Customer Reviews

QuarkXpress 5.0

5 star:		(6)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

I made up my mind a year ago to learn 4 computer art/graphics based programs, the industry leaders. These were Photoshop, Illustrator, Dreamweaver and Quark. Of the four, my worst experience has been with Quark. I find myself fighting it every step of the way and that there is no intuitive sense to its interface. To add insult to injury, it is by far the more expensive of the 4 programs. To think that this program is ... more than Photoshop, an absolute masterpiece of a program, boggles my mind! I also find the educational support materials and online assistance for this product way below what is available for the other three. Adobe's website is a consumer/educational paradise in comparison to Quark's idea of consumer/educational support. I've just seen Adobe's In Design, the competitor for this product, demonstrated live in the classroom and I am eager to try it instead, especially since it was designed to work hand in hand with Photoshop and Illustrator. My design work uses a lot of visuals so Photoshop-friendly is very important to me. I'd try this product and Adobe's In Design out at your local community college first before spending this kind of money on this program. I also saw in the classroom demo that you can pull any of your existing Quark files right into Adobe's In Design so no one should have trouble switching over to it.

Pay no attention to the catty doom-sayers: QuarkXPress is here to stay. Quark is too firmly entrenched in the collective consciousness of the computer community at large, and has too many diehard loyalists, to go quietly into that good night, just because a certain monopolistic competitor is banging loudly at the gate. The demand for Version 6, released in June, is phenomenally high. The reason is elementary: Quark is the best LAYOUT program - an all-important distinction - available, period, and has been since the dawn of desktop publishing.

My personal experience with Quark goes back to 1993, when I started a home-based advertising agency specializing in Yellow Page advertising. Quark was the first program I loaded on my then-formidable Macintosh Centris 610 (which nowadays sits on a couple of cement blocks out in the yard). I had never touched a computer in my life before then, but I felt an instant rapport with Quark, whose logical interface brilliantly exemplified the "your computer is your desktop" metaphor. (I might add, before starting my business, I had been a "paste-up artist" for nearly ten years, working with X-acto knives, layout boards, art wax, etc. It was easy for me to make a seamless transition from these tactile tools to Quark's virtual workspace.) To those who find Quark "non-intuitive," "non-user friendly," "frustrating" and "difficult," I politely suggest, perhaps you are in the wrong business. I've found Quark to be the polar opposite of these pejoratives.

For ten years now, Quark has been my primary program AND my favorite one. No exaggeration: I could not have survived the text-intensive world of the Yellow Pages without Quark's peerless typographical capabilities. I use Quark not only for my bread-and-butter YP work, but for virtually every print need imaginable: forms, labels, brochures, newsletters, calendars, greeting cards - you name it. For business correspondence and for creative or leisure writing (including all my Amazon reviews), Quark is also my chosen collaborator. After ten years, we're inseparable.

Sure, Quark has its quirks - I defy you to name an application that doesn't. (For instance, whenever I collapse a window in Illustrator, my G-4 freezes. I've never been able to figure that one out.) Considering the myriad of GREAT things about Quark, I prefer to think of its occasional lapses as the entertaining skulduggery of cyber-gremlins, no doubt playing pool with all those ones and zeroes. I never get bent out of shape over Quark's idiosyncrasies, because these, too, shall pass with a little sweet-talk, patience and tinkering.

I will never throw Quark over for Adobe InDesign for several reasons. One, I am too fond of and too loyal to Quark ever to betray my trust in the product. Two, I have nothing but admiration for the maverick Quark company, which has steadfastly resisted encroachments on its territory. And three, I have enough Adobe products already, thank you very much. I like them well enough, but I will not put any more money in the coffers of a humongous company that enjoys quite enough dominance already and has no business trying to rope and tie my favorite maverick.

It's important for desktop publishers and other professionals to have choices that don't include Adobe in their titles. For me, the only choice is QuarkXPress.

We have been using Quark in our design office for three years, and are extremely glad to have finally purchased InDesign to replace it.

For too long now, we tolerated Quark's limitations and non-user friendly interface. When we purchased it, we were sold on the program's multi-page layout "strengths" (smirk). But printing a 170 page book, three times a year, has proven to be a feat/ritual, each time we need to proof, then more problems when we pdf files to press.

Maps I placed as .eps files 4 months ago have to be replaced because otherwise they print blurry. As soon as I REPLACE the map with the same .eps map file, it prints fine. Why do I only have this problem with "Quirk? "

What a hassle. It's not our printer network folks, it's not us, and it's certainly not our G4 Firewire 800s. It's the quirky make-up of Quark. Bugs continue to shoot out of it to this day.

I have more bad examples but I won't go on. If you don't take my word for it, fine. Call any design/print shop in the city you live in and ask when & why they switched to Indesign. You will be shocked.

