Quark finally made available for pre-ordering their long-awaited QuarkXPress 6 after 2 years of porting it to Mac OS X. Our Take: The big surprise for me personally was when earlier today I browsed the comments at VersionTracker, the premier OSX software repository. The vast majority of these users seems to have already switched to Adobe InDesign. $200 bucks cheaper too.
QuarkXPress 6 is Out — Hey, Where is Everybody?
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
.. hang out at VersionTracker? I’d guess not many.
Scores of publishing firms around the globe will go to QE 6 … once they upgrade to OS X, if they haven’t already.
My company is waiting to do just that. Then, it’s QE 6, no doubt.
Just an observation.
Print/prepress houses who have been holding out for QuarkXPress 6 before making an OS X transition will begin looking for new hardware soon (as soon as their favorite plugins have been Carbonized) Apple will soon be delivering 2-way (and probably also 4-way) PPC970 desktop systems, which will be quickly snatched up by print houses looking to upgrade to OS X.
Two years ago, I switched to InDesign. Overall, I’m very happy with it. I cannot imagine ever using Quark again.
Who the hell cares! Quark was a bad program to start off with but after usingh InDesign for so long now I could never go back to Quark.
The Queen Elizabeth 6?
Quark was a bad program to start off with
I trust by “bad” you actually mean good? Back in the Day (Note: This refers to a time many years before the advent of inDesign) Quark simply rocked, especially if you were laying out anything grander than a small company newsletter or a… no, it rocked there too.
I’ve been using QuarkXPress 5 in classic mode. I honestly gave InDesign the benefit of the doubt but it’s just too bloated and slow for me to work.
**off-topic – (Why is it that Adobe Applications seem to be getting rediculously large in size. case in point: Acrobat Professional=268.3MB WTF!!!!) ****
The InDesign Quark import features are scetchy at best. It usually crashes InDesign. Multiple-undo’s are nice. I’ve only been wanting them since Quark 3.3
I did the “get inDesign free when you buy a Mac” thing. But then I am not a graphics pro so it probably doesn’t matter. I spend more time in Photoshop
I’ve used both XPress in its 4.11 Passport incarnation versus Indesign 1.0, 1.5 and now 2.0.
My experiences with XPress were on a Mac running OS 9, while InDesign ran on a Win2K box. Maybe a lot can be attributed to the OS’es, but InDesign simply rocked in comparison to Quark’s offering. Even at InDesign version 1.0 that didn’t have transparency functions yet.
Also, I really hope Quark did away with their ridiculous copy protection dongle. It causes more trouble than it’s worth, and it shows great distrust for Quark’s own customers. If I need 2 pro-quality XPress workstations, I’ll buy 2 licenses. I’m not going to risk my business running warez.
We have not switched to OSX beucase of Quarks lak of a OSX version. We do a lot of work for people that use Quark, and is needed. So maybe I can finally get them to switch to OSX.
I looked at the ‘key benefits’ of XPress 6, and there’s hardly anything there that I didn’t have with InDesign literally years ago. Looks to me like Quark’s missing the boat big time.
Kind of a silly question, I guess, considering Quark has had an impressive hold on the printing industry forever.
I’ll tell ya, I am generally a firm believer in “The Right Tool For The Right Job” school of thought, but Quark really does have a lot of nerve.
I’ve been using Xpress for a long time and it does it’s job admirably, but when I made the switch to OS X and have since had to use it in the quirky and irritating confines of Classic-land, I really started to dislike Quark.
I’ve been seriously looking at InDesign and I like the idea behind the forward-thinking integration among Adobe’s apps. If nothing else, i’d like to stick with a company that does have to listen to public opinion and has taken the time to deliver on our needs.
There’s really no excuse for making us wait this long for an OS X version of Quark.
At the time I used it (4 years ago maybe) quark was much more expensive than InDesign. The US version was indeed competitive but in Switzerland they had sucha monopoly that they sold it around 4000 swiss francs (2600$ !). They even made you pay to switch the same version (3.31) from 68k to PowerPC for 600 CHF (400$).
They really took advantage of their monopoly without any limits. May they die in peace.
