Quark and Mac OS X... Only

[Sayer]

Re: Quark Letter

I like the part where it says "OS X only runs on a G4 computer." I guess I should get Sculley and Mulder to look at my wife's iMac Rev B which is running Mac OS X 10.1.5 right now.

Gotta love clueless marketing people who get an offhand comment from a part-time Mac developer and turns it into fundamental laws of the universe.

"See we just CANT develop for OS X because it only runs on G4 computers! It's not our fault!"

 

[crassusad44]

Re: Letter from Quark

Originally posted by nemo
But probably
will not run 10.1 because it is a bad OS. Also Watch out for InDesign. Call
your printer and ask them if they can handle level three PostScript files.
Chances are they can't and if you send them something in InDesign, it will
come back looking nothing like you wanted it

10.1 a bad OS??? Yes, printing sucked, but bad? No. Windows is bad. Mac OS X 10.1 is not. And Indesign not handeling PS level 3. Adobe invented Postscript!!! How about Quark supporting PDF without the need of extentions and Distiller, for once!!!!

Ethereby delaying the
release of QuarkXPress 5.0, which many customers were very anxious to get.

They waited five bloody years, who can blame them...

Mac OS X is not widely adopted yet

4 million is nothing........

OS X will only run
on a G4 or newer computer.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

We'll ship a Mac OS X
native version of QuarkXPress when we're confident that you'll be able to
use it productively and reliably in your workflow.

So, 2007 then???


If this guy works for Quark, he must be an idiot... Well.... On second thought, maybe he does work for Quark....

 

[DavidFDM]

For me Quark for X is the last piece of the "upgrade to X" puzzle. I am dependent on Quark for my livelihood because the bulk of my clients use it nearly exclusively. I hope this upgrade will be relatively pain-free, unlike QXP 4.0. Unfortunately, Quark has a poor track record with initial releases of new versions and their customer support has been abysmal. Hopefully, they have learned some lessons and this upgrade will go smoothly.

 

[os4]

Re: Old news

Originally posted by Wash!!
Since I got InDesing my printers had no problem using it the image setters works fine and there is something in the letter that they don't say about InDesign is that you can print to a PS level 2 with no problems.

And for them to say that OS 10.x is a bad OS just sound to me like a lame scuse for their lack of support for the crative community. Most designer I deal with and printers can handel InDesign.

Wash

Wash, I think you have picked up on several points in that supposed "letter" that just don't add up. Personally, I don't believe that that is a real letter. The grammar alone is egregious. And the reference to OSX being a bad OS is just silly.

 

[Foocha]

Yeah, that letter does not seem to add up. It seems unlikely that Quark would describe 10.1 as a "bad OS" simple because of a lack of drivers. Any corporate comms person would be much more likely to say "we took the view that 10.1 did not meet the needs of the majority of our customers, and so we decided to focus our efforts on the development of an OS 9 product at that time..."

If 10.1 was a bad OS, then OS 9 was hardly an OS at all!

 

[nemo]

The grammar is bad, the comments are very off-the-cuff and don't hold water against the facts, and the letter is extremely unprofessional. I could hardly believe it when I first read it.

Quark had contacted our deparment offering us coupons to use toward the purchase of Quark 5.0 and our Senior Designer shot back a message telling them that we won't upgrade until Xpress runs in OSX and we were even considering switching to InDesign. This was the response we received from Quark.

I have no interest in manufacturing fake letters that make Quark look bad. The letter, as embarrassing as it is, is the real thing.

nemo

 

[moki]

Originally posted by Computer_Phreak
So its going to be written in cocoa?
Is that what they are saying?

That would improve performance and stability over carbon, correct me if I am wrong.

You're wrong... unless you consider iPhoto and iChat to be paragons of speed and stability, of course...

There is no inherent advantage in either Carbon or Cocoa in terms of speed/stability. None. Zero. Zip. Nadda. They are merely two different APIs that let programmers accomplish the same thing.

You should care if your applications under OS X are Cocoa as much as you cared that your applications under Mac OS 9 were PowerPlant apps.

 

[yorran]

Dead weight !

I think the focus shouldn't be on the cost for upgrading : it has always costed money. Who ever said it would not ??
But Just consider the price for XPress by itself, and the price for the Adobe Design Collection pack.
I have switched to Adobe some time ago, I don't have XPress anymore on my machine, and it's been some time I haven't launched Classic. I work everyday on desktop publishing, internet and multimedia products.
The question is : what price, and for what, are you ready to pay ?

I don't have _any_ serious problem with my configuration, and I work really faster... except when I wait InDesign to decode an XPress document from another agency.
It's been a time when XPress was the only reference for desktop publishing, but by now one should remember the way they treat their customers -how much will the next XPress upgrade cost ??-.
As to me the choice is clear : I don't need XPress on my machine, should it be Cocoa native.