QuarkXPress and adobe, which is better? Please help me with the great god.
I haven’t thought about Quark XPress for years. To some degree, they screwed themselves, and, to some degree, Adobe screwed them. I don’t know anyone that still uses Quark.
Of course, you can use either to execute particular aspects of graphic design work.
The one you like better.
With respect to the Adobe apps, the equivalent would be their user-to-user forums at https://forums.adobe.com/welcome
It has to do with PostScript. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PostScript
Quark Xpress was at one time the best you could get (going back a few years here), but they only ever licensed parts of Postscript from Adobe. Because of this, Quark Xpress always had problems, but for the most part we learned how to get around them. It was better than PageMaker from Adobe, its main competitor on a number of fronts - not least of which was the user interface which was more user-friendly.
Then Adobe brought out InDesign. InDesign was built around Postscript from the start, and fully integrated with Adobe’s other flagship software, Illustrator and PhotoShop. Most Quark users also used PhotoShop and Illustrator so the user interface that InDesign used was already familiar.
I had been a quark user since version 1.0, and I knew as soon as I saw InDesign that Quark Xpress was in big trouble.
I know that there are loyal Quark users out there, and probably on this forum, but I would never recommend Quark over InDesign.
^What StudioMonkey said.
Quark also shot themselves in the foot for a long time with their limited artboard size. While they have addressed that in the latest versions it is too little too late. I do pretty much exclusively wide format print work and I have not seen a Quark file in 4 years now (tomorrow someone will send me one, you watch.) I have not even upgraded from V7 and won’t until forced to. We can use V7 for our archived jobs and have no use for it otherwise (no, it doesn’t work to convert to ID, too many custom Xtensions, remember those things?. Needed em just to add functionality to Quark, but we were trying to make it do things it wasn’t meant to do…)
I guess I have no valid opinion on modern Quark. Haven’t used it in it’s present iteration.
I downloaded a trial version of the newest QuarkXPress a couple of months ago and was pleasantly surprised. I didn’t use it for anything other than experimenting, but from what I saw, I liked it. I might change my mind on that if I actually used it for some real projects, but my initial impression was positive.
What I didn’t see, however, was anything that wowed me to the point of saying to myself that I really needed to buy a copy. As much as I’ve learned to dislike Adobe and their ransomware, which is rapidly turning into hatred, the monopoly they have on graphic design software is difficult extract oneself from. Even if I did decide to make a switch to QuarkXPress, I’d still need to keep paying out money for Adobe’s Creative Cloud in order to get the other software that comes with it, which really lessens the incentive to switch.
Now if Quark (or anyone else) came out with good, solid and viable alternatives to Photoshop, Illustrator and InDesign without the subscription crap that Adobe’s forced upon us, I’d switch in a heartbeat.
Yeah, don’t get me started on the subscription model.
Make PDF editable? Copy and paste as vectors from Excel (e.g. Pie Charts)? Create native apps (free of charge)? Create progressive web apps? Export PDF/A? Non-destructive Image Editing? Edit kerning tables? And more that QuarkXPress 2018 can do?
Sure, if you decide for the Happy Meal it’s easier. However there are other yummy delights that you need to get from multiple sources: http://www.planetquark.com/2017/05/18/the-non-rental-suite/
Meet 3000+ users here: https://www.facebook.com/groups/quarkxpress/
The problem is that I don’t really have a need for those features or have other, more specialized applications to accomplish them. I’m not looking for a Swiss Army Knife. What Quark really needs to do is bring back the old Martian ray gun Easter egg — I’d much rather have that than an option to edit kerning tables.
If there were viable alternatives to Adobe’s CC, I’d jump ship. From what I’ve seen, the latest versions of Quark are just that, but the leading contenders for replacing Illustrator and Photoshop (Affinity Designer and Affinity Photo) are not yet there. But they are promising unless Affinity decides to focus more on the amateur/hobbyist crowd instead of professionals, which I’m suspecting might be the case.
I do like your reference to the Creative Cloud as a Happy Meal , but Adobe never includes the toy that’s supposed to come with it. Also, thanks for the reference to other software. That’s very useful.
Have a look at Photoline please. Its price might make it look like a hobbyist app, but it’s powerful, feels a bit like an older version of PS.
Thank you for your valuable insights.