You would ask that of course… Well they had a protection forcing you to switch to a US keymap when launching the US version. Worse, you simply didn’t get any foreign dictionnaries / hyphenation tools with the standard US version.
Of course there was a so-called PassPort version allowing edition of multiple languages… for some more cash. And of course there was Passport US version, and the other ones.
I agree, and considering they’re high end applications, the people who will use them and pay for it will do it regardless of whether there is copy protection or not.
Unfortunately the whole idea of piracy prevention is built off the myth that every person who pirates will automatically buy it if they had to, which is completely incorrect. For example, I know many people who run a pirated version of Photoshop, however, if they couldn’t run it, they would simply move to a cheaper package or in somecases, they really didn’t need it at all and that they simply had it to stuff around with.
btw, Anonymous (IP: —.a.002.cba.iprimus.net.au) is a post by me 😉
Regarding buying of US companies directly, many have this phobia of not shipping outside the US. Whats up with that? why should there be export restrictions on a friggin piece of software? someone please fill me in on this phenominon.
Truth is, these dumbasses can use hardware keys, dongles, etc etc etc..
And me and my city of lost boys will write a dongle crack faster than you can say “eat my shorts apple”.
l33t h@X000r
Hate using Quark 4 and I quite like Indesign. So Quark Has Version 6 out, wow. Adobe will be leapfrogging them again by 3rd quater with Indesign 3 and I can bet the program will really put Xpress in its place. Some people are die hards and refuse to change no matter what.
3 years after the introduction of OS X, and just in time for a 32 bit version to be rendered obsolete by a 64 bit version of OS X! Quark has spit in the face of Macintosh users for 3 years. What they hell were they doing all that time? They dont deserve anyone’s business.
Having used Quark for 8+ years, I’ve NEVER liked it. Indesign first version was a dog, then V2 came out and I changed.
Quark is way over priced $3500AU for a new licence or $1500+AU for the upgrade pfft.
Working in a place which outputs other peoples files, I haver noticed a big decline in Quarks usage. Use to be 90% Quark, now its aroung 50% or less. Everyone seems to be swapping to Illustrator or Indesign (Illustrator is not the best program for outputing large prints, way tooooo slow). As the older agencys close down and new ones start up, I’ve noticed that not one new agency use Quark, stating its overpriced for their needs, and lacks features.
The new version is to much and to late.
They are arrogant, and with competition from Adobe, face the threat of becoming second place. I use Quark, like Quark well enough. I personally wish for several things it could do better, and its interface could be improved somewhat too, but the program itself is not bad. Really sucks, though, how most non English speaking people are darn near FORCED to get XPress Passport to get any real use out of the program. I wonder if this will continue into the OS X version. If it does, it will suck extremely as MacOS X and Windows2000 and XP have extremely rich, BUILT IN multi-language capability, and charging that much money for what is essentially additional language packs, dictionaries, and layout rules should be a crime.
Still, Quark 6 should be good and functional if not revolutionary. Good enough for most of their major clients. I heard they basically had to rewrite more than 40% of their codebase (kinda like Windows NT 4 vs. Windows 2000) on both platforms, so they likely couldn’t add all the features they wanted until the core program worked.
Adobe knows that publishing is still a huge market that they have not conquered. In fact, they have TWO layout products already (Framemaker and PageMaker) that could not steal QuarkXPress’ crown. Rest assured InDesign won’t share the same, niche-market fates. InDesign 3 will likely rock AND have competitive pricing, but hopefully Quark can get a free 6.1 update out before then to remain competitive.
–JM
Before InDesign, yes, even before Quark, there was Ready, Set, Go! And it still lives! And get it for a song, now on Windows too!
http://www.diwan.com
The ultimate cool was using the Quickdraw GX version of RSG! with System 7.5 🙂
The last good version of Xpress was 3.32r5.
Xpress 4 did nothing. Xpress 5…was that really a shipping product?
Xpress 6? I’ll wait until all of the early adopters fix the bugs.
The test will be in the first few months. If it isn’t rock solid in the first three months, people will lose confidence in Quark and migrate over to InDesign in droves…more so than have already moved.
I predict that it will be a flop, and they’ll try to pin it on Apple.
