher (99% of plublisher jobs my company deals with have to be redone). besides, quark is too damn expensive for that group of potential customer. so where does quark go from here? straight in the dumpster and if you have any vested interests in quark, i suggest you unload them faster than the lifeboats off the titanic.

[beatle888]

Originally posted by jayscheuerle
Mr. Hey

I've seen this happen to friends firsthand and I understand your comments in relation to OS9, but the transitional difficulties and productivity loss are going to be just as tough moving from 9 to X as from 9 to XP. At least the app would remain the same. Retraining to learn ID2 would be an even greater loss of productivity.

In the simplest terms, Quark would not be going this route if they weren't happy with how many and how effectively PC users are using their product. Bottom line...

That light should have a speed limit and that the sun is the center of our solar system were once considered ridiculous statements too. Let us hope that time is less kind to me.

Remember... I like OSX and ID2...


ok, i just have to say ad agencies and designers
will not use windows. thats just crazy. these
are creative types and most still dont know
how to take full advantage of quark or the
mac. believe me, i use to manage the studio
at the last ad agency i worked at.
i just used indesign for the first time on my
last project. sure i stumbled around a LITTLE
but i was really comfortable in it. and to be
honest...designers and art directors only need
to be able to manipulate text and place graphics.
the production artists will handle the rest and
any production artist should be able to make
their way around indesign within moments of
opening the application for the first time.

the cost of rebuilding your font database for
one will slow people down from moving to pc's.
fonts are expensive. anyway, i just had to post
in response to yours. i think your wrong.
indesign is just to easy to use. these applications
arent THAT deep. there pretty easy to figure
out. and like i said earlier, the creatives only
need to know how to push graphics and fonts
around...the production artists will do the rest.

[beatle888]

ha ha ha ha ha


good bye quark. dont come back pleeeeaaazzee.

how long have they screwed us on updates
and features? god i hate quark. did they add
key access to the tool pallet yet? im not talking
about cycling through the tools, i know you can
do that. but can you access the tool pallet like
say in photoshop? "V" for the move tool, etc...
ha ha ha quirk sucks.


.

[hvfsl]

Well my Univerity in the Uk has switched totally to adobe and Macromedia graphics and video software. We no longer use Quark for our graphic design courses, so in my eyes Quark is already dead. I did my lastest project on Indesign 2 (Mac OS X)and got a much better mark for it than my Quark work.

[Frobozz]

Originally posted by jayscheuerle
...many larger publishing houses (as well as ad agencies/design houses on the fence) would find switching to Wintel boxes running Quark a more favorable option than moving over to the ever-evolving OSX. There would actually be much less of a learning curve and once you were in the program designing, you wouldn't be very aware of what OS you were using.



You obvoiusly haven't tried this. It's not a simple process. I've worked in a company where they insisted all poeple use a PC. including the designers. It was a horrible choice, obviously. Have you tried to use Quark on a PC and get it to work with your motherbaord, graphics card, and printer? Have you tried to send that to a printer? Not only do the printers seem confused when you give them a PC Quark file, but they look at you and ask how you managed to get THAT far.

We had a bunch of standard Dell boxes and the print designer couldn't get Quark to run for more than 20 minutes at a time. Who knows which part of her system was causing the crash?! It crashed constantly, and she was never able to calibrate her color properly. Sending prints to the (all windows based) network were just as perilous.

Mac people would NEVER chose to enter into the Frankensteinian world of Windows where nothing is standard, everything in unintuitive, and crashes are regular practice.

[e-coli]

Originally posted by jayscheuerle
Don't get me wrong. I've been an Apple user since the II+ and started into OSX with the public beta, but this is not good news. ID2 is a fine program, but many larger publishing houses (as well as ad agencies/design houses on the fence) would find switching to Wintel boxes running Quark a more favorable option than moving over to the ever-evolving OSX. There would actually be much less of a learning curve and once you were in the program designing, you wouldn't be very aware of what OS you were using. On top of that, many of these shops are running older hardware that may struggle with OSX's overhead. I've you're going to buy a new box, not only is the PC cheaper (the short run matters to bean-counters), but your existing peripherals will probably work fine with Windows (but not necessarily with OSX).

Hate Quark all you want, but they're still the standard. Very slow to upgrade, but never underestimate how well the tortise will do in the long run. As a Mac lover, I take this attitude as a personal insult and I hope Quark falls flat on its face, but unfortunately, they're holding quite a bit of power now... - j

We shouldn't be delusional. The trillion dollar advertising and publishing industries aren't going to stop, and then switch platforms when one software company becomes arrogant and short sighted. Especially when said company considers their market to be "dying".

...and ESPECIALLY not when there's a drastically better alternative available that fits right into the workflow.

[cthorp]

I have a small design business working from home. Although I work for myself, my clients include several fortune 500 companies. I have used Quark since 1990.

My latest project is for one of the largest pharmacutical companies in the world, it is also my first project in ID. Right now my biggest hold back is a print driver for my Epson 5000 with Firery RIP. My observations are as follows.

There is almost no learning curve to get up and running. ID 2 allows me to do things within the program that required photoshop and complex alignment.
example: A drop shadow that is half on an image and half in white space.

There have been numerous things that seem to be more elegantly handled in ID2.

Seeing clean eps files is huge! Now I can see how things are going to look on a spread without looking at an 8-bit preview.

