Quark's Response

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
46,727
8,945
This email was sent to reader inquiries by Quark's Communications Manager in response to MacEdition's recent story on Quark and OS X.


"Simply put, 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 MediaSystem, 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 would like to discuss this further.

Glen Turpin
Communications Manager, Quark, Inc.

<hr>
<font size=1>Submitted by BadAndy and rwarner1956</font>
 

meddle

macrumors newbie
Jul 18, 2002
7
0
BS!

If they care then were is the the APP? Microsoft isn't this slow. First post?
 

schalliol

macrumors regular
May 7, 2002
178
43
Carmel, IN
No software, of course switch

Could it be that people are switching to Windows because they don't have the Mac software? :rolleyes: Perhaps shipping their software on X will stop those customers' moves.
 

bluecell

macrumors member
Jul 9, 2002
78
0
cleveland:oh
Hmmm... sounds like back-peddling. Oracle supports MacOS X, in fact Apple was at OracleWorld. Quark has already lost a great deal of customers to InDesign anyway.
 

idkew

macrumors 68020
maybe quark customers are switching to windows because they prefer second rate software- quarXpress and windows.

indesign is much better than quark, and once it has a few years to mature ever more (v3 or v4) quark will be nearly out of business anyway.
 

wymer100

macrumors member
Apr 16, 2002
53
0
Maybe its because I'm not in the business, but I thought that most publishers use macs because they perfer macs. I figure that the "switchers" that Quark is talking about are people disgrunted with lack of powermac updates and dropping support for OS9. Do they really think switching to Wintel is really going to make things easier? Anyway, I thought Oracle 9 was on its way. I thought I read that MS is working on .Net for mac, as well. What will be their excuse after those come out for the mac?
 

jeffhalmos

macrumors newbie
Nov 27, 2002
19
18
Got the very same reply from Glen last night, with some personal mods. However, in defense of Quark (did I just say that out loud?), the publishing industry is terrible, and will get worse. Apple did apparently not release quality drivers for OSX until Jag, so Quark would have just ended up releasing another PR disaster as their 4.0 caused. Quark HAS to work out of the gate, or forget it. And InDesign is not a better app than XPress. Not even close. It's far slower and very clunky and unrefined. Has ANYONE found their rhythm with this thing yet? So while Adobe does a three month update cycle to their bloatware to keep us hooked, Quark does not work this way. It really shouldn't be considered in the same space as Illustrator or Photoshop. XPress is far more powerful and essential. We just have to learn to accept XPress as a unique product, and Quark has to learn to meet us half way. Does this sound like I only like XPress? Far from it. I too am pissed that I still have to use OS9 in emulation. But reality is reality. No use in slamming and flaming for the sake of it.
 

mangoman

macrumors 6502a
Nov 27, 2002
898
10
Third Floor
Blah Blah Blah

Oh... Where to start? First, Jeff, ma boy: You're way off about InDesign, buddy. Way. It's not perfect (what is?), but as a guy who's used both since the beginnings, InDesign is stepping up to the throne.

And, um, Mr. Suchandsuch from Quark? Save your corporate babble for those weird a** die hards that still have to put up with Quark's rotten attitude towards its customers. Our shop just went full blown InDesign this year and we're not turning back. Trust me.

Adios, Quark. Down you go. (sound of toilet flushing.)

:D
 

jeffhalmos

macrumors newbie
Nov 27, 2002
19
18
When to start?

I was waiting for a huge thrashing when you laced in with "Oh where to start" but all we got was a "InDesign is better dude" instead of a detailed synopsis. Hit me friend. tell me why! I'm open to discussion.
 

Computer_Phreak

macrumors 6502
Jul 15, 2002
375
0
ive not used either quark or indesign... but one advantage that Adobe has is that all of their applications are supported in OS X and they all work well together.
 

