Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
QuarkXPress OS X Soon
- Thread starter arn
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
oh god i hate that about quark.....oh yea
quark is soooo fncking great...that's why
they stuck us with limited keyboard access to the tool palett through cycling through ALL THE
FREAKEN TOOLS before you get to the one
you need. How long did they stick us with that
bulls1t? unexceptable.
I certainly hope all you lot in the pre-press industry go and upgrade then - I'm yet to come across a print house here on anything newer than Quark 3, and get this, Photoshop 4! A nationwide design and marketing company i went to recently did all their work on Freehand 4...
... on Dells!!!!!!!
God help the UK design/press industry. I've just come out of Uni, and have Photoshop 7, PageMaker 7, Dreamweaver MX, FCP3 - why, because it pays to be ahead of the game I thought - when actually, the biggest print house in a big city, have'nt heard of OSX!
... on Dells!!!!!!!
God help the UK design/press industry. I've just come out of Uni, and have Photoshop 7, PageMaker 7, Dreamweaver MX, FCP3 - why, because it pays to be ahead of the game I thought - when actually, the biggest print house in a big city, have'nt heard of OSX!
the industry generally lags behind in terms of keeping up to date with regards to software.......
Students are always completely clued up on the latest and greatest software, and they get such a shock when they find out that consultancies have older versions of software and even machines.......
Anways I could understand Photoshop 3 or 5 but 4???? I hated 4 so much......
Quark is solid.
We've been using Xpress 4.11 for at least 2 years. It gets the job done. If there was an OSX version we might switch to it... but not until it had been out for a few months at least... and after we've tested it on one machine. When you have short deadlines and an entire network of art directors plugging away 12 hours a day... you can't afford to spend alot of time or money upgrading. But also consider... we can run older illustrator and photoshop... there hasn't been any huge breakthroughs in capabilities that justify spending $1500 or more per machine to make the various G3 and G4s run OSX if the core program doesn't run on it. Smaller agencies don't upgrade thier entire network and machines until they absolutely have to.
We've been using Xpress 4.11 for at least 2 years. It gets the job done. If there was an OSX version we might switch to it... but not until it had been out for a few months at least... and after we've tested it on one machine. When you have short deadlines and an entire network of art directors plugging away 12 hours a day... you can't afford to spend alot of time or money upgrading. But also consider... we can run older illustrator and photoshop... there hasn't been any huge breakthroughs in capabilities that justify spending $1500 or more per machine to make the various G3 and G4s run OSX if the core program doesn't run on it. Smaller agencies don't upgrade thier entire network and machines until they absolutely have to.
looking forward to quark x
im in the uk, i have heard of OSX, and use it, and we use quark 4, but have found it increasingly unstable. hence in the studio we are on 9.22, but 2 other macs are on x. we have an xserve, so we are on the leading edge ;-) we would love to upgrade to osx, to help prevent crashes taking down the whole mac, but until quark comes out its not gonna happen. changing to ID would be nice, but unrealistic. the deadline on jobs make it difficult enough as it is, without haveing the problem of an unfamiliar piece of software, whatever its features above QXP. not forgeting the fact that unlike usa, most repro/magazines here in the uk only use quark. i think US-centric people tend to forget this in their rush to praise ID, much in the same way that apple seemed to forget the rest of the world with sherlock 3, but thats another forum.
i can see that companies using old software is realistic, after all, if it aint broke dont fix it, and these are COMPANIES, who after all, are there to make money and upgrading software is expensive (especially qxp it has to be said). we try to keep up to date, and are just in the process of getting ps5-6 on about 8 macs upto 7, and ill 7-9 on the same macs upto 10. quark will be grudgingly paid for (from 4) when 6 comes out. basically so we can move to x. we luckly dont use many plugins for our sw, so hopefully wont miss them in the switch, i do want the ps retroscan plugin though.
layout software doesnt have to have a major update every 6 months, but itd be nice if it kept up with current hardware, hopefully preventing some stupid crashes and weird -43 errors (whats with that).
im in the uk, i have heard of OSX, and use it, and we use quark 4, but have found it increasingly unstable. hence in the studio we are on 9.22, but 2 other macs are on x. we have an xserve, so we are on the leading edge ;-) we would love to upgrade to osx, to help prevent crashes taking down the whole mac, but until quark comes out its not gonna happen. changing to ID would be nice, but unrealistic. the deadline on jobs make it difficult enough as it is, without haveing the problem of an unfamiliar piece of software, whatever its features above QXP. not forgeting the fact that unlike usa, most repro/magazines here in the uk only use quark. i think US-centric people tend to forget this in their rush to praise ID, much in the same way that apple seemed to forget the rest of the world with sherlock 3, but thats another forum.
i can see that companies using old software is realistic, after all, if it aint broke dont fix it, and these are COMPANIES, who after all, are there to make money and upgrading software is expensive (especially qxp it has to be said). we try to keep up to date, and are just in the process of getting ps5-6 on about 8 macs upto 7, and ill 7-9 on the same macs upto 10. quark will be grudgingly paid for (from 4) when 6 comes out. basically so we can move to x. we luckly dont use many plugins for our sw, so hopefully wont miss them in the switch, i do want the ps retroscan plugin though.
layout software doesnt have to have a major update every 6 months, but itd be nice if it kept up with current hardware, hopefully preventing some stupid crashes and weird -43 errors (whats with that).