I am having the printer use acrobat for final output. I had everything set up in reader spreads. When the printer asked that everything be single pages (it will be perfect bound) I began thinking of the best way to do this. Thankfully I checked and ID 2 allowed me to change the entire doc with one dialouge box.
All that was left was to extend the bleed in the gutter and I was done.

On a down side. Quark feels more fluid when scrolling or panning.

ID 2's picture update could use an "update all" feature. If there is one please let me know.

My conclusion: I plan to ditch Quark ASAP. What I need to do this is a driver for my printer a little nerve and that's about it.

Currently my G4 laptop is total OS X 10.2. I do not run classic at all. My desktop is OS 9 and is hooked to my RIP and scanners. I absloutly love OS 10 and look forward to a complete migration.

Cameron Thorp


cthorp@mac.com

theispot.com/artist/cthorp

[cthorp]

Another note:
Since like many pros I have been using Illustrator for years. In design is so similar to illustrator that anyone with experience it will have no problem in ID. This is why I say there is almost no learning curve.

Cameron

[e-coli]

Originally posted by cthorp

ID 2's picture update could use an "update all" feature. If there is one please let me know.

select the multiple links in the links palette, and chose update links from the palette drop down menu. It works for multple images.

[ennerseed]

Thinksecret has further details of how Indesign will further succeed into designers hearts.

after using Indesign for a couple of years all I can say is: "my precious" - read with Gollum voice

[Awimoway]

...questions about Mac OS X provoked an Ebrahimi tirade of Old Testament proportions: Quark’s Dear Leader told his squirming guests that “the Macintosh platform is shrinking,” and that “publishing is dying.” He suggested that anyone dissatisfied with Quark’s Mac commitment should “switch to something else,”

This is so inflammatory and screwed up that it's hard to believe, and maybe some ID zealot is setting Quark up (an easy target for trashy rumors, I admit).

If it is true, then I think someone needs to check Ebrahimi's dishware for lead and keep him away from open flames and fiddles. I have never used ID, but I think it's safe to say that many designers will jump to it before they jump off a cliff—through Windows.

Think about it—which is more time-consuming and expensive (emotionally as well as monetarily), switching to a different Mac app or throwing out your whole computer for a detestable OS? Thought so. I think a lot of corporate users will understand this better than some of the people who have posted and think that Windows is inevitable in the professional world.


Edit: 1:45p MST—Added a couple thoughts.

[solvs]

I know some smaller places that use all PCs, mostly for the reason someone else mentioned - someone higher up in the company says so. All of the creative people want to use Macs. I know a lot of people who use ID 1.5 or 2, PC and Mac (myself included), but I don't know a lot of people who use Quark on PCs. Actually, I don't think I know any. Most of us didn't even know there was new PC version of Quark until recently.

Do they really think those who go cheap and get PCs are really going to spend more for an outdated version Quark over ID? And why upgrade when a new version is finally available (how many people upgraded last time)? Especially when you can get Adobe Design Collection with everything you need. To semi-quote someone else's Sig. ID isn't perfect, but it looks that way compared to Quark. People are going to take this as a slap in the face (what is he, on crack?) and find some way to make ID work for them. It's much easier to go from Quark and OS 9 to ID and X than to go to Wintels.

How many people just won't upgrade for awhile.

"Print is dead, who needs Macs". This has got to be wrong. Or a bad joke. Steve's gonna be pissed. Free InDesign for everyone. Now if we could only get rid of M$...


On the plus side, 6 GHz looks promising. Performance over numbers, I say. Bring on those IBM 970s.

[patrick0brien]

-All

Moving away from Macs in the printing industry would be amongst the stupidest actions of the century. I really have to wonder what 'chemical assistance' the CEO of Quark has been using.

If facts are still accurate, and due to the base architecture of Intel's chips this should be, Intel, AMD, and by virtue Windows is incompatible and incapable of using the Pantone color system.

It was developed with Apple after all.

Now before someone sticks my head on a pike, let me qualify that extreme wording. Wintel Boxes are capable of thinking in Pantone colors, and simulating them with CMYK (for those not around printing, that's Process color and it consists of Cyan, Magenta, Yellow and blacK). But, if a wintel user wishes to do a print run using Pantone colors, they send it to a press that runs the presses with...

Any guesses?

None?

Aww c'mon guys!

MACS!

This is also, BTW, why Apple is so difficult to kill (by the wintel pundits).

[Monomni]

Sheesh... Definitely time to jump off the Quark train... the tracks ahead go careening off a cliff.

I have been a devoted Mac user for 17 years, but I'm not usually an "early adopter." It took me a while to switch to OS X, but when Jaguar came out, I had it pre-ordered the minute it was available. And even THEN I was putting up with Classic (and its "issues") to use my ONE holdout non-OS X program - Quark.

Well, not anymore folks! I was encouraged by the news that Quark might be OS X in early 2003 - but now, even when Quark does get off its posterior - I'm gonna be long gone!

I agree that Quark is alienating its core user/customer base. Those of us devoted enough to live without significant updates and to shell out for their extortion, um... prices.

Any design house, print shop, or ad agency that is dumb/cheap enough to switch to PC-o-garbage Windoze boxes - they deserve the associated crashes, incompatibilities, and anxiety that goes with it.

'Nuff said.
:D

[Toe]

If Quark were publicly traded, I'd short it.