When I can get InDesign or Corel Draw cheaper, how can one justify sticking with such an overprice piece of garbage?
At first I was afraid, I was petrified. Kept thinking I could never live without you by my side. But then I spent so many nights nurtured by my Indesign, and I grew strong, I learned to live without such a bloated swine.
So now you’re back, from outer space. I just logged on to find you here with that silly $mirk upon your face. I should have changed that stupid code, I should have sold your stupid key, if I knew for just one second you’d be back to bother me.
Quark now go, walk out the door, just turn around now, cuz you’re not welcome in my computer anymore.
Btw, anyone see Parkinson interviewing Gloria Gaynor? oh well, its a good summary of the Quark eXPerience.
it is integration with large scale publishing that gives them a strangle hold. They plug into all the content management and editing tools so the big papers use them. So the small shops use them etc etc.
They have alway been clunky if you just do layout but they plugged in the the bussiness model of the process. Hence their dominance.
I could never figure it out having used the different tools till I went to a large journalism design conference and saw the fancy industrial style tools.
…it’s that Aldus horrendously dropped the ball with PageMaker and Adobe never really picked it up. InDesign does a really pretty good job with high-end design flows, thanks to tools like InStory. The thing is, the prepress and printing industries are not guys who like to live on the cutting edge. They don’t like change.
InDesign can’t just be a little better than Quark, it has to be a lot better, and Quark will have to drop the ball repeatedly. And prepress customers will have to start demanding that shops support InDesign directly. Eventually, the industry might shift.
But it won’t be for years.
“Adobe knows that publishing is still a huge market that they have not conquered. In fact, they have TWO layout products already (Framemaker and PageMaker) that could not steal QuarkXPress’ crown.”
Pagemaker nowadays is positioned as a DTP program for amateurs. It is still quite good, but rather lacking in features. I have been using it for teaching beginners (the Education price is very low), and they find it easy to learn.
why is everyone using inDesign.. I thought pagemaker would have been a better rival for Quark..
could someone explain why they think indesign is better than pagemaker
I’ve seen pagemaker v7 and thought it looked rather good.
Indesign is for the serious user setting up complex books, catalogs with lots of images.
Pagemaker in like a lite version of Indesign. Good for single page layouts or for a few non complex pages. Doesn’t have all the features that Indesign has built in.
Yes, Adobe, on their site, makes Pagemaker sound like some little program you use clip-art with to make greeting cards (or one page business items). Good Lord, you can just use AppleWorks or Microsoft Works to do that 🙂
I call it the Netscape syndrome. Not because they the first to get the “disease”, just the most famous. What is it? Take a long time to get out their product during the time when competition is stiffest and demand for a new release is biggest – they don’t do nothing. So people have to choose between a old outdated release or a (sometimes) cheaper upcoming competitor’s release.
I shed no tears for Quark. Even though I’m a current user of Quark 5 (IMHO is it easier to learn than InDesign, and currently I don’t have money to blow on InDesign for featuresI still don’t need).
Regarding buying of US companies directly, many have this phobia of not shipping outside the US. Whats up with that? why should there be export restrictions on a friggin piece of software? someone please fill me in on this phenominon.
Most US companies that have enough capital to do overseas are normally okay with EU and Canada and maybe Australia. But they definately avoid Asia, Africa, Russia and South & Central America. Piracy is rampant there. We aren’t talking about big companies like Microsoft and Adobe, rather small ones that relies on software sales.
That’s why most US companies are reluctant to move out of the borders. Nothing political, or just because it is exports, just business.
>>Truth is, these dumbasses can use hardware keys, dongles, >>etc etc etc..
>>And me and my city of lost boys will write a dongle crack >>faster than you can say “eat my shorts apple”.
>>l33t h@X000r
1) you openly admit to such tasks
2) you co-sign with the hack/hax word in your handle
3) city of lost boys is your crewname
4) “eat my shorts apple”, where’s the crack? too slow biatch
5) your gateway sticks out like a sore thumb
Pagemaker nowadays is positioned as a DTP program for amateurs. It is still quite good, but rather lacking in features. I have been using it for teaching beginners (the Education price is very low), and they find it easy to learn.
