Quark 8 - Online Design

Discussion in 'Design and Graphics' started by Paul FM, Dec 20, 2010.

  1. macrumors newbie

    Dec 20, 2010
    <newbie on here>

    is Quark8 sufficient for creating webpages?, I've just downloaded a trial copy with a view to purchasing the student edition, worked with HTML code in the past but not completely savvy in it, was hopefully looking to combine my print design skills with some basic web design in a single application.

    look forward to the feedback...

  2. macrumors 68000


    Aug 4, 2008
    quark is primarily used for print design. if you're looking for web design, then look into something like dreamweaver.
  3. Moderator emeritus

    Jul 4, 2004

    Yes, but simple ones. It's not an ideal tool at all. There is no one-stop single application that covers all bases. Personally, after using QuarkXpress professionally from 3.3 to v8, I'd be reluctant to spend any more money on it; it's a dying app on the desktop at least, its marketshare dwindling.
  4. macrumors member

    Mar 1, 2009
    i'm surprised it's still going. who's using it that's not using indesign?
  5. macrumors regular

    Sep 11, 2007
    I still use it and I know many others who still use it as well. I think that you would be surprised at how many companies use it. Quark has its strong points as well as its weaknesses. To say that no one uses it is almost as ridiculous as those nutty Windows users who say "What? You use a Mac? No one uses a Mac". I am always amazed at how much I still hear this from people.

    Sure Quark has had it's share of mistakes (not releasing an OS X version for a long time was a terrible move on the company's part) and the fact that Adobe bundles InDesign in the Creative Suite makes it difficult for Quark. Despite those things, I think that Quark still makes a competitive program that for some people suits their needs better than InDesign. There isn't that much difference between the two programs as far as features go. The main difference is the user interface (and for some, InDesign has an advantage as it is similar to all the other Adobe programs). On the other hand, I know a lot of users who prefer Quark's U.I. to Adobe's because they feel it is simpler and cleaner.

    As far as using Quark for web design, I wouldn't recommend it nor would I recommend InDesign either. It always irritates me when Adobe and Quark list the new features of InDesign and Xpress and they add more web publishing "features". Most professional web designers use Dreamweaver or code by hand (or use a similar program like Coda or Flash). To me it just adds more bloat to the program when they should be adding more useful features for print (as print production is their main market). I know that the original idea was to be able to use one program to create print ads and also web pages as well, but that dream died along time ago but unfortunately, no one told Quark and Adobe.
  6. macrumors 6502

    Jul 9, 2008
    I wouldn't bother with Quark, Paul if your an individual purchaser.

    Like Blue Velvet I've been using Quark since I think V2 (parent and child text boxes - agh!) Then V3 - (Fantastic!) I stopped at v7... I suspect v8 is probably a good version and they seem to be making a huge effort to be 'responsive' and good value but in the past they were awful after about 1995.

    Quark could be a business studies masterclass in how to loose a market monopoly...

    Quark 3 - Great...
    Quark 4 - OK (but 7-8 years!!!)
    Quark 5 - Agh! What was that version all about? Oh, I see I need a PC to run it... You're no longer going to support the Mac platform...
    Quark 6 - OK, so you've changed your mind but... Agh! Bugs, bugs and more bugs!
    Quark 7 - Finally an improvement on 4 - only took another 10 years... and um... unfortunately we've all got fed up, lost the will to live, and now pretty much switch to InDesign...

    And as for Quark passport - Agh! Agh! Agh! Again! Don't even go there!

    ... and breathe...
  7. macrumors regular

    Oct 20, 2010
    Is anyone really still using QuarkXPress??! I don't know anyone who uses it anymore, and certainly NOT for Web design.. sheesh!! :rolleyes:
  8. Moderator emeritus

    Jul 4, 2004

    Disagree. The feature set in InDesign vastly outstrips that in Quark, even version 8. Its typographic handling is far superior, although I'm not fussed on the way it handles master pages, nor am I entirely comfortable with some of the changes in CS5; when I group a set of frames, I'd like them to act as a group, thanks. However, Quark's interface has been specifically designed for layout, always found it cleaner than InDesign's palette-heavy Illustrator-like approach.

    Basically put and this is just from personal experience, I'm a faster designer with QuarkXpress, but I'm a more creative designer with InDesign. Have only kept a copy of Quark 8 on my Mac for opening legacy files and on the off-chance someone asks me to work on something using it.
  9. macrumors 65816


    Oct 17, 2007
    London / U.K.
    I'm of almost the exact opinion as Blue Velvet. I always considered QuarkXpress more of a print layout tool and InDesign more of a designers' tool. However in all of my jobs except the position I'm currently in I've had to use Quark due to legacy files. So nice to finally be able to use my tool of choice.

    Regardless, back to Paul FM's question: Quark introduced their 'Interactive designer' features in version 7 and have apparently enhanced them with version 8, but the fact still remains that it's print layout software and although it can be used to generate HTML web pages and flash sites, it doesn't mean it should. But it can if you need it to.

    My opinion: You'd be far better brushing up on some HTML and CSS skills and learning how to do it properly than investing time learning how to use Quark for such business. The time taken is probably not too much different.


    Let us know what path you take :)

Share This Page