Then again, they really couldn't be THAT stupid, could they? The publishing industry runs on Quark and Macs. If forced to choose, would they throw all their awesome hardware in the garbage, or would they buy a cheap competitive upgrade to the slick InDesign?

Seems like a no-brainer.

[creativeczar]

I find it hard to believe that designers and agencies would rather spend thousands of dollars (maybe millions for some of the larger ones) on new software for the Windows platform just because they wanted to stick with Quark. This is a perfect opportunity for Adobe to get the attention of the publishing industry in a big way. Now that art directors and designers are seeing Quark's true colors, maybe they will give InDesign a try. It is not that great a leap and the printers who told me they won't "deal" with InDesign have been using my PDFs created in InDesign for two years. Who's zoomin who?

[pilotgi]

I'm really enjoying reading the great posts in this thread. I was a printing press operator for 17 years before I switched professions. The last company I worked for was independently owned and used Macs exclusively in the design dept and I think they used Quark.

I've been out of that business for a while now but the reason my first computer was a Mac was because the graphics guys/gals told me how much better Macs were than pcs. And I'm typing this on my new 800Mhz iBook.

A publishing/design software company who doesn't want to support Apple and OSX?

Strange.

[whatever]

What's this I hear about free InDesign. I bought a new Mac a few months back and I didn't hear about this offer.

[PrettyMan]

I've used Photoshop & Illustrator for years.

I've started with ID two months ago and I think it's simple and productive.

Can it be better ? Sure. But It´s real. Now.

Ciao, Quark.

[meddle]

http://www.apple.com/promo/designfreely/

Check it out at the link above. Print off a coupon fill it out and send in a copy of your purchased and Indesign is "In the Mail."

I think I see a new switch campaign. "I was using my old publishing program, and it like "sad mac bomb" and then my hours of work were gone. Since I switched to OS X and Indesign I've had no problems."

[Malic]

Originally posted by jayscheuerle


You're a lucky exception then. Quark wouldn't be doing this if you weren't.

Quark is irrelevant? Unfortunately, 95% of the world says the same about the Mac. In this hardball game between stubborn knuckleheads, it's us users who are going to be affected most.

Ok, more evidence. I work for a mid-sized mid-western ad agency and InDesign is on the front burner for consideration in 2003.

Quark as a company does not appear to be interested in the wishes of their customer base. Any company that takes that stance needs to be "humbled."

[Marvenp]

Originally posted by jayscheuerle
Don't get me wrong. I've been an Apple user since the II+ and started into OSX with the public beta, but this is not good news. ID2 is a fine program, but many larger publishing houses (as well as ad agencies/design houses on the fence) would find switching to Wintel boxes running Quark a more favorable option than moving over to the ever-evolving OSX. There would actually be much less of a learning curve and once you were in the program designing, you wouldn't be very aware of what OS you were using. On top of that, many of these shops are running older hardware that may struggle with OSX's overhead. I've you're going to buy a new box, not only is the PC cheaper (the short run matters to bean-counters), but your existing peripherals will probably work fine with Windows (but not necessarily with OSX).

Hate Quark all you want, but they're still the standard. Very slow to upgrade, but never underestimate how well the tortise will do in the long run. As a Mac lover, I take this attitude as a personal insult and I hope Quark falls flat on its face, but unfortunately, they're holding quite a bit of power now... - j

Well David Coursey of ZDNet seems to think otherwise. He is recommending that new computer buyers buy a Mac and that Windoze loyalist become at least "adders" if not "switchers". (See link below)
http://www.zdnet.com/anchordesk/stories/story/0,10738,2898453,00.html
I agree that Mac is having it's troubles right now as OS X is still a fairly new operating system but I could NEVER justify that as a reason to use Windoze.

Feature for feature OS X is the most elegant operating system ever developed and developers need to get off thier arses and get with the program. I don't think we can blame Apple for the lack of drivers of third party peripherals. I think companies like Quark will regret their decision as OS X become more mature and more people make the switch. And just wait until features like Rendezvous and Inkwell come full circle. Wow!

People simply underestimate OS X. There are so many features such as Speech recognition and Multi-language support that get overlooked and/or taken for granted. Speech is very powerful. You actually don't have to touch your keyboard for anything (if set up correctly) and it has been a part of the Mac OS for years! And I won't ever get into AppleScript.

Like it or not, OS X simply rocks! And just think it was only a few years ago we were wondering if it was ever going to materialize. OS X was just a rumor then. I think Apple has done an excellent job of bringing OS X from something that was just on our dream list to something that is usable and powerful today!

[MikeH]

I find Quarks' attitude curious and self destructive. I have worked in advertising and design for over fifteen years now (before computers took over from airbrushes and magic markers) and the only thing I'm sure of is that if you don't move with the times you will die. The way Quark is behaving with XPress just suggests unless it gets its act together soon, it will perish. I'm not spouting anti Quark proganda here, although I am unhappy with XPress as it is at the moment, it just seems as though they are cutting their nose off to spite their face.

As for critisising the OS X as a viable platform, that's just foolish, the PC is just not as good in the pre-press environment as a Mac (mainly due too colour matching and font issues) and I should know I've used both extensively - after seeing proofs I frequently have to amend colours on a PC, something I've never needed to do with a Mac (OS 9 or X).