I would really say that PageMaker is a word processor (heh, with my experience with KWord) with professional layout features and lacking in some word processing features, rather than an amateur DTP..
I like this quote from PoolMouse
“How dare you leave me in the cold…in the middle of the night…only to show up two years later at my front door with a smirk on your face. Screw you. I’m with InDesign now. InDesign cares about me. You never did. You had problems and took your sweet time trying to fix things. InDesign cares about me. InDesign respects me. “
Makes sense… considering a cracker is not a hacker….
I have several friends in the publishing industry. Yes, they hate Quark and are angry that Quark sat about with its thumb up its butt for so long and they would’ve loved to have moved to In Design a long time ago but …
… all those special extensions built into Quark translate very poorly, if at all, to In Design.
Which means years of work would have to be re-created almost from scratch if they switched to In Design, not to mention the time it would take to learn a new program interface.
Quark was stupid and arrogant and now that the economy’s in the crapper, this program will not be flying off the shelves they way it could have 2 years ago.
I guess he should be co-signed l33t cr@X000r then.
I was a big fan of Quark and had 4 copies in our design group alone and many others within our company. Years ago Q was a hungry company that really gave PageMaker a run for there money. They knew what we needed and had an innovative approach to software development. That?s why we switched to Q.
Apple?s new OSX is nothing new? we have all known about this operating system for many years. Right now I believed that Q has really dropped the ball. We have been waiting on this for over a year and its taken Q this long to do one application. What have you guys been doing all this time!
Hey Q the world is not going to stop and wait while you get your act together. Adobe, Macromedia, MS and many others have done in months (many applications) what has taken you years on an application. The print world evolved around you but you?re late to the game and we have found ways to work around your applications. We have no plans at this time of upgrading. You need to be hungry again.
As my dad said to me when I was growing up. “You?re a day late and a dollar short”.
Q your years late and I don’t care anymore!
Ex-customer (4x)
I use Indesign at job since their 1st version, for less 500 euro (the Adobe start campaign); it was my boss decission, not mine. Indesign 2 it’s incredible, their true alphamasks and their perfect pdf files including spot tints… i only miss paragraphs with multiple styles, tables more faster and styles for graphical objects.
I don’t know Quark Xpress (i switched to ID from Pagemaker -not bad but unprofessional-), but i lestened from other professionals (design, prepress) Indesign it’s better than Quark.
Quark 6 (and Photoshop 8) is good only to obtain more OSX switchers, and i’m happy with this, because i know and i see lots of professional designers working with Mac OS 9. Now it only remains a good Freehand release (with font grouping) or Illustrator with multiple pages
Quark has disappointed me for the last time. I’ve switched to InDesign, and I don’t see quark doing anything that would make me go back. Of course I’ll buy it, but i’ll be using ID to author. it’s leaps and bounds ahead of qe6.
I wonder how it will compete with Adobe Indesign, since Indesign has been OS X for a while and offered other advantages over Quark Express.
As a minor dissent, PageMaker is a very professional DTP program–it just didn’t keep up with the prepress market. Color management, particularly related to high-end output devices and issues like color separation, trapping and knockouts, just isn’t up to the standard Quark Xpress 3 set, and ultimately InDesign was created because Adobe decided it’d be easier to build a new system on the internal framework they used for in-house programs to address those shortcomings than to adapt the DTP systems they bought from Aldus and Frame. On the flip side, PageMaker supports some things–notably tables and automatic lists (tables of contents, indexes, cross-references, etc.)–that as far as I know Xpress and InDesign still don’t support out of the box but instead rely on (usually extra-cost) plug-ins to achieve. If your DTP work doesn’t require heavy lifting with respect to colors and image processing, PageMaker may still be an excellent choice.
Hi there.
I read you are all happy working in Quark and InDesign but
– have you tried fantastic DTP program [that is very similar to QuarkXpress] named PageStream? It is available for Mac, PC, Amiga and Linux platforms. It is the best program I’ve ever worked on [and I worked both in Quark and InDesign].
For more info you can read on http://www.grasshopperllc.com or http://www.pagestream.de URLs.
Nick.