Quark is a rapidly burning and sinking ship. You can't say I didn't warn you.

This is the one you want. Not PageMaker. Not InDesign. And whatever you do, don't buy Publisher.

Buy Quark.

Sure, you'll lay down some serious bucks. But you want to do the job right. Service bureaus will love you, printing houses will get the job done for you as you expect, and you'll save money over the long haul.

There are some new features, and, depending what you are into, not all may be important. For me, I dig the tables and layers. I can do less work to do the same job.

The tables feature is less clunky than in previous versions of Quark. You can manipulate them more efficiently and cleanly, and have tables within tabkes within tables.

Layers are great for creating various versions of a document within the same context. Rather than create a bunch of master pages, the layers option is much handier.

Also very cool is the web-design aspect. It isn't quite Dreamweaver, but it has increased its capacity to be opened in Dreamweaver. Design in Quark, then open it in Dreamweaver. This allows better control within your graphic design department, especially in smaller businesses where the web guy is not necessarily a strong designer.

There is the XML export option, but I've not explored this. It seems to open the door for better online publishing, however, and is worth figuring out, especially in light of Quark's web design strengths.

I fully recommend Quark 5.0.

Anthony Trendl
editor, HungarianBookstore.com

I've been working for a print shop for around three years now, and have been doing computer aided design work for about 7 years now and I must say that Quark is simply the best in desktop publishing software there is, well worth the extra money over PageMaker, InDesign, and the very very sad Publisher.

Sure, Quark isn't quite as friendly as PageMaker, but there is a reason for that. Quark works on logic as opposed to trying to be "friendly". Quark was obviously designed by people who were actually layout artists before the days of computerized design, and it shows. The layout looks exactly like what you would see on an old mock-up.

Granted this means you have to know a bit about layout and design, but you get much better results, and the pre press department at the printer will love you if you use Quark correctly. PageMaker and InDesign are clunky and a bit obnoxious to deal with.

Our shops usual response to someone asking what program to use it "Find someone to design it for you in Quark". It's not a tool for someone to run out and buy if they don't know what they are doing, but it's deffinately the tool to use for professional results.

It took an entire year to save up enough money to buy this product. My plan was to go all the way professional, by using Quark as the defacto DTP program on my machine. After a miserable experience with PageMaker 7, I said to myself I would stay with Publisher forever. After much reviewing and testing, I finally, pushed my self to fork out the cash. I have heard a lot of people say that Quark is difficult and is not intuitive like other lowend DTPs and I agree in some respects. It works just like most DTPs, you create text boxes and link them. One feature I thank Quark for putting in this version is the table feature, I have heard of many bad experiences with importing tables in previous versions. The product is simple and easy to use although I recommend that users doing simple desktop publishing stick with Microsoft Publisher. Reason why I decided to really purchase this product was because our Youth Publication had reached 50 pages and Publisher was giving some problems handling that amount of pages, so we thougth it was time to bring in the heavy guns. We are enjoying the programe it does what it does, its just the same as it was in Publisher. It was difficult transferring the publication from MS Publisher to Quark, I had to find an extension for that. Our publications are much the same only thing is we are able control the amount of pages.
Adobe Indesign is o.k. but the print house or print press does not support it, so that's another thing to remember choosing a DTP program.

I've been using this program since it first came out and was compatible with pre-press, what a great thing that was!!!! I was using PageMaker, but at the time, Quark was pre-press capable & PageMaker was NOT. Once you know it...it is great. It is for the serious graphic designer for page layout, brochures, etc. That is why ALL good printing companies use Quark. If you plan on going to press...Quark has been there from the start...PageMaker is finally catching up.

I learned how to effectively use Quark in the first 2 weeks of my college Prepress class, and anybody in the design world knows that if you can't use it you're a novice. It's itelligent, straight forward and an essential program for any graphic designer to master. All the complaints about this program are the result of non professionals who are either unwilling or unable to learn how to use it properly. "In Design" - what a joke. I love Adobe products, but let's get serious. If you can't use Quark, you might as well start applying for a job designing the Church Newsletter, because you can't get a top level design position without knowing this program. If you are studying to be a designer - trust me... learn it, know it, love it!

Working for a large commercial printer of books and magazines, I gasp everytime someone sends us a book in anything other than Quark. On the Mac and especially on the PC, you can't beat it for ease of use, design functions and "RIPablity" to our high end image setters. Quark 5 rocks!!

This new version will likely have the bugs worked out of it for months to come, but so it is with every program. I recommend Quark 5 simply because it is THE standard for DTP. If you are new to page layout, don't skimp on an Adobe product, go for this and interface easier with your service bureau. If you are not new, then you've already made up your mind . . ...