Quark 6 in January

[dschlow]

quark 6

I was at the apple store in Soho last saturday (which by the way is amazing) and Quark had a rep there giving a lecture. While most of what he was saying was basic stuff, he did mention that with Jaguar up to speed that quark 6 was not too far behind. Or as he put it "Don't be suprised if you get an early christmas present". Now while I take what he said with a grain of salt, it's not unrealistic to think a new version would be out by Jan.

I actually sent a message to the site earlier, but I guess i didn't have any hard proof to back it up

 

[bousozoku]

Re: Quark

Originally posted by MM2270


Yes, it's coming, but so is the end of the world . Hopefully Quark for OS X will be released before that.

I really think it was a stupid move for Quark to even release version 5.0 at all. Someone there wasn't thinking or paying attention. They would have been better of going back to the start and working on a carbon version of XPress way back when they were working on the early vers. 5, even if that meant releasing it much later, like November of this year. Now, any poor sap that upgraded to 5.0 thinking that it would take Quark another eon to come out with the next verison will have to pay up for yet another upgrade. This just makes thm look disprganized. Besides, unless Quark pulls a miracle out of their @sses, I doubt it will be half as cool as InDesign. Unfortunately that won't matter, because for now Quark still has dominating control in the electronic publishing industry. So it's likely everyones been waiting and will jump on this release, whenever it comes.

It looks like 6 is just 5.1 Carbon-ized. They won't do anything special. I'm glad that they finally released 5.0 but it's so full of bugs (as usual) that it's difficult to use (again). Certainly, they could have found better or different programmers, instead of bitter and indifferent programmers, to accelerate their development.

They needed to release 5.0 just to get upgrade money so they could finish it. Now, with that 6.0, they'll want a lot more money. I doubt that the Windows users will buy it at all.

 

[Foulger]

Quark and 2003

Thats if Quark are still around in 2003! Their outrageous price, second only to M$ coupled with the number of people changing to InDesign may have finally (hopefully) spelt doom to this greedy corporation (lower case deliberate)

 

[jackthemac]

Switch to OS X

We have yet to switch to OSX, and do not see it happening any time in the near future.

Why?

Well, it's not really due to Quark...which is what we use, I personally do not care for indesign.

But rather due to Microsoft Outlook 2001. This software still runs in classic and not native to OSX, and since it is the only piece of software that is integrated with Microsoft Exchange Server, we are stuck waiting for an OSX version.

Since this is an app that runs on our machines all day, I do not feel any need to switch to X just to have 9 run all day. Buggy, buggy, buggy.

So I figure, even though it may take Quark forever to release 6, it may still happen before Outlook 2001.

Maybe then we'll switch over .

Does anyone know of Microsoft developments for Outlook 2001

 

[gropo]

Re: Quark

Originally posted by MM2270
They would have been better of going back to the start and working on a carbon version of XPress way back when they were working on the early vers. 5, even if that meant releasing it much later, like November of this year. Now, any poor sap that upgraded to 5.0 thinking that it would take Quark another eon to come out with the next verison will have to pay up for yet another upgrade.

Yes, but a pre-emptive shift to Carbon development could only have been possible if:

A) Quark wasn't built upon flaky, "App that Jack built" home-brewed API's (ever notice how QXP1-5.x *never* used the platinum appearance under OS 8.x-9.x?)

and

B) Quark's high-mucky-mucks didn't believe up until 6 months ago that the Press/PrePress/Design industry was inevitably shifting over to WindBlows. (Why shouldn't we believe them to be so misconceived? Look at thier goddamn complacency with Adobe nipping @ thier heels like a ferocious champion pitbull with a 14-0 career)

DIE QUARK DIE!!

 

[gropo]

Re: I know... I know...

Originally posted by iN8
We feel your pain. really!

Is there a site out there that acts as a Quark Victim Support Group? It's time we banded together to alleviate some of the stress.

"Hi, My name's Gropo, and I'm a Quark User"

P.S. My G/F works at Parade Publications and has gotten so very sick and fscking tired of me bitching about Quark whenever she brings work home for me to help her with...

