QuarkXPress vs. InDesign, yet again!

[eclipse525]

Ok.... so all I get is die hard Quark heads telling me how InDesign isn't as good as Quark....AND I got fanatically InDesign users telling that Quark is gonna die and InDesign will be the defacto app for publishing/printing world.

Does anyone have any objective views on the future of these two Apps. and who really might be the program of choice?

Personally, I've tried both and still think Quark is solid BUT in all fairness, I haven't really given the lastest InDesign enough time. So, I really don't know at the moment.




~e

 

[Mudbug]

I've been a die-hard Quark user for years now (8 of them or so now) and I finally have started taking the move-over plunge into ID.

I'm planning on a gradual transition, since I still have a few thousand files that are in Quark 6 (which InDesign won't open) and I'll leave the legacy files to run their course in Quark. But honesly now that I've started a few new projects in ID, I think it really is the better platform. I say that now that I've just plunked down another $700 or so for a full copy of Quark with my new office machine.

I'm not an 'authority' on them by any means, and I'm still quite green with ID, but just seeing what it can do with photoshop files, I'm impressed. Quark is still a powerhouse, regardless of what the critics say, and I think it's easier to do straight production work with, but for designing things, ID is better, IMO.

And for anyone reading this that hasn't used either, and is wanting to get into the publishing world with both feet, I'd choose ID for that as well. If you can use photoshop, or illustrator, then you'll have no problem picking up ID. If you've been using Quark this whole time and are really comfy with it, know it's ins and outs, then you're well-suited to keep using what's comfortable. I don't plan on uninstalling it anytime soon.

Hope that helps...

Mud

 

[Peyote]

Quark has never really made sense to me....some things you adjust in the bottom toolbar, some things in side pallettes, you can't delete colors without selecting an object, no shortcut for exporting to PDF, the list goes on and on. To me, Indesign just makes sense when working in it. Plus it's a lot easier to work in Indesign, Photoshop, and Illustrator all at the same time, than it is to work in Quark, Illustrator, and Photoshop. If you know Iluustrator, Indesign is a breeze...a standard interface and set of tools is important to me.

The only thing I wish Indesign had was the ability to mirror flip an object across the x or y axis.

 

[aus_dave]

The only thing I wish Indesign had was the ability to mirror flip an object across the x or y axis.

I may have misunderstood you, but if you pick up a corner of any object and move it past its opposite corner on the same axis it will mirror flip (x or y axis).

 

[Belly-laughs]

Both packages deliver good layout tools, but i find InDesign better by far. I´ve been using Quark since ´98 and after ID 2.0 I´m only using Quark on client´s request. Of course, I charge them more for the hassle.

When I say hassle I mean all the time you have to spend dealing with bugs in the app. Especially 6.0 was horrible. It would crash when auto-saving (!), crash when exporting to PDF, crash when pasting text… 6.1 is much more stable but not without it´s problems. And I will not get the free 6.5 upgrade after reading posts from all the pissed off users at the Quark forums.

For reasons only Quark as a company can resolve I feel InDesign and the Adobe route is much safer. You get a stable app with lots of features that work. The integration with Illustrator and Photoshop is also a pus, maybe they one day become one?

By all means, I don´t hope Quark goes belly-up. Competition has proven to be good in a market dominated by one player for too long.


Peyote, to do a quick flip just select the object, klick on the little menu button in the transform palette and selct flip horizontal/vertical. To flip contents, use the contents tool and follow he same procedure. The flip axis depends on which control point you have selected in the transform palette.

 

[iGary]

The only complainit I have heard about ID is ripping files come print time....anyone?

 

[Blue Velvet]

It's hard to be objective when you spend your entire working life with an application, add to that the investment in training and the production workflow... plus the backlog of scheduled work that's due on your desk.

Apart from a few notable exceptions, I feel that the majority of Indesign users tend to be one-person or small outfits where swapping a core app is not such a big deal.

For larger publishers, investment in other workflows that use Quark apps like Copydesk make the decision to move to InDesign that much harder...

 

[da_alchemist]

I switched over to Indesign from Quark. InDesign integrates well with Photoshop and Illustrator; really easy to pick up if you have used other Adobe products; and it doesn't look as archaic as Quark!

 

[da_alchemist]

InDesign question. How do you switch between windows in the application?

Sorry.. this might be slightly off-topic. Let's say you have two Indesign files open; is there a shortcut for switching between the two open files? I hate having to go up to the Window menu all the time.

Oh yeah.. and InDesign is great! Quark is good if you like old-school. I like old-school but not when it comes to programs...

thanx.

 

[iGary]

It's hard to be objective when you spend your entire working life with an application, add to that the investment in training and the production workflow... plus the backlog of scheduled work that's due on your desk.

