Quark – have shocked me

[B&Wtoon]

as a long time user of quark (some would say a masochist) I am shocked that they are going to provide an impressive xtension for FREE!!

http://www.macworld.co.uk/procreative/news/index.cfm?newsid=17466

I know some would say that some of these features should be in the initial programme, but in fairness they have paid big money and are going to give it away, free!

It includes amongst others: XPert Scale: Scale multiple objects and their contents in a layout quickly and easily. – yes yes yes!

QXP 6.5 is riddled with bugs but 7.1 seems to be the biz – I'm in shock think I'll seek medical attention .

 

[xfiftyfour]

Quark 7 is a huge improvement over 6.5, but I still prefer InDesign...

 

[MRU]

^ I'd tend to agree. Quark to me has always seemingly been 'antiquated'.

 

[Blue Velvet]

^ I'd tend to agree. Quark to me has always seemingly been 'antiquated'.

Not when it had certain features that InDesign lacked at the time, like being able to build multi-ink blends... but are we talking about InDesign? No.

Personally, I find InDesign's implementation of master pages rigid and antiquated, having to unlock elements on derived pages in order to remove or alter them, but I just don't understand this constant reflex to drag in talk of another app when discussing a Quark topic. Is it relevant? Is it even interesting?

Anyway, more functionality at no cost for Quark? Great. Just as long as it doesn't require other users to have the same set of xtensions in order to open the document. Pasteboard Xtension anyone?

In an attempt to hold marketshare, Quark's strategy seems to be to quickly supply additional functionality free within the same product versions in order to compete on perceived value, much as was done with 6.x and Quark Vista. I am sure we will see a 7.5 with more goodies... and v8 is bound to have Quark Interactive Designer built-in, not as an optional module.

 

[Stampyhead]

Anyway, more functionality at no cost for Quark? Great. Just as long as it doesn't require other users to have the same set of xtensions in order to open the document. Pasteboard Xtension anyone?

Holy crap, I almost forgot about that abomination. That was my biggest pet peeve when I did production work back in the late '90s. Thank goodness I don't use Quark anymore...

 

[B&Wtoon]

Anyway, more functionality at no cost for Quark? Great. Just as long as it doesn't require other users to have the same set of xtensions in order to open the document. Pasteboard Xtension anyone?

I suppose we will see on tuesday – surely if its a free download anyway why would it be an issue? I have stayed away from any Xtensions since Pasteboard Xtension but I am hoping this is not another cynical trap to cough up £££ for problems.

One issue is backward compatibility to earlier editions as many are still using v4 (majority in here). But with advancing features there will be losers. What peed me off with previous updates purchased had little in the way of new features but were forced because of OSX, etc.

 

[xfiftyfour]

Not when it had certain features that InDesign lacked at the time, like being able to build multi-ink blends... but are we talking about InDesign? No.

Personally, I find InDesign's implementation of master pages rigid and antiquated, having to unlock elements on derived pages in order to remove or alter them, but I just don't understand this constant reflex to drag in talk of another app when discussing a Quark topic. Is it relevant? Is it even interesting?

Way to go off on an unnecessary rant.
Now jump off that high horse.

I'd say it IS relevant, considering Quark lost its status as the industry standard to InDesign because "6.5 is riddled with bugs." I was commenting on the fact that "7.1 seems to be the biz," and much better than 6.5, but that I still preferred InDesign.

Pretty relevant, I'd say.

 

[B&Wtoon]

considering Quark lost its status as the industry standard to InDesign....Pretty relevant, I'd say.

if BV is like me, she is fed up with unconstructive InDesign posts slagging off Quark because Indesign is best, blah, blah, blah yawn.

The original post was meant as help to other Quark users and never meant to be because I think I now have a bigger todger than InDesign users.

I have but choose not to use InDesign CS2 because I fear I will start posting irrelevant posts about other software. – My horse is almighty I cant see the floor, so I will stay here and rant.

 

[Blue Velvet]

Way to go off on an unnecessary rant.
Now jump off that high horse.

I'd say it IS relevant, considering Quark lost its status as the industry standard to InDesign because "6.5 is riddled with bugs." I was commenting on the fact that "7.1 seems to be the biz," and much better than 6.5, but that I still preferred InDesign.

Pretty relevant, I'd say.

Industry standard? Where? Not here in the UK; not one of our dozen or so suppliers uses it. I would hazard a guess that here in the UK it's prob. about 30/70 in Quark's favour.

And no, it's not relevant at all... it irritates the hell out of me because I wasn't replying to your post and this thread isn't about InDesign. Although it is now.

Cheers.

BTW: I also like and use InDesign for certain projects so you I'm not neccesarily a fan-girl. Just one who appreciates a conversation about publishing software not to descend into a project-bashing session. This isn't the Gaming Forum, you know.

 

[xfiftyfour]

Industry standard? Where? Not here in the UK; not one of our dozen or so suppliers uses it. I would hazard a guess that here in the UK it's prob. about 30/70 in Quark's favour.

And no, it's not relevant at all... it irritates the hell out of me because I wasn't replying to your post and this thread isn't about InDesign. Although it is now.

Cheers.

BTW: I also like and use InDesign for certain projects so you I'm not neccesarily a fan-girl. Just one who appreciates a conversation about publishing software not to descend into a project-bashing session. This isn't the Gaming Forum, you know.

No, perhaps not in the UK, but in the US it sure did.

And yes, I still firmly stand that wherever Quark is mentioned in regards to "shocking" someone, then it's relevant that InDesign is the preferred program.. whether or not you agree. Relevant isn't a tricky word.. it simply means when two things are "closely connected".. Is InDesign not also a page layout program that a designer might grab for instead of Quark? Is it not feasible that when someone considers Quark and its features, that they might also think of InDesign and the comparison between the two? =Relevancy.

I'm sorry if I didn't realize that there's an ongoing annoyance of people feeling it necessary to respond with a comment about InDesign wherever Quark is mentioned, but that certainly doesn't make my comment irrelevant. I was commenting on the OP's last remark in his original post - not to be annoying or reitterate old sores.