Canadian Mac Forums at ehMac banner
1 - 20 of 29 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
37 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Howdy everyone...

I am BRAND new to macs and to the DTP world. Trying to learn quark or indesign in a hurry so I can do some of the more basic page layout tasks involved in publishing my 24 page FREE newspaper this spring/summer.

I'm just wondering what the general concensus is out there regarding programs: I need to learn ONE and one only, so should it be quark or indesign???

Which is easier to work with? Is the print industry up to snuff on indesign?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,115 Posts
Acutally, from what I've seen so far, InDesign has borrowed a lot of their layout from QuarkXPress, yet maintained their unique GUI that follow through from Photoshop and Illustrator. What I've read on the net, Adobe did this intentionally to attract Quark users.

So, if you're starting from scratch, go for InDesign. It's better integrated with other Adobe products, has more features that matter and has better support. And I'm a Quark user for all of 7 years, so that's saying a lot.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,423 Posts
I would deffinetly say go for indesign, although I am not very familiar with indesign, I am very frustrated with Quarks products, and customer support. Save yourself some headaches and stick with adobe products if possible.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
268 Posts
i'm sure a lot of people wish they had this choice back in the mid-90s. i've been a quark user since '97 and i'll be glad to see it gone for good.

unfortunately, though, it's still a quark xpress world when it comes to publishing.

but you need to ask yourself a couple of questions: will i be dealing with many third parties when it comes to printing? is your printer/bureau set up for handling indesign files? they should be by now. if they aren't, you might consider switching printers.

that said, do you have the horsepower to run indesign? like most adobe app's since the late 90's, it's ram hungry and likes a bigger and better mac to perform on. quark xpress runs on considerably less processing power.

that said, i'm using quark xpress 6 for panther at work on a 933mhz g4 w/1G of ram, and i have to say, it sucks pretty hard. all kinds of bugs (a "normal" feature of any vers. of quark), and still still still, no keyboard shortcuts for selecting tools from the tool palette. this alone drives me crazy. an extremely unwieldy application which demands that YOU succumb to IT and offers little user comfort along the way.

when all is said and done, go for indesign, if you can.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
108 Posts
Go for Indesign. I’ve used both and find Indesign to be great, especially for creating PDF documents.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
291 Posts
I'd have to strongly agree with The Librarian. To someone new to the industry, I'd say go with InDesign, although I haven't had the opportunity to use it yet myself. Chances are good you'll be using one or two of Adobe's other packages (Illustrator, Photoshop, Acrobat) which all play very well together which translates to ease of use. Your only real concerns will be horsepower and finding a printer that uses InDesign. Start talking to the printers and service bureaus now to get a feel for what you might be up against. It may not be that bad, I'm a bit out of touch.

Success!!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,115 Posts
One thing I will noticed in InDesign's ability to import Quark projects is It's flawed. I have a massive library of jobs I've worked on in Quark (not to mention it's the predominant file format used by clients that I work with) that I tried InDesign's import feature and every time I've tried it ends with something—anything, getting screwed up. It's not consistent. Simple things, like text boxes, would be in the wrong position.

So, if you know you'll be dealing with a lot of Quark users, this is one thing to keep in mind.

Be warned. ;)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,951 Posts
Having imported hundreds of Quark documents into InDesign, I've had no bad experiences other than minor kerning and tracking adjustments. InDesign CS seems to have conquered that issue, allowing me perfect imports.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,304 Posts
If I was an investor in Quark, I would be very worried after reading comments here and many other places regarding their product. True, they've long owned the market, but it would appear that a lot of designers have had enough with their lack of client support and have bid them farewell in Adobe's favour.

Might be early still for me to say this, but I suspect that Quark will someday soon become another textbook example of how a successful business can come undone in a hurry when you don't work hard enough at customer service and responding to the needs of your user base.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
126 Posts
It is amazing to hear all the support for Indesign.
I know 1.0 was very buggy, but as stated, 2.0 is much better. I work for a trade printer and we will not except Indesign files.
It sounds like we better get our act together very soon.
Quark 4.1 is a great product, but I feel it is doomed because of panther. It seems 5.0 and 6.0 are a mess, which means I believe Indesign will gain in popularity.
Judging by this thread, it already has.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
26 Posts
If I was starting from scratch, I would probably go with InDesign.
Having said that, I design a 72 page monthly magazine and the workflow with Quark 4.1 and flightcheck is still the most stable solution available.