And publishing is dieing? Yeah, sure. One trip to anywhere that sells magazines will tell you otherwise.

Quark need to pull their heads out of their arses/asses and join the 21st century.

[Marvenp]

Originally posted by jayscheuerle
Don't get me wrong. I've been an Apple user since the II+ and started into OSX with the public beta, but this is not good news. ID2 is a fine program, but many larger publishing houses (as well as ad agencies/design houses on the fence) would find switching to Wintel boxes running Quark a more favorable option than moving over to the ever-evolving OSX. There would actually be much less of a learning curve and once you were in the program designing, you wouldn't be very aware of what OS you were using. On top of that, many of these shops are running older hardware that may struggle with OSX's overhead. I've you're going to buy a new box, not only is the PC cheaper (the short run matters to bean-counters), but your existing peripherals will probably work fine with Windows (but not necessarily with OSX).

Hate Quark all you want, but they're still the standard. Very slow to upgrade, but never underestimate how well the tortise will do in the long run. As a Mac lover, I take this attitude as a personal insult and I hope Quark falls flat on its face, but unfortunately, they're holding quite a bit of power now... - j

Oh yeah. I forgot to mention that since I own a design company in Japan I constantly get sent adverts for new stuff. Dell just sent me a pamphlet yesterday with their new savings for the holiday season. Feature for feature comparison to the iMac, Dell was actually more expensive. I use the iMac as an example because most people who talk about cheap Windoze boxes are referring to consumer machines. If you are talking about 2, 3Ghz workhorses for video post-production or 3D Animation, they are every bit as expensive as Mac if not more expensive.

Now before you naysayers try to blast me, remember I said feature for feature. The iMac comes with a 17' LCD and a Superdrive not to mention the iapps. Compare prices and you'll see that I'm right. I'm not talking about Joe computer engineer who can build his own machine for about $1,000 bucks.

[cthorp]

Just wanted to say thanks to all those who responded with input to my question. Have a great holiday!

Thanks,
Cameron

[e-coli]

I decided to go straight to the source, and see if there's any truth to this.

Response From Quark
Here's the straight truth: Quark is not shifting its focus away from
the Mac platform. Our focus remains on helping our customers solve their
business problems. We will continue to support the platforms our customers
want to use. We'll develop software for Mac OS and Windows as our customers
want to use those platforms.

If you cut through the purple prose, you'll see that a handful of comments
have been taken out of context and re-cast in an unflattering manner by an
anonymous writer who was not present at the event during which they were
allegedly spoken.

Let me bring back some of the context. The fact of the matter is that the
publishing industry is hurting. Ad revenues are down globally -- down as
much as 70% in some regions. Look on any newsstand and you'll see that there
are far fewer titles than there were two years ago, and page counts are down
across the spectrum. Major dailies across the nation are closing bureaus and
merging departments. Ad firms are fighting for business while corporations
cut spending and bring work in house. Publishing is in a crisis. There is
only one major software company that I know that has dedicated 100% of its
resources to publishing: Quark. The technologies that we talked about in New
York are designed to help publishers do more with fewer resources without
sacrificing quality.

With respect to Mac OS, our market data indicates that fewer publishers are
purchasing Macs, and more of our Mac-using customers are considering
switching to Windows. That doesn't mean we're any less committed to Mac OS.
Mac users constitute the majority of our customer base. We will continue to
support Mac OS (and Windows) as long as they are the platforms of choice by
our customers.

The Mac OS X version of QuarkXPress is far along in its development cycle,
but there is still a lot more testing to do before we release it. We're
working to bring that release to you as quickly as possible without
sacrificing quality. It will be a high quality application with some
paradigm-shifting new features and consequently represents a significant
development and testing effort that simply takes time.

The anonymous writer points out that Mac OS X Server is not on the agenda
for the version of QPS that uses a Microsoft SQL Server database or for
Quark Digital Media System, which uses an Oracle database. There's an
obvious reason. Neither Microsoft SQL Server nor Oracle runs on Mac OS X.
What they omitted is that we emphatically stated that the clients for both
these publishing systems will run on Mac OS X.

In fact, the relationship between Quark and Apple is closer than it has been
in years, and I think that the industry will be pleasantly surprised by some
of the initiatives that Quark and Apple will bring to the market in the near
future.

Please let me know if you'd like to discuss this further.

Sincerely,

[beatle888]

hmm, so that's straight from the horses mouth?
well, this response sounds a lot better to me.
we'll see but they better be right.

[ibjoshua]

whether it's true or not......

isn't it time the prepress gang drop Quark?

i_b_joshua

[XxflipperxX]

Originally posted by creativeczar
It is not that great a leap and the printers who told me they won't "deal" with InDesign have been using my PDFs created in InDesign for two years. Who's zoomin who?

I only do editing and all layout for three small, b & w [gray scale] tabloids, a weekly, monthly, and quarterly. not a 'bigtime' person.

But i tried ID recently,after loading my working fonts ito suitcase and popping the Suitcase extension into ID and my most recent doc opened in Jaguar/ID without a hitch. Our printer says they don't 'do' adobe. But they take pdf files from quark. i have been sending up straight Quark docs.