Kid Red

macrumors 65816
Dec 14, 2001
1,379
87
More of their clients switching to windows? Ah, don't know many publisjers that use windows or would ever think about using windows. I'd like to see some facts about that as that's a rather bold broad statement. Screw Quark, I hope Adobe hears about the "switching to ID would be suicide" comment, maybe they'll get publishers the features they need to completely finish off Quark. It's only a matter of time.
 

fatalerror101

macrumors newbie
Oct 8, 2002
29
0
San Jose
Stinky

well isn't this just a lot of B&!! S#^& jeez. I think quark should release what they have done thus far at MacWorld SF. Then reslease a free set of upgrades for it. And whoever wrote this article, maybe there is a less percentige of mac's purchased because thier is a big market slow down in the press industry. ???

I'll be happy with my Indesign2



PowerBook G4 1GHZ
 

mangoman

macrumors 6502a
Nov 27, 2002
898
10
Third Floor
Jeff:

Your inquiry about proof says to me you're on the right track. Good man.

Proof: I've used InDesign since version 1, which IMHO was a real piece of crap. More buggy than Amish country (it's a midwest thang...). But with InD2 in full swing, I gave up Quark for good. Since then, I've sent over 500 pages of material to several different printers, using several of InD's bells and whistles--including transparency--and I haven't had an unsuccessful rip yet. Does that mean some of the PrePress gods didn't grumble? Nope. But I deal with the high end print shops in my city, and they've all come around to welcoming the InD files. Adobe's gettin' the bugs out. Finally.

More importantly, why does Quark suck/InD rule? With InD (and remember I've used Quark for many years), I don't have to bust out the manual to figure things out. Key commands are intuitive, as is the GUI in general. NOT perfect, but much better organized than Quirk. Customer support is good. I've used it several times--Adobe has demonstrated an upbeat 'Hey, what can we help ya with' attitude every time. Furthermore, I can SEE my EPS files beautifully! And the big draw for me, ,a typography FREAK, is that InD's really ON IT when it comes to creating beautiful documents in the department of type. Tools that I don't have to pay extra for, and type tools that do more for my type, with elegance and ease.

OK. That's my QUICK list. I could rant about my consistently rotten experiences with Quark customer service, my constant beef about their archaic, clunky GUI, etc. Maybe later. I've got a turkey to prepare for now.

I do hope you get the opp' to really dig around in InD. My boss, a DEVOUT (really) Quark user of almost ten years, took a dare from me, used InD for ONE day. We outfitted all of our workstations with InDesign the following week. Done. Never upgrading to Quark again.

My final thought to the Lost Ones at Quark: Go pound sand up your a**. You suck.

'Night all. Tomorrow I'll give thanks for lots of wonderful things. Like InDesign.

Happy T-Day.
 

mangoman

macrumors 6502a
Nov 27, 2002
898
10
Third Floor
Originally posted by Computer_Phreak
ive not used either quark or indesign... but one advantage that Adobe has is that all of their applications are supported in OS X and they all work well together.
Oh yeah, and what he said, too. (And thanks for listening, Jeff!)
 

jeffhalmos

macrumors newbie
Nov 27, 2002
19
18
ID Type

I too am a type snob, and I've found ID's Type handling to be a little complicated. But then, I have 12 years of unlearning XPress to truly feel comfortable with ID. What I've found stunningly frustrating is ID's seeming inability or unwillingness to paste text unformatted into a doc. This was a wonderful thing in XPress. Any tips on how to do this? No matter what I try, I cannot select a paragraph in ID, and replace it with type from another app or file, not even email. I have to set up styles first. Argh! Solve this, and I'll join you on the other side.
 

jeffbunch

macrumors newbie
Nov 27, 2002
1
0
Raleigh, NC
Quark is dead. Long live Quark!

mangoman: You're right about IDv1 sucking a lot, but I haven't seen enough improvement to switch. I keep starting projects with ID, but end up completing them in Quark. I'm desperate for a OS X app, but just not that desperate. The interface for ID, while the same as Photoshop/Illustrator, is way too jumble for me and I have a dual monitor setup. If they had a measurements pallette like Quark maybe then I'd switch but I keep getting lost in the sea of palletes when I want to change. Document layout is different than photoediting/illustrations and should have it's own purpose-specific interface.