Apart from a few notable exceptions, I feel that the majority of Indesign users tend to be one-person or small outfits where swapping a core app is not such a big deal.

For larger publishers, investment in other workflows that use Quark apps like Copydesk make the decision to move to InDesign that much harder...

I agree with you, however it is unbelievable how many of our printers are using Quark 5 and OS 9.

And they are not small printers...

 

[zarathustra]

I have used Quark from 3.0 to 5.0 and InDesign since 1.0. And I LOVE InDesign. I couldn't be buggered with Quark anymore. In short, if you do want to read what I think of it, do a search on these forums.

Anyway, our studio is 100% Quark free and we have not had bad links, missing fonts and weird problems since switching over (Preflight and Package built in, including packaging fonts). All of our printers made the switch about the same time we did and the ones that didn't, we got in touch with an Adobe rep and they "got them a deal they couldn't refuse".

To answer questions:

Cycling through documents is easy, since it's a Mac OS thing. Just hit command-` (that's the character in the upper left hand side). You can also use exposé to show all the documents windows. Did you know that you can have more than one window of the same document open at the same time? You could copy from one page to the other very simply this way...

Also to flip a placed image, or anything, for that matter, you can also put a minus sign in front of the scale in the Transform palette.

I would say use the one that works for you best, but keep an open mind. Trust me, I was a Quark fanatic in the days of PageFaker. It's just that someone came along and made a better product and I switched. Sounds familiar?

 

[Peyote]

I may have misunderstood you, but if you pick up a corner of any object and move it past its opposite corner on the same axis it will mirror flip (x or y axis).

I could be wrong, but I thought that doing the also changed the scale. I know there are workaround to flipping an object, I'm just wondering why there isn't an easy way to do it, such as in Illustrator.

 

[Peyote]

It's hard to be objective when you spend your entire working life with an application, add to that the investment in training and the production workflow... plus the backlog of scheduled work that's due on your desk.

Apart from a few notable exceptions, I feel that the majority of Indesign users tend to be one-person or small outfits where swapping a core app is not such a big deal.

For larger publishers, investment in other workflows that use Quark apps like Copydesk make the decision to move to InDesign that much harder...

One of those exceptions happens to be Fossil, who has a design staff of around 100 creatives). They switched to ID not too long ago. I think for the most part this is true, but not because large companies couldn't switch. It's a lot easier for one person or a small shop to switch, than it is for a large company. But ID has only been around for what, a few years? Give it some more time and you'll see more and more large companies switch....especially when it comes time to upgrade their versions of Quark.

 

[emw]

The only complainit I have heard about ID is ripping files come print time....anyone?

I'm with you on that one. I love ID's feature set from a design standpoint, but enabling all of those cool features (direct Pshop import, transparencies, etc.) makes printing them a chore at times.

Quark has for some time continued to drop the ball. They got complacent and have never recovered - pushing to match ID, they release buggy products that still don't meet expectations. Maybe 7.0. I mean 7.1...

 

[neilrobinson]

The only complainit I have heard about ID is ripping files come print time....anyone?

yep, i know it... spent far to many hours figuring out a set of guidelines... actually at work now 12:25 (im on night shift)... trying to get quark to print for a change.

 

[Chip NoVaMac]

Last year I transitioned my companies work from MS Publisher (I know, I know) to ID. I took a look at Quark, but for my needs I felt that ID (yeah, I am one of those one man shops too) had the relative ease of use and Adobe application support that made my life easier.

 

[Sparky's]

If you really want to hear from Printing, Pre-press, or Graphics professionals, who really use these apps then I suggest you visit:
http://www.prepressforums.com/modules.php?name=Forums

I have been in commercial printing over 35 years and 20+ has been in desktop publishing. I grew up with Quark and started with 2.x in the late '80s. I switched to ID a couple of years ago and started with v1.5 and now use CS (along with photoshop, Illustrator, Acrobat, and yes even Quark 6.5. After using both for some time I find ID far superior to Quark. Again I'm just a Graphics professional, but that's my opinion.

 

[zarathustra]

One of those exceptions happens to be Fossil, who has a design staff of around 100 creatives).

OK, I work at Fossil. It's actually more like 150, but "only" about 50 of us work on 2D/graphic design projects. Our whole studio is OS X, Adobe Creative Suite equipped. Granted we don't necessarily all have CS, but at the worst level we all have OS X 10.2.8, AI10, ID2, PS7. I give credit to our Mac IT support group who saw the benefits after letting us beta test certain products.

A lot of RIP problems occur when the tools are not used correctly, just like in Quark. You cannot half-ass a project and expect it to print well. I am not insinuating that any of us would do it that way, I am just making a general observation based on experience.