Quark 5.0.1 does not really 'run great', as someone said, in "Classic", no way. ( I was getting screen-only colored streaks, vertically, that were the same color as my OS 9 'highlight' color!!!)... It runs better than 4.0.1 in OS 9 though, but not good enough. I'm curious to try sending an Adobe pdf from ID to our printer to see what happens. Unfortunatrely, i am NOT an Illustrator whiz, so the learning curve is steeper than it would be for most. it's spooky, i don't call the shots on who does our printing... keepin' my fingers crossed...

[Foocha]

I have worked with a lot of professional artwork studios, and it has always been my obeservation that they are locked-in to the Mac platform, and that they would not migrate to Windows unless there really was no alternative.

There are 3 reasons for this:

1. Inertia The publishing industry is notoriously slow to embrace change.

2. Hardware investment Since Mac & PC hardware are incompatible, a migration to Windows would represent a significant write off

3. Lack of technical expertise Mac studios lack the technical competance to handle higher maintenance PC hardware (Macs are an integrated solution that tend to look after themselves)

The question is this: is the industry more locked-in to the Mac, or more locked-in to QuarkXpress. Given that an extremely competent alternative is now available from Adobe - a name highly regarded by the publishing industry, I suspect that they're more likely to switch to InDesign on Mac.

Quark should give up blowing off steam, and start working on improving their lame product!

[Mole Man]

Originally posted by beatle888
hmm, so that's straight from the horses mouth?
well, this response sounds a lot better to me.
we'll see but they better be right.

It might sound better, but it doesn't actually deny any of the details of the report - just spins them prettier.

The Quark rep still says Macs are diminishing in importance in the publishing market and that they won't be part of Quark's server strategy. He also tacitly acknowledges that Ebrahimi made the statements quoted in the column.

Aside from prose style, what's substantially different between this statement and the account of Ebrahimi's remarks?

[Sweeny]

If you DO decide to dump Quark and move to InDesign, BE CAREFUL...there is one little detail you probably have not thought of.

Since you no longer need Quark, you'll be tempted to sell it...before you do, READ THE EULA.

I don't know if it's still the case, but I know someone who owns a consignment store for computers and software, and one time they got in Quark to sell, from someone getting out of the business...when the buyer attempted to transfer ownership, Quark's lawyers threatened the buyer, the seller, and the store with a lawsuit, if the sale went through. Apparently, when you buy Quark, you buy it for life!

Just ask before you get into hot water!

[meddle]

Crazy Fred hates the idea of having to recode Quark for OS X. I work with someone that left Quark a little while ago. They went to California to work with Apple on OS X when the got back Fred had them start in again on Windows work. The code was never even integrated.
Quark is killing their US work force and going overseas for programming, Fred is all about the bottom line dollar and thinks he can get more money if everybody moves to using Windows. They don’t care about Mac no matter how their PR department spins it. Quark was supposed to be out at the start of this year, then the end of this year, now next. People get a clue if Xpress may never get released of OS X and if it does expect it to be a pile of crap because the team developing it is being jerk around by Crazy Fred.
Go with a product and a company that has proven they care about their customers. If there are things missing in Indesign then submit lots of feed back. Adobe will listen, it might take a while but you'll get the features before Quark is up and running on OS X.

[Monomni]

Um, anybody else find this letter from Quark totally unconvincing?

"Quark is not shifting its focus away from the Mac platform. We'll develop software for Mac OS and Windows as our customers want to use those platforms."

- That's gotta be one of the top candidates for corporate backpedaling and noncommital.

"The fact of the matter is that the publishing industry is hurting. Publishing is in a crisis."

- Um, hello? The whole freakin' economy has been in the gutter for almost two years. Deal with it.

"With respect to Mac OS, our market data indicates that fewer publishers are purchasing Macs, and more of our Mac-using customers are considering switching to Windows."

- Like I said before, those "alleged traitors" dumb/cheap enough to switch to Windoze deserve what they get - agony.

"The Mac OS X version of QuarkXPress is far along in its development cycle, but there is still a lot more testing to do before we release it."

- I didn't hear a release date... did you?

"In fact, the relationship between Quark and Apple is closer than it has been in years..."

- And what does Apple think of the relationship?

Anybody else find it interesting that there's no name on this letter?
:confused:

InDesign is IN!
:D

[e-coli]

Originally posted by Monomni
Um, anybody else find this "letter" from Quark totally unconvincing?

Anybody else find it interesting that there's no name/indication of authenticity on this letter?


And why would I waste all that time typing up a fake letter. To impress people?

Sheesh. :rolleyes:

Here, if you need your "hard proof". :rolleyes:

Sincerely,

Glen Turpin
Communications Manager
Quark, Inc.

edited out[/email]

but he's wrong about one thing...Oracle does run on OS X.

[Monomni]

e-coli,

Please don't misinterpret my Quark-bashing - I didn't mean to imply that you were disseminating fictitious correspondence - just smacking Quark...
:D

But now that we have the putz's name and phone numbers... who's up for some prank calling?
:D

[lmalave]

Originally posted by e-coli


And why would I waste all that time typing up a fake letter. To impress people?

Sheesh. :rolleyes:

Here, if you need your "hard proof". :rolleyes:



but he's wrong about one thing...Oracle does run on OS X.

