QuarkXPress for OSX

Mudbug

Administrator emeritus
Original poster
Jun 28, 2002
3,809
1
North Central Colorado
Any news about when Quark will release a version for OSX? It's the only piece in the chain keeping the full time switch from happening, and I don't feel like learning InDesign this week (or next week, or ever, unless I have to).:D
 

MacKenzie999

macrumors regular
Jan 24, 2002
236
14
Boston
Re: QuarkXPress for OSX

and I don't feel like learning InDesign this week (or next week, or ever, unless I have to).:D [/B][/QUOTE]

Hey...

I had to learn InDesign for a job and I have to say, it blows Quark away. It's easy to learn, easy to use, and it feels logical, unlike the Express UI which never felt particularly elegant to me.

I didn't expect to like InDesign but its my page layout app of choice now, by far.

$.02
-Mike
 

Choppaface

macrumors 65816
Jan 22, 2002
1,187
0
SFBA
Re: Re: QuarkXPress for OSX

Originally posted by MacKenzie999
and I don't feel like learning InDesign this week (or next week, or ever, unless I have to).:D
Hey...

I had to learn InDesign for a job and I have to say, it blows Quark away. It's easy to learn, easy to use, and it feels logical, unlike the Express UI which never felt particularly elegant to me.

I didn't expect to like InDesign but its my page layout app of choice now, by far.

$.02
-Mike [/B][/QUOTE]


i argee...although I've only used an older version of quark, i think indesign is much more intuitive...especially for somebody like me who uses adobe products pretty regularly :D
 

iH8Quark

macrumors 6502
Jan 17, 2002
344
0
Big Shoulders
Re: Re: QuarkXPress for OSX

Quark is a plague. Switch to InDesign. It's SO much better. You'll never go back. As indicated by the name, I hate Quark. It sucks @ss.

Oh...I didn't mean to say that. Undo.

Wait...there is no undo. :rolleyes:
 

iH8Quark

macrumors 6502
Jan 17, 2002
344
0
Big Shoulders
Not to double post, but It's rediculous that you can't set proper typography in a $900 program without getting a hernia. Setting punctuation outside the measure is a maddening experience in Quark. That's rediculous. Fine if you're a hack, but hardly suitable for real typographers.

Setting good optical margin alignment in Quark. Forget it. And Quark's justified text looks like the sequel to "A River Runs Through It". Clipping paths????? :rolleyes: Isn't this 2002? There's no more clipping paths in InDesign. It's even flawless with feathered transparency. Try doing THAT in Quirk.

$.05
 

Mudbug

Administrator emeritus
Original poster
Jun 28, 2002
3,809
1
North Central Colorado
I'm not saying I'm against using InDesign, I just don't have a free 5 minutes to learn new shortcuts. I do, by the way, like how PS layered files can import directly into InD. But I've got a filter for Q that does that, too.

My biggest problem is that it's basically just Illustrator with multiple pages. And as far as ease of use, Illustrator is just an Oxy Moron with that term (emphasis on the MORON).

I just want what I want. Is that so wrong?
 

MacKenzie999

macrumors regular
Jan 24, 2002
236
14
Boston
My biggest problem is that it's basically just Illustrator with multiple pages. And as far as ease of use, Illustrator is just an Oxy Moron with that term (emphasis on the MORON).

Nice to hear somebody else dis Illustrator. I vastly prefer Freehand, but figured its because I learned it first and know it better than AI.
 

Mudbug

Administrator emeritus
Original poster
Jun 28, 2002
3,809
1
North Central Colorado
No, you're right. Save for a few things AI can do that none of us use regularly, Freehand is infinitely easier.

There's nothing wrong with working in PostScript level 3, unless none of the major printers in your market can print it due to their own budget problems. Even our local papers can only accept PDF Files of version 3 or earlier, since their RIP is postscript one. That means if in Illustrator, converting down to Illustrator 5 format, from AI10. What's the point?
 

iGav

macrumors G3
Mar 9, 2002
9,025
1
I totally dig Indesign......... it's far more intuitive and conducive to creativity than Quark is.... but each to there own I supose....

As for Illustrator and Freehand...... I use both... both have there on pros and cons..... I try not and limit myself to one set of software... because generally one can do something the other can't........ but hey.... each to there own again I guess..... :p
 

Mudbug

Administrator emeritus
Original poster
Jun 28, 2002
3,809
1
North Central Colorado
I just downloaded the trial for InD 2.0 - I'll let you know. My only concern is if I don't like it, I can't in turn reopen the files back into Q. Anybody got a xtension that'll do that? :confused:
 

MacKenzie999

macrumors regular
Jan 24, 2002
236
14
Boston
if I don't like it, I can't in turn reopen the files back into Q. Anybody got a xtension that'll do that? :confused: [/B][/QUOTE]

Hey...

Before getting too far make sure you can save files in the demo version....I dont think you can.
 

Choppaface

macrumors 65816
Jan 22, 2002
1,187
0
SFBA
no but you can open quark files in indesign :D

as to AI versus freehand...I tried freehand 9 and I was really not impressed. not only was anti-aliasing off by default, but I had horrible screen draw problems (like i had in flash 5), and it crashed 3 or 4 times. I'm sure there are artists that find it easier to use, but I'm a big photoshop user and I like AI's interface anyways...

It's nice to have some disagreement, but I really hate it when people play the macromedia versus adobe game. I've read far too many golive vs. dreamweaver arguments. so let's not 'dis' other products and call them silly names. people have far too much creativity here to waste themselves on childish behavior.

the only (other) problem with adobe products is a) everything always has to install SVG...so sick of that and b) mac acrobat is as buggy and slow as hell. that and the acrobat plugin *always* crashed my comp when I'd try to dl a PDF in IE...until I finally delted the thing. I can see where PDF is great for the print world, but why people use it to distribute simple docs over the internet instead of using html (which adobe themself use :eyebrow) is just nutty.
 

idkew

macrumors 68020
Originally posted by Choppaface
I can see where PDF is great for the print world, but why people use it to distribute simple docs over the internet instead of using html (which adobe themself use :eyebrow) is just nutty.
Simple:

PDF can do so much more than HTML. PDF looks the same on all cpu's/os's. Plus, it makes you look cool.:D
 

Ensign Paris

macrumors 68000
Nov 4, 2001
1,781
0
Europe
Quark XPress was a good program, and still is, but I use InDesign for three main reasons:

1) I can afford a legal copy of it
2) It intergrates perfectly with Illustrator and Photoshop
3) It works in OSX

Ensign
 

spacepower

macrumors member
Jul 8, 2002
35
0
quark they are SLOOOOOOOOW

I talked to a Quark programmer back in Summer 2000. He told me he was working on OS9 versions but that they had a "team" working on OSX version. It is now 2 years since he told me. IF they can't get the OSX version finished in 2 years, they have problems. It better be cocoa Not carbon!!!!!
 

Nipsy

macrumors 65816
Jan 19, 2002
1,009
0
I heard Quark for OSX will be released 11 days after Apple introduces OSXI (which I will pronounce ohh-ess-exx-eee, whether The Steve likes it or not).
 

PyroTurtle

macrumors regular
Jul 27, 2001
240
0
10 Minutes from Disneyland
maybe westlake should just finsih the OSX version...or better yet OmniGroup...how about those people making Chimera? i love quark, i really do, InDesign is nice, but not when editing a book. i prefer quark for that and that's the bulk of buisness right now...so grrr!!!!!
maybe i'll just have to go back to print design, cause then i won't mind using ID2