Re: Well...
Every one knows Photoshop and Illustrator right?
So what is the problem?
ID2 has the same interface, the same short cuts, same way of look and feel. I don't see why people are hesitant to adopt ID2, especially that now it's free when you buy a new Powermac.
Don't tell me that ID won't take your old Quark extension...the new Quark won't take it either.
Every one knows Photoshop and Illustrator right?
So what is the problem?
ID2 has the same interface, the same short cuts, same way of look and feel. I don't see why people are hesitant to adopt ID2, especially that now it's free when you buy a new Powermac.
Don't tell me that ID won't take your old Quark extension...the new Quark won't take it either.
Sheeesh..
How about why build and elevator when you live on the second floor!
If it was really important to our studio to upgrade to OS X then it would be a problem... and we would possibly switch. But's it's not. If I was doing freelance from home and had made the switch to 10.2, I would probably be using Indesign. But the cost of upgrading 5 workstations and getting all the software needed (PS,AI, QX... Suitecase, etc.) isn't justified... the advantages just aren't there yet.
Maybe when our office moves to the Penthouse.
How about why build and elevator when you live on the second floor!
If it was really important to our studio to upgrade to OS X then it would be a problem... and we would possibly switch. But's it's not. If I was doing freelance from home and had made the switch to 10.2, I would probably be using Indesign. But the cost of upgrading 5 workstations and getting all the software needed (PS,AI, QX... Suitecase, etc.) isn't justified... the advantages just aren't there yet.
Maybe when our office moves to the Penthouse.
Re: Sheeesh..
So I take it that you guys haven't bought any new g4 lately...or had any plan to buy anytime soon...because I think it is a waste to buy a multy prosessor machines and use only one of them
So I take it that you guys haven't bought any new g4 lately...or had any plan to buy anytime soon...because I think it is a waste to buy a multy prosessor machines and use only one of them
Originally posted by iGAV
There's alot of posts in this thread that remind me of the Honda 'OK" advertisement on UK tv........
Why invent the elevator if stairs are okay???
Yeah, who wouldn't want to walk up a building that has floors in the double digits. Especially if you have to carry a lot of stuff. Or you're in a wheelchair (like my friend on the third floor). Stairs are just fine. Who even needs an escalator?
Oh wait, you were being sarcastic...
I knew that. I did.
Nevermind.
Re: Re: Sheeesh..
You spell that multi processor or multi-processor. Anyway, Mac OS X uses both processors whenever you get a chance to. You can monitor this with various process meters on Versiontracker. So if you are going to get a tower, plan on getting Mac OS X software as soon as it becomes available for what you want to do. Because then it will be able to take advantage of multiprocessing.
Originally posted by Mr. G4
So I take it that you guys haven't bought any new g4 lately...or had any plan to buy anytime soon...because I think it is a waste to buy a multy prosessor machines and use only one of them
You spell that multi processor or multi-processor. Anyway, Mac OS X uses both processors whenever you get a chance to. You can monitor this with various process meters on Versiontracker. So if you are going to get a tower, plan on getting Mac OS X software as soon as it becomes available for what you want to do. Because then it will be able to take advantage of multiprocessing.
Indesign 2 rocks, get out of your Safety Zone
I am a self employed designer, and I switched to Indesign 2 and hav'nt looked back since. Yes ocasionally I have to go into classic and open a quark doc. but hopefully if more people get into Indesign Quark will fade away.
Indesign has more features is easy to use and in half the price, not to mention the technical support.
I am a self employed designer, and I switched to Indesign 2 and hav'nt looked back since. Yes ocasionally I have to go into classic and open a quark doc. but hopefully if more people get into Indesign Quark will fade away.
Indesign has more features is easy to use and in half the price, not to mention the technical support.
Keep Quark at 4.1
I think a lot of us who have been in the graphics arts industry for a number of years can keep a copy of Quark 4.1 around in classic to update old jobs that need tweaks. But I don't think anyone who gives InDesign a fair try will ever want to switch back to Quark as their main design tool. Quark's history of foot-dragging and lukewarm response to changes in the Mac market aside, InDesign is simply a more elegant, enjoyable, easy to use (once you stop thinking in Quark's restrictive terms -- I find most things that frustrated me in switching to InDesign were trying to make things harder than they were, because of how those tools worked in Quark).
Time to get on the Abobe InDesign bus, and nudge all the printers we use to support this better design software.
I came to InDesign for Mac OS X support, but I'm staying with it because it makes my life easier in many, many ways.
I think a lot of us who have been in the graphics arts industry for a number of years can keep a copy of Quark 4.1 around in classic to update old jobs that need tweaks. But I don't think anyone who gives InDesign a fair try will ever want to switch back to Quark as their main design tool. Quark's history of foot-dragging and lukewarm response to changes in the Mac market aside, InDesign is simply a more elegant, enjoyable, easy to use (once you stop thinking in Quark's restrictive terms -- I find most things that frustrated me in switching to InDesign were trying to make things harder than they were, because of how those tools worked in Quark).
Time to get on the Abobe InDesign bus, and nudge all the printers we use to support this better design software.
I came to InDesign for Mac OS X support, but I'm staying with it because it makes my life easier in many, many ways.
Originally posted by solvs
Yeah, who wouldn't want to walk up a building that has floors in the double digits. Especially if you have to carry a lot of stuff. Or you're in a wheelchair (like my friend on the third floor). Stairs are just fine. Who even needs an escalator?
Oh wait, you were being sarcastic...
I knew that. I did.
Nevermind.
Ouch..........
But why invent tall buildings if bungalows are ok???
Originally posted by iGAV
Ouch..........
But why invent tall buildings if bungalows are ok???
I was just kidding.
But when I read your post, at first, for a second I thought you were serious.
You'd be suprised.
I have GOT to get some sleep.
Adobe's "switch" battle is as steep uphill as Apple's
Quark is familiar and entrenched in the U.S. prepress. Many commercial printers still use Quark 3.3 or 4.11 on OS 9 if not 8.6. With so much capital tied up in machines, printers tend to stick with what they know works.
Scores of 3rd party developers over the last decade have provided custom solutions (Xtensions) that are now integral parts of many shops' workflow - from plug-ins as complex as database integration, variable print, pdf generation, and catalog creation, to simple time-saving tools that eliminate repetitive tasks.
These people will not argue against you that Quark is a "better layout program" than InDesign. That's not their issue. It's a matter of workflow. Upgrading to X (and potentially having to buy new Macs, since InDesign is quite clunky on all but the most recent years' machines), switching to InDesign, re-educating staff, and having everything run smooth (while keeping up with clients' deadlines) is too difficult for most companies to handle.
InDesign may be able to run circles around Quark with new technology and features that allow it to make well-kearned type appear transparent over a drop-shadowed full-resolution preview of a layer of a placed .psd file while running natively in OS X. If it chokes in my custom workflow, I can't use it. For that reason, it will be a long time before InDesign has anywhere near the installed base of QuarkXpress.
Quark is familiar and entrenched in the U.S. prepress. Many commercial printers still use Quark 3.3 or 4.11 on OS 9 if not 8.6. With so much capital tied up in machines, printers tend to stick with what they know works.
Scores of 3rd party developers over the last decade have provided custom solutions (Xtensions) that are now integral parts of many shops' workflow - from plug-ins as complex as database integration, variable print, pdf generation, and catalog creation, to simple time-saving tools that eliminate repetitive tasks.
These people will not argue against you that Quark is a "better layout program" than InDesign. That's not their issue. It's a matter of workflow. Upgrading to X (and potentially having to buy new Macs, since InDesign is quite clunky on all but the most recent years' machines), switching to InDesign, re-educating staff, and having everything run smooth (while keeping up with clients' deadlines) is too difficult for most companies to handle.
InDesign may be able to run circles around Quark with new technology and features that allow it to make well-kearned type appear transparent over a drop-shadowed full-resolution preview of a layer of a placed .psd file while running natively in OS X. If it chokes in my custom workflow, I can't use it. For that reason, it will be a long time before InDesign has anywhere near the installed base of QuarkXpress.
Re: a switch of a different kind
Yeah u can believe it.
A good program? A big buggy piece of **** for me. I used it for years and i'm angry about it. This soft is an hold-up for the freelance designers, it's monolithic, it has a dongle, it's unstable and capricious.
U're right, switch to InDesign
Yeah u can believe it.
A good program? A big buggy piece of **** for me. I used it for years and i'm angry about it. This soft is an hold-up for the freelance designers, it's monolithic, it has a dongle, it's unstable and capricious.
U're right, switch to InDesign