Yes, but the official version is not out yet, only the Developers Release:

http://www.oracle.com/start/apple/intro.html?src=1439096&Act=5

[e-coli]

Originally posted by Monomni
e-coli,

Please don't misinterpret my Quark-bashing - I didn't mean to imply that you were disseminating fictitious correspondence - just smacking Quark...
:D

But now that we have the putz's name and phone numbers... who's up for some prank calling?
:D

Please don't, as my real name was attached to me original inquiry to him. He sent me his contact info in good faith.

Thanks,

[Marvenp]

Originally posted by Foocha
I have worked with a lot of professional artwork studios, and it has always been my obeservation that they are locked-in to the Mac platform, and that they would not migrate to Windows unless there really was no alternative.

There are 3 reasons for this:

1. Inertia The publishing industry is notoriously slow to embrace change.

2. Hardware investment Since Mac & PC hardware are incompatible, a migration to Windows would represent a significant write off

3. Lack of technical expertise Mac studios lack the technical competance to handle higher maintenance PC hardware (Macs are an integrated solution that tend to look after themselves)

The question is this: is the industry more locked-in to the Mac, or more locked-in to QuarkXpress. Given that an extremely competent alternative is now available from Adobe - a name highly regarded by the publishing industry, I suspect that they're more likely to switch to InDesign on Mac.


Quark should give up blowing off steam, and start working on improving their lame product!

Mac studios lack the technical competence? Exsqueeze me? What did you smoke before you typed that? How about Windoze developers lack the technical competence to develop a system that works properly. To quote from Apple's website December of 1999 "We may not get everything right but at least we knew the millennium was going to end". Can anyone say Y2K? Hell Windoze engineers lack the technical expertise to fix that garbage they call a system but if there was anyone who know (and love) their computers I'd say it was Mac techies.

[Foocha]

Of course it's a good thing that Macs are easier to administrate than PCs. My point is that I'm not sure most design studios would find it as easy to administrate a Windows network.

After all, Apple's whole marketing strategy is based on the concept of "it's easier on a Mac," right?

[Wry Cooter]

Originally posted by Thirteenva
The designers are gonna pave the way for the print houses. If designers are choosing Indesign(and they are) they're gonna take there work to printers that are willing to take indesign files.

There is tons of work done every day with Quark, that is not particularly design heavy, and not only are these customers Quarks bread and butter (Perhaps more so than a graphic designer), but they have editorial staffs that want to merge their PCs into the work flow. These customers are called Newspapers. Their writing staff is using PCs. Often the drones in the classified department are using PCs. Many of the editors are using PCs, and a lot of the past editorial content is in a database that is running in Windows. The compositing, illustration, and display advertising may swear by their Macs, but they are a small piece of the pie, as the daily business is run.

Since Quark can't seem to get anything ready for OS X, they are probably going to concentrate their efforts toward their PC customers. They do not have to fight InDesign users on the PC side, merely Pagemaker users, which they can easily overthrow.

[Foocha]

Most of the newspapers using PCs migrated to NT during Apple's long, dark tea-time of the soul in the late nineties when most people in the industry believed that the Mac platform had come to the end of the line.

Those companies who were first to jump ship incurred significant costs in the process - typically substantially more than they had anticipated. Since the costs of switching back would be equally prohibative, I suspect they'll now stick with what they've got. However, newspapers that still use the Mac (like The Guardian in London, for example) are planning to stick with it and getting ready to migrate to OS X.

[basquino]

Originally posted by jayscheuerle
Hate Quark all you want, but they're still the standard. Very slow to upgrade, but never underestimate how well the tortise will do in the long run. As a Mac lover, I take this attitude as a personal insult and I hope Quark falls flat on its face, but unfortunately, they're holding quite a bit of power now... - j

Finally...a voice of reason that seems to know what he's talking about. XPress users are all over the publishing world, regardless of platform, though college campus influence has many of them edging over to the Mac side of the fence. Mac fans, designers or not, need Quark, even if you love your ID2. If FCP had no Avid, Premiere or (fill in the blank), then lack of competition breeds things like Micro$oft, no?

And, I think we all can agree that we don't want that, now do we?

[shadowfax]

Originally posted by Macrumors
MacEdition updates (http://www.macedition.com/nmr/nmr_20021126.php) with a NMR report which disappointing rumors for Quark users:



This, along with a disturbing account of Quark's CEO's anti-Mac sentiments. This is contrary, however to an interview (http://www.pcpro.co.uk/front_index.php?ip=1&page=%2Fnews%2Fnews_story.php%3Fid%3D34724) with Jürgen Kurz, Quark's director of product management on November 4th, 2002.

On a more positive note, they report that IBM's server plans are pushing PowerPC development towards 6GHz "within the next couple of years" and that this push should trickle down into the future successors to the PowerPC 970.

am i the only one who looked at the topic and thought quantum computer research with NMR and quarks (one of the smallest particles in the universe)?

[bcsimac]

Look Guys! The truth is both Apple and Quark keep doing things that are screwy and piss people off. Crappy upgrade programs. Making unsightly comments that gets out and pisses people off. Apple for one keeps infuriating retailers and service providers with their ever changing programs and rules. Not always offering price protection for products just made obsolete by Macworld announcements or so forth. Not allowing returns of defective equipment that crowd up the warehouses. They make service providers upset by constantly changing warranty reinbursement coverage and by not providing reimbursement on parts that come DOA. I can't name everything in this board because it would take too long. Let us not forget the .Mac anger that came out.

