GrannySmith_G5 said:
How so? Every old timer I know uses Quark for page layout. Have been for over a decade. A ton of printers still prefer getting quark files, this I can assure you of. As far as it being an ugly turd...it is, it's hideous. Indesign being "nicer and more fun" is simply an opinion. just kidding..
You are right I have absolutely no clue what I'm talking about. What I meant to say is that quark is the industry standard program for page layout and is clearly the best most reliable software in the field for layout and prepress.
At work I pray everyday that every file I pull off our FTP is a Quark file. If the file happens to be an InDesign file, I'll export every page as an eps and import them into quark. I like it that much. Plus, naturally the rip for our Inca Spyder handles quark files so much better that it's a no brainer.
Well, in that case I'll leave the decision on repro to you (somebody who by their own words and less than a year ago was: '...running samples in the blood lab at their local hospital all day long.')
...and I'll listen to other experienced print designers on the suitability for their workflow of any piece of particular software.
If you know anything of my posting history, I'm no great lover of Quark not have I been particularly impressed with certain aspects of InDesign but reasons for using a particular layout program often go far beyond features, particularly for larger studios. It's easier for a small setup to retrain and transition.
Personally speaking, we're giving Quark one last shot with Xpress 7 while simultaneously getting some external training with InDesign. Every time I consider what is involved, I pull out our production schedule -- for a dose of cold realism -- which has about 150 jobs on it and covers the next 3-4 months or so.