And before the negative responses, I'm not a Quark lover by any stretch. The company sucks in the customer service department and is such a quirky company to deal with, considering what they charge for their product. But it works, and works well. On paper, ID looks better by far, but I'm talking about the real world. The majority of people I know use Quark instead of PageMaker/InDesign and they're not switching anytime soon. I give them the selling points of ID but you can take Quark from their cold dead hands.

Quark spanked Aldus (original PageMaker) when it was king, maybe Adobe will return the favor, but that won't be for a long time. People will just stay with OS 9 and Quark because it's what they know until something compelling enough comes along. (soon hopefully)


Kid Red Ditto on the switching to Windows part. What BS!!
 

fcd

macrumors newbie
Nov 27, 2002
2
0
I'm so sick of this company!

I'm so sick of this company, and especially here in Australia, I layout $1500 ten years ago, then another $1300 for an upgrade, then if i want the current version it's another thousand buck's, Support has been totally **** in this country.
Then, i find that you can purchase it in the states for a 1/4 of the Aussie price, guess what, the kuntz at the Aussie distrubutor tell me that it's illegal to purchase a forgien copy and use it here, - it's all too complicated, they have abandoned there grass root users - the small design, advertising or print agency, if they supported us more, maybe there would be more young startup title's on the newstands.
I'm going with Indesign- inovative, Fresh and alot cheaper, why drive the expensive family wagon, when there's a super horse powered sports car in the garage.
 

xype

macrumors newbie
Nov 28, 2002
6
0
I am workind with InDesign ever since I first touched it. And I use PDF, most print shops around here suppoer InDesign and PDF already and the only situation where one may have problems is if the Press is using non-certified PostScript (=cheap) equipment. I also like the fact that for less money than XPress would cost me, I got the Adobe Publishing Collection. Right now I'm working on a 300+ page book and I feel fine.
 

tmid

macrumors newbie
Nov 28, 2002
1
0
Re: ID Type

This might help with pasting unformatted text in InDesign. Just click "Login as Guest" to bypass the login, if you aren't registered.

http://www.adobeforums.com/cgi-bin/webx?128@127.rry4aGUUtfa.3@.1de55022

I made the switch to ID as well. Used Xpress for years, but ID is getting better, faster, and does what I need it to do, nicely. Bumps along the way, but those are true of every app, and are almost always resolved by applying a little thought. (An app doesn't suck just because the user hasn't mastered it yet).

Funny thing: the one printer I work with that said he'd never touch an Adobe file is no longer in business. My other printer went all InDesign for in-house work more than a year ago. No regrets.
 

AmigaMac

macrumors member
Jul 18, 2002
43
0
Oracle does support Mac OS X!

You'd better tell that guy that Oracle does support Mac OS X!!!

:mad:
 

Chrissyboy

macrumors newbie
Nov 28, 2002
4
0
A growing proportion of Quark users are Windows based - all that means is that more Mac users are tired of waiting around/being shafted and have hopped over to InDesign. That's not called "switching to Windows". That's called Quark haemorrhaging customers. Bye bye.
 

Foocha

macrumors 6502a
Jul 10, 2001
588
0
London
Companies like Quark make me feel tired. Yawn!

I'd like to see someone like Macromedia buy them and put a rocket up their you know what ;)
 

linescreen

macrumors newbie
Nov 28, 2002
14
0
NYC
Mac's are dying

We as mac users have to face some facts.

1) the market share of Mac's this year has continued to fall even with all the switcher ads. The mac market share is around 3% and falling.

2) There has been a huge trend in technology to standardize platforms, java, .net ect....

3) Design houses are moving to the pc....I have seen it hear in nyc.

4) If a company does more than just publishing, there Senior IT people may make the entire company PC. They feel it is easier to support....and it may be.

5) The mac really does not compare in performance to a new pc these days....os x is still sluggish at times compared to jaguar.

Don't get me wrong, I love apple...but there marketting sucks.