Quark's CEO makes dumb comments and the company comes off with a really bad attitude all the time. I remember when I first went to the Quark both about reseller information and support....and etc because I wanted to get some sales training on how to sell Quark and maybe get a copy of Quark to become more familiar with it. The guy said to me, "We at Quark don't offer resellers salesman training and etc because we are Quark and we are professional. You wouldn't know anything about our customers." "We don't really do business with your kind." Boy that really pissed me off! I wanted to say to him, "Hey, Jerkoff, I am trying to get better about understanding your product so I can sell more copies of it. I already sell like 20 copies a week, and I think I could do better if I got a bit more support." I worked in Boston where there was a lot of graphics shops and etc. I knew my customers were asking me more about Quark Xpress; but since all the information I had was from Apple, I really couldn't help them much. I felt really belittled and Quark came off as snobbish. Well guess what Quark? I don't push your product anymore......I push Adobe Indesign.....at least Adobe provides trials, seminars, a vendor rep, information, and pays a little attention to the retail sales people. What do you do?.......oh let's see piss off the people who made you a profitable business. Make a rear of yourself and throw stupid tantrums. Oh, and you piss of the very same people who could help you get more product out.....real smart Quark!


Just my 2cents on this subject

[shadowfax]

Originally posted by bcsimac
Look Guys! The truth is both Apple and Quark keep doing things that are screwy and piss people off. Crappy upgrade programs. Making unsightly comments that gets out and pisses people off. Apple for one keeps infuriating retailers and service providers with their ever changing programs and rules. Not always offering price protection for products just made obsolete by Macworld announcements or so forth. Not allowing returns of defective equipment that crowd up the warehouses. They make service providers upset by constantly changing warranty reinbursement coverage and by not providing reimbursement on parts that come DOA. I can't name everything in this board because it would take too long. Let us not forget the .Mac anger that came out.

Quark's CEO makes dumb comments and the company comes off with a really bad attitude all the time. I remember when I first went to the Quark both about reseller information and support....and etc because I wanted to get some sales training on how to sell Quark and maybe get a copy of Quark to become more familiar with it. The guy said to me, "We at Quark don't offer resellers salesman training and etc because we are Quark and we are professional. You wouldn't know anything about our customers." "We don't really do business with your kind." Boy that really pissed me off! I wanted to say to him, "Hey, Jerkoff, I am trying to get better about understanding your product so I can sell more copies of it. I already sell like 20 copies a week, and I think I could do better if I got a bit more support." I worked in Boston where there was a lot of graphics shops and etc. I knew my customers were asking me more about Quark Xpress; but since all the information I had was from Apple, I really couldn't help them much. I felt really belittled and Quark came off as snobbish. Well guess what Quark? I don't push your product anymore......I push Adobe Indesign.....at least Adobe provides trials, seminars, a vendor rep, information, and pays a little attention to the retail sales people. What do you do?.......oh let's see piss off the people who made you a profitable business. Make a rear of yourself and throw stupid tantrums. Oh, and you piss of the very same people who could help you get more product out.....real smart Quark!


Just my 2cents on this subject


I am OK with you comparing apple and quark, as long as you look at what they actually have produced, and see that, hey, apple does things completely differently... i mean, hey, no company is perfect. and apple certainly more than likely has that snobbish thing going, at least a little. but apple gets things done. people have criticized OS X a lot, and i have to admit they released it rather too soon, but, wow. people who criticize apple for OS X are idiots. i had been waiting for microsoft to change things for years. and surprise, they never really did. with XP they finally got rid of the DOS base, but nothing significantly changed, other than that now i could leave my ugly, yet resource hogging GUI on for weeks without a restart. everyone has criticized MS for not making meaningful change. now here's apple. they have new ideas, and they innovate. and they bring it right to you. sure, you live through some of their bugs, but hey, you always live through bugs. that's a lot of code. OS X is now internationally recognized as one of the best OSes on the block, by many who use it (myself included) as THE best. you criticized Apple's coming out with new hardware. they really seem to me to come out with stuff fairly regular, and certainly usually with some level of advance warning to people who sell their stuff. i can't imagine that anyone would find a problem with their updating of stuff. that's horrible. updating is a part of product life. everyone knows that. with a company like apple, they keep a single product as the best in its class for much longer than PCs, where they come out with the latest crap every few weeks. sure, there you know that the stuff you buy is devaluing. you just expect it because it happens so regularly, so publicly.

anyways, i don't feel like defending apple anymore. with quark, you have a company that is more snobbish (by far) than apple, and one that is incompetent to boot. they don't come up with new stuff. they don't update software, most significantly. this is just unforgivable for a company like that. they don't have a version out for the very best operating system in the world. and they act snobbish about it--they don't think OS X is that special, just kind of an immature little fluke not worth writing for.

there are little comparisons, but i don't think you should be making them without qualifying that APPLE IS STILL NOTHING LIKE QUARK when it comes down to the most important stuff (customer satisfaction and innovation being foremost among those things in my mind).

to apply this: i have heard people defend dictatorships like Hitler's Mussolini's, the USSR, N. Korea, and so on, by saying, "hey, the US has done some really horrible things too." Oh, gee, that's great. so the constitution, the general welfare of the people, all those great things about america. shoot. ask anyone who's been under political persecution in any of those countries, hey, you wanna live in america? i don't think they'll say, no, i prefer to live over here in daily fear of my life, where any day i could be purged... no, i really like the single party state so much better.

hah, right. i've known several people from the czech republic and belarus, they don't say crap like that.

of course the US has problems. i'd be the first to tell you that. i'm not a hotheaded nationalist. but that doesn't make it comparable to regimes that actively kill millions of [it's own] people! same line of reasoning going on here.