Sincerely, tired-of-the-complaints-falling-on-dead-ears

 

[serke]

MultiAd Creator

There is another option in the world of page layout. Although designed for the newspaper industry MultiAd Creator is a viable alternative to Quark and InDesign. Creator 6 has been out for some time and 6.5 is currently in demo form and both are OS X native. Both have some pretty cool features...

You can download the demo at:

http://www.creatorsoftware.com/support/demodownload.shtml

Just thought I'd toss my two cents in...thanks

 

[MM2270]

Re: Switch to OS X

Originally posted by jackthemac
We have yet to switch to OSX, and do not see it happening any time in the near future.

Why?

Well, it's not really due to Quark...which is what we use, I personally do not care for indesign.

But rather due to Microsoft Outlook 2001. This software still runs in classic and not native to OSX, and since it is the only piece of software that is integrated with Microsoft Exchange Server, we are stuck waiting for an OSX version.

Since this is an app that runs on our machines all day, I do not feel any need to switch to X just to have 9 run all day. Buggy, buggy, buggy.

So I figure, even though it may take Quark forever to release 6, it may still happen before Outlook 2001.

Maybe then we'll switch over .

Does anyone know of Microsoft developments for Outlook 2001

I've heard that the Jaguar release of OS X's Mail app will be able to connect to Outlook servers. I really don't know if that's true, but I would suggest you get a copy of 10.2 when it's out and install and play with it on some test machine if you have one. If it does integrate with Exchange servers, then you can dump Outlook 2001 and go with OS X.

Of course, it's sound like you really want to wait for an OS X version of Quark anyway. I'm not sure why you don't care for InDesign, but to each his own I guess. Personally I really don't think we'll be seeing that native XPress in early 2003 as this article suggests. I have a hard time believing that the glacially moving Quark can get this version out that fast. Plus, they seem to be serious about doing a LOT of testing with new versions before releasing them. So if this is their 1st OS X app (and only one!) then you can bet this will go through a long round of testing. If not, then they'll release a buggy app that would be just as bad as releasing it really late. So either way, I think Quark lost the game!

 

[dongmin]

ha ha...entertaining thread

Nothing like good ol' Quark to get people riled up and use 18-pt. bold type in their posts.

Seriously, has Quark added any real features since 3.x??? I never bothered going from 3.x to 4, and the new features in 5 seem really lame. Quark 3.x was a decent app way back when, but comon, this is 2002.

All this talk of Quark releasing a major update before Xmas--they're just pulling your chain, trying to keep you from switching...

 

[Wry Cooter]

Re: Quark Xpress 6 in jan?

Originally posted by MacArtist
If it does come in January, that'll the fastest version ugrade Quark has ever had.

I truly doubt they sold as many as 100 copies of 5. That's the real reason, that and InDesign.

Of course it has to be carbon.

 

[gopher]

Re: Quark is ABSOLUTELY useless

Originally posted by Moxiemike
I have InDesign running, i'm 100% more productive, since its SO integrated with PS7 and AI10, it rocks, plain and simple, and blows Quack Quack out of the water.

Even my prepress and print shops are using it. You just have to bully them. "oh, well, I'll take this $10,000 print job to another place"

Believe me, ID will be installed on their machines in seconds. I know. I've seen it.

m

Tell that to 80% of the newspaper publishers in this country that use QuarkXpress and have their work saved in that format. And then when they attempt to migrate over to InDesign they lose data. Until Quark for X or a decent translator to InDesign from Quark is released no newspaper editor worth his salt will switch to Mac OS X. And then all those plugins need to be recompiled.

 

[Moxiemike]

Re: Re: Quark is ABSOLUTELY useless

Originally posted by gopher


Tell that to 80% of the newspaper publishers in this country that use QuarkXpress and have their work saved in that format. And then when they attempt to migrate over to InDesign they lose data. Until Quark for X or a decent translator to InDesign from Quark is released no newspaper editor worth his salt will switch to Mac OS X. And then all those plugins need to be recompiled.