I own a G4 Quicksilver 933 with 20" cinema display and have two internal hd and use dual boot. I don't like working in classic, so I boot in OS 9 every time I need to use Quark 4.1, for Photoshop and everything else, I reboot in Panther. The printer we use doesn't accept Indesign files and they haven't migrated to OS X yet, so I'm stuck for now.

I'm dying to get a G5 or even the new 20" imac looks very tempting for the price, if they could only boot in OS 9...
 

·
ehMac KungFu Master
Joined
·
5,768 Posts
As a technician dealing with Quark since its inception and having swtiched to InDesign since version 1.0 I can tell you a few observations:

1. Adobe as added tons of new features and fixed everything from version 1.0 (it was pretty rough but showed potential). We are currently at the FOURTH version of InDesign now (1.0, 1.5, 2.0 and now CS). The CS version is FABULOUS

2. Quark WASTED their time with version 5. Version is 6 a huge mess with a terrible PDF creation interface, does not take advantage of Quartz in ANY way (try rotating some text and see what happens). Product activation that is too restritive and I could go on and on.

Regardless of the advantages and disadvantages of each program (nobody who's actually used both will ague that InDesign is the more modern application) if you look at the current situation with each program you will see that Quark is shooting itself in the foot at every chance they get (you should have been at the Apple Driven by Design Seminar late last year, the poor Quark guy almost got tar and feathered). Adobe continues to improve their product line every year. We have been waiting for Q 6.1 since November and its been delayed again.

In the end, learn both if you can but do not rely on Quark, instead master InDesign for in the next coming years that is where the demand will be.

Don't believe me?
Read this:

GXO Quark 6, the last upgrade?

and read this as well:

ArsTechica InDesign CS review

Shameless plug: We have a Quark to InDesign migration seminar we do privately for companies wishing to move into the 21st century.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,014 Posts
Indesign is the modern application and it has tons of feature and abilities that Quark can only dream of copying.

That being said... Quark 4.11 and OS 9 are still 90% of the professional Print industry.... Some will argue that, usually designers who have switched... Some will support that, usually printers and service bureau prepress types...

Regardless of which side you favour, no one disputes that QX 4.11 and OS9 are stagnent {Stability is not a bad thing} and on the edge of a precepice. OS X is starting to gain mainstream acceptance and classic is not a professional option, in the long run.

Wheither Quark gets its act together and releases an acceptable upgrade or dies in Indesign's shadow {Dropshadow effect} is immaterial.

For now however, no one is placing empoloyment ads looking for Indesign people... they always list Quark, Illustrator & Photoshop...

The 2 programs are not that different really, Quark is a good base, Indesign is an added bonus, don't limit yourself be rigidly choosing one over the other.

Publishing your own Free newspaper will either make you lots of money or be a character building experience. Choice of software should reflect the requirements of the company that is printing it for you. If you are in control of that, then the choice is yours.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
69 Posts
Despite the overwhelming support for InDesign, I have never liked it and strongly recommend Quark.

The only advantage InDesign has over Quark is its ability to natively import other Adobe files such as Photoshop and Illustrator.

However I find the Quark interface more intuitive and neither product does tables very well.

Yes, Quark is a mature product meaning there have not been a plethora of new tools. It does what it does and it does it very well. It does lack the promise of the Bells and Whistles that Adobe is attempting to seduce users with, but at the end of the day, there is a reason Quark is used by most serious periodic publications: large user base; availability of good training and self-training material; wide service bureau support....

For those who think Quark is a dinosaur soon to meet its end, may I remind you that not too long ago similar opinions were held of Apple and IBM. Quark is simply too big to role over and play dead; it will survive.

DMG
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
554 Posts
I have never used Indesign myself. I dont have it and have only seen it opened infront of me once. But i do suspect once I get it I will much prefer it. I am currently, and have always, used quark. Right now Im running both 5 and 6. Havent used 6 enough to say what I hate about it.

I dont know If Indesign offers all of the features that Quark does but Im guessing it probably does.

I would say: "F Quark, go for indesign cs!"

adobe's user interface (photoshop, Illustrator) is great. Easy to figure out. Im sure Indesign is the same. Quark however, is not.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,465 Posts
I'll vote for InDesign. I have used Quark very little, but I use InDesign 2.0 all the time, both at home and at work. I have known many Quark users who love the program (at least version 4.x and previous) but hate the company. Quark has always looked pretty crude to my eyes - Indesign 2.0 is a smooth, full-fledged OS X app, and a pleasure to use.

Cheers :-> Bill
 
1 - 20 of 29 Posts
Top