[nighthawk]

I used to work for a desktop publishing Service Provider, and now I am working for a medium sized printing company. In both places, we have owned copies of Quark for the PC. And in the entire time that I have been at the Service Provider (5 years) only 5% of the PC jobs were using Quark. The majority of PC designers that worked with us used Pagemaker or CorelDraw instead. At the printer that I am now working at, there has not been a SINGLE job for Quark on the PC.

In my experience, there are three reasons why designers use PCs:

1. A printing shop decided to get into design, and went with the "cheapest" option.

2. A design student started a home business and choose a PC because "that is what I always used before."

3. A design firm was primarly a web-design firm, and their clients asked them to expand their services to include print design.

In the graphics industry, the only three sub-industries that have traditionally NOT USED macs were the Signage industry (vinyl lettering), silkscreen (t-shirts, manufacturing), and web design ("anybody can do it."). For the first two, this was only because the tools were only available for PC at the time. In fact, this is where CorelDraw (a small nich design program) got its group of loyal followers. For web-design, it grew so much because of the need for corporate and business web sites. In many ways we (the graphic design industry) can be thankful for the web designers that started on the PC because it has allowed Adobe to grow and literally take-over in a niche that Corel was unable to satisfy at the time.

This said, the first two reasons (listed above) why designers are not using Macs to design is really ignorance. The third reason, (web designers) is purely economics... and the web design companies are able to support the PC hardware to make it a practical business with regards to design.

Cross-Platform Compatibility:
The cross-platform file formats of BOTH InDesign and Quark have only one problem when switching from one platform to the other... the fonts. Once Opentype is the standard, this is not going to be a problem. This will mean that a designer can design on the PC in either Quark or InDesign, and the printer will have the ability to print using the Mac OSX (or vice versa).

Cost of Quark/InDesign:
I believe that just because of the cost, that InDesign is a more attractive solution. You can buy the design collection for $999 which includes all of the programs that a designer would need. However, a full version of Quark would cost $799 plus the need to purchase Photoshop ($599) and Illustrator ($399). In addition, the upgrade prices for Quark range between $299 to $399 whereas InDesign upgrades are only $149.

[yzedf]

About 12 months ago I was interviewing for several different sales jobs. One was for a Harley motorcycle magazine (the one that introduced the Spider-Man bike). Their entire office was running PC's (Gateways of all things) except for the graphic artist/layout guy. He had a G4 with the jumbo CRT display that Apple used to sell. It was strange to see this setup, and I asked him about it. His response was along the lines of "I need OS 9 and Quark to do my job easily. I hate it, OS X will be so much better in most respects, but Quark has not seen the light..." Now, this was a year ago, and he was lamenting no Quark on OS X. He is stuck using whatever the printing companies can accept, which is usally only one format.

I think that Quark has screwed Apple out of a lot of newer harware sales, just to prove that they can.

What are the chances of Apple creating their own product, selling it for $150, and using open file formats? Would something like that be a viable solution?

[nighthawk]

I don't see Quark's situation as being vindictive toward Apple. What I see is that Quark did not accurately gauge what the users wanted, and now they are suffering the consequences.

When the offical OSX 10.0 came out, Quark had a press release stating that their market research has determined that Quark users are not planning on switching to OSX for another year and a half. Nearly two years have passed since that announcement, and they still do not have OSX native software. Instead of developing immediately for OSX, the Quark software design team decided that their version 5 (which was in development at the time of this announcement) would only support OS9. They choose to have no consideration for the future... now they are doing the same thing in a sense. They are writing their OSX version so that it is OSX ONLY -- FROM THE GROUND UP!!!

Adobe, on the other hand, took the opposite approach knowing that their best interest lay in developing OSX native software ASAP.

It was a matter of priorities.

[shadowfax]

Originally posted by nighthawk
I don't see Quark's situation as being vindictive toward Apple. What I see is that Quark did not accurately gauge what the users wanted, and now they are suffering the consequences.

I think you're right, i don't think they hate apple, but i think they grossly underestimated it, and that makes me mad.


They are writing their OSX version so that it is OSX ONLY -- FROM THE GROUND UP!!!

I'll believe it when i see it, lol. but that would probably be a really cool program. it just makes me so edgy to read the quotes by managers of the company and so on about how they have no faith in OS X; i think they have done it just because they don't want to admit they were asses not to make OS X compatibility when they should have.

[Wry Cooter]

Originally posted by yzedf


What are the chances of Apple creating their own product, selling it for $150, and using open file formats? Would something like that be a viable solution?

What makes Quark the must have it is, (for people using running tons of paper daily through a press) is the reliance on the plug in architecture for work flow, and the RIPs for high end imagesetting or direct to press. Apple could assign 20 coders to this task just to get Quark back in the ballpark, it still might not do them a bit of good... it is the third party plug ins, that might massage a relational database into a phone book for example, that need the upgrading.

Also, isn't Quark privately held? I think you might be seeing some Quark executives wish to sell out and retire... they have been at it for nearly 20 years.