 

[Gravity]

Was in Quark, Now in InDesign

I was a Quark user from 1992 until 2002. It was the tool of my trade and I loved it. But as I grew, it didn't.

When ID 2.0 came along, I gave it a month's try...and loved it! I stopped using Quark in '02 and haven't looked back. I love the tight integration between ID, Illustrator, & photoshop. I work so much more efficiently than I ever did before.

So I'm not objective. I never upgraded my quark from 4.1 I skipped Quark 5 because of the problems it was having...and by the time Quark got its pokey behind in gear to carbonize for OSX...I was already in InDesign. Quark dropped the ball years ago...and they're struggling to catch up, all the while losing customers to InDesign.

But I don't want Quark to go out of business. As many have said, competition is good. I just hope I don't have lots of problems sharing graphics files within the industry...having to worry about whether they're using Quark or InDesign!!! Things were so much simpler back in the 90's!

 

[Peyote]

OK, I work at Fossil. It's actually more like 150, but "only" about 50 of us work on 2D/graphic design projects. Our whole studio is OS X, Adobe Creative Suite equipped. Granted we don't necessarily all have CS, but at the worst level we all have OS X 10.2.8, AI10, ID2, PS7. I give credit to our Mac IT support group who saw the benefits after letting us beta test certain products.

A lot of RIP problems occur when the tools are not used correctly, just like in Quark. You cannot half-ass a project and expect it to print well. I am not insinuating that any of us would do it that way, I am just making a general observation based on experience.

Heh...I just interviewed at Fossil and didn't get it unfortunately. One AD (Paula I believe?) was in charge of the Fossil Brand, and said she didn't hire off the street anymore, pretty much from within. Of the other AD's I interviewed with, most were looking for someone with apparel design experience, environmental design experience, or product design experience, all of which I do not have...only print design right now. So I guess I never really had a chance. Oh well...must be nice to work for a company that values design, and is even built around design. Me? I work for an insurance company (blegh!) But I'm moving back to Austin hopefully in May, so I only have to hang on for a 5 more months!

 

[Jaffa Cake]

I remember at the time that InDesign first came out there were a lot of people in the design community hoping that even if the new software didn't actually dethrone Quark Xpress, it would at least give it a huge kick up the arse and make it get its house in order.

Unfortunately, that hasn't really happened – designers and printers seem to be sticking with Quark (albeit older versions as iGary mentions). I know from our point of view that switching over fully to InDesign would prove costly in terms of training and interrupted workflow, even before you consider buying all that new software – and we're a relatively small firm. A full switch over would be even less attractive for very large design firms and printers.

Personally, I've tried InDesign out, and my first impressions have been good. The integration with the other Adobe apps is a definitely in its favour. Of course, both apps have their pros and cons... but I really hope that InDesign takes off.

Anyway people, don't worry. Quark 7 will be out soon...

 

[Blue Velvet]

Anyway people, don't worry. Quark 7 will be out soon...

They had better give it away for virtually nothing. They can't afford to lumber waverers with yet another expensive release...

Although we're still a Quark studio, the hassles with Quark 6.1 are pushing us towards InDesign, in the sense of messing with it at home and in our spare time, at this stage...

Quark 6.1 (forget 6.5 until they've patched & repatched it) has been a poor release. As David Blatner said 'It feels like a bad hack'.

But it takes time to turn round a company and a flagship product...

Another observation is: 99% of InDesign users rarely talk with fondness about Quark -- once they've switched, nobody ever seems to contemplate returning... hmmm... reminds me of the new-found passion of switchers to another platform. These former customers will never return...

 

[Jaffa Cake]

Another observation is: 99% of InDesign users rarely talk with fondness about Quark

A large percentage of Quark users rarely talk with fondness about Quark!

Quark 6.1 (forget 6.5 until they've patched & repatched it) has been a poor release. As David Blatner said 'It feels like a bad hack'.

The last few releases have been very bad – buggy and unresponsive. Given that Quark has had a good five years or so to respond to InDesign's challenge, the current state the software is in is pretty inexcusable. I can't see Quark 7 bucking the trend.

 

[Blue Velvet]

A large percentage of Quark users rarely talk with fondness about Quark!

True. It's a hate-hate thing, but a bit like a dependency... a habit.

Still, I'm one of the few at work that likes the synchronised text feature in Quark 6. It's come in damn useful recently on a corporate stationary redesign project.

We held off on InDesign 1 & 2 at first because of it's lack of multi-ink support... damn, another reason gone!

I'm not too fussed about .psd import. Layered TIFs import just fine, you can mess with them to your hearts content & then flatten & sharpen before sending to press, anyways...

 

[aus_dave]

I could be wrong, but I thought that doing that also changed the scale.

Try it and see. It doesn't change the scale at all from what I can see. It's a pretty robust shortcut.