or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › QuarkXPress 8 to target Adobe's Creative Suite this August
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

QuarkXPress 8 to target Adobe's Creative Suite this August

post #1 of 51
Thread Starter 
Quark, Inc. is preparing to release a major new version of its flagship QuarkXPress software this fall, aimed at cementing its lead in the market for professional desktop publishing against Adobe's rival InDesign product, AppleInsider has learned.

People familiar with the release say the new version is slated to take on the publishing features of Photoshop, Illustrator and Flash in a revamped, standardized, and polished package that will temporarily be offered as a free upgrade to new buyers of the existing QuarkXPress 7 ahead of the 8.0 release in the August timeframe.

How Adobe Forced Quark to Compete

QuarkXPress 8 will closely follow the release of Quark 7 in 2006, which delivered OpenType, PDF/X, and Unicode