Did i say i was a newspaper publisher? Nope. Quark is a production artists tool. If you are a production artist, and chances are that if you're working for an np then you are, Quark is a decent tool. But for real-deal creatives working at small to mid-size to large agencies, InDesign is a PERFECTLY viable option. And you don't NEED plugins..... it has every feature Quark has, and also has the plugs that you'd have to buy third-party (pasteboard???? WTF?)

And, FYI, the translator from Quark to ID works very well... that is, if you KNOW what you're doing when you put together a Quark document. Do a hack job? Get a hack conversion.

You know what I mean???

 

[bousozoku]

Re: Re: Quark Xpress 6 in jan?

Originally posted by Wry Cooter


I truly doubt they sold as many as 100 copies of 5. That's the real reason, that and InDesign.

Of course it has to be carbon.

They may have sold half that many to my school since I've been using version 5.x in class and that room has probably 30 machines.

 

[Wry Cooter]

Re: Re: Re: Quark Xpress 6 in jan?

Originally posted by bousozoku


They may have sold half that many to my school since I've been using version 5.x in class and that room has probably 30 machines.

Do they teach the concept called 'hyperbole' at your school? Just kidding, I think we both get each others points.

Most Quark users, some reading among those I'm sure, did get a marketing call from Quark probably to ask why we haven't bought 5 yet. (mine was on my answering machine). The answers to that question are scattered among this thread. I could reduce them all to a letter a couple of spaces from the end of the alphabet which rhymes with grin, but instead I will expand.

1. We didn't need the print to web features of 5, we liked more web specific apps for that.
2. InDesign was starting to a) finally get good, b) downloaded for almost free.
3. As far as timing to what the market wanted, What was due from Quark was something Native to OS X, what they offered was something geared towards a niche we had trained ourselves to be more happy using other products to accomplish.

Most people reading will buy Quark when it is ready for OS X- until then, they will use whatever they have installed, which may be Quark 4.x. Many of us have been using Quark a long time, and have updated when Quark has wanted us too, sometimes before the imagesetting bureaus were ready for us. So we learn that we do not have to jump through every hoop that Denver holds up- only the ones that it makes sense to jump through.

I only hope that those writing plug-ins will be there to help hold the hoop, and that the hoop shows up by next February, otherwise the dog act is over.

 

[Pauls]

Re: Switch to OS X

Originally posted by jackthemac

Does anyone know of Microsoft developments for Outlook 2001 [/B]

There are many options at the moment. We use Outlook 2001 in our design studio, a Mac island in a Windows sea. Before we knew of the Mac client for exchange we used a POP mail client with Exchange. Exchange supports POP. If you don't use calendaring, you can use any mail app with Exchange.

Microsoft have also released an OSX 'Remote Desktop Connection' which allows you to run any windows app on a Windows server from terminal session on your Mac. It seems to be a a better solution than running VPC and installing Windows 2000 on a Mac. It's free and has a lot of potential. (The client is free but beware licensing issues running client apps from a windows server) I've dowloaded this but haven't had a chance to trial it. (See Mactopia at microsoft.com)

I have also trialled Outlook 2001 in Classic without any problems.

 

[bousozoku]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Quark Xpress 6 in jan?

Originally posted by Wry Cooter


Do they teach the concept called 'hyperbole' at your school? Just kidding, I think we both get each others points.
...

I only hope that those writing plug-ins will be there to help hold the hoop, and that the hoop shows up by next February, otherwise the dog act is over.

You're not missing anything. Between QuarkXPress 5.01 and Illustrator 10.0.1, I'm not sure which is buggier, but I'd bet it's XPress.

I just can't believe they're going to number the Carbon version 6...that can only mean that they want to charge full price...even to those who already paid full price for the upgrade to 5.

 

[iH8Quark]

whoopty-f*ckin'-do. Just in time to hopefully go out of business.

As for anyone not liking InDesign...I'm REALLY at a loss. You must not give a thought to your typography. Get real. I still like DOS, but...

 

[creativeczar]

InDesign fighting similar battle

I left Quark behind two years ago. Most designers and art directors who see InDesign on my machine agree it works better than Quark. The stumbling block for InDesign is the same one MS has created for any Word Processing Software in the market. Printers and publishers all use Quark so they determine who uses it on the front line. If you prefer InDesign but can't find a printer who will accept the files, you've got problems. The solution I've found is PDF. Most printers that accept PDF files remark how great the files look and how there are suddenly no problems with my "Quark" files. Guess what, they're InDesign files. PDF makes InDesign a viable option for Art Directors and Designers.

 

[eskilling]

still getting quark projects

Though I spent last weekend really getting to know Indesign and loving it the fact is that I'm still getting projects originally done in Quark. For instance, I've been asked to create a brochure based on a template originally done in Quark. While I know that I could easily do it in Indesign the printers don't support it and I'm not the one making the decision of the printer. sigh. Heck, if Corel can put out two versions of their graphics suite then certainly Quark can update their antiquated code for Mac OS X. *sigh*

 

[idkew]

what took you so long IH8Quark?

Originally posted by iH8Quark
whoopty-f*ckin'-do. Just in time to hopefully go out of business.

As for anyone not liking InDesign...I'm REALLY at a loss. You must not give a thought to your typography. Get real. I still like DOS, but...

I would have thought you would have been the first poster.

As I have said before, I am done with Quark personally, I only use it when I am forced to. A company that works like Quark does not deserve to be in business, especially in this economic climate.

It only took Adobe 2 versions to get way past Quark in nearly every area of typographic design. The only thing I see that InDesign is missing is add ons such as DragX, iQue... that help the production of papers and such.

Will Quark even last long enough to counter Adobe's blow? My guess , if Adobe plays its cards correctly, is no.

 

[idkew]

Expierence?

Originally posted by gopher


Tell that to 80% of the newspaper publishers in this country that use QuarkXpress and have their work saved in that format. And then when they attempt to migrate over to InDesign they lose data. Until Quark for X or a decent translator to InDesign from Quark is released no newspaper editor worth his salt will switch to Mac OS X. And then all those plugins need to be recompiled.

Have you ever worked for a newspaper? I have worked for 3, a monthly, weekly, and daily. Each one had simple templates that were used every day to build the paper. These templates would take between minutes and maybe and hour or two to transfer by hand to InDesign, less with an import and a little fine tuning. This reason is way, way down on the list of why people haven't switched.

My guess is that one big reason, as i said before, is the lack of helper apps for InDesign.

Apple is on the verge of controlling the entire print process. Apple computers running the layout software, Apple servers divvying out graphics and texts. The only thing that apple has no hand in is the actual printing of the paper.

 

[gopher]

I'll be honest, I haven't worked for a newspaper, but have read numerous articles on why migration to Mac OS X has slowed, and all point towards QuarkXpress.

 

[beatle888]

Originally posted by O and A
Sheesh not bad at least we don't have to wait 5 years for another update as is usual with quark
This is good

no kidding, i hate quark...more than any other piece of outdated
software..YES it IS out dated.

I can't believe their calling it quark 6. that company is such a joke.
I wish indesign had the masses to leave quark behind.

they have screwed with their customers so much AND left them
to use a software package that hasnt really changed that much
since i started using it back in what 1991 oh my god that's laughable.

Sure they introduced a few things here and there but god, THEY SUCK.
Their quark 4.0 update cost the printing industry soooooo much money.
Service burues had to say forget the ***** upgrade where going back
to 3.whatever.

Can you tell i think quark sucks?

 

[beatle888]

Re: Expierence?

Originally posted by idkew


Have you ever worked for a newspaper? I have worked for 3, a monthly, weekly, and daily. Each one had simple templates that were used every day to build the paper. These templates would take between minutes and maybe and hour or two to transfer by hand to InDesign, less with an import and a little fine tuning. This reason is way, way down on the list of why people haven't switched.

My guess is that one big reason, as i said before, is the lack of helper apps for InDesign.

Apple is on the verge of controlling the entire print process. Apple computers running the layout software, Apple servers divvying out graphics and texts. The only thing that apple has no hand in is the actual printing of the paper.

well said, that other guy doesnt know what the fnck he's talking about.

 

[beatle888]

Originally posted by gopher
I'll be honest, I haven't worked for a newspaper, but have read numerous articles on why migration to Mac OS X has slowed, and all point towards QuarkXpress.

good for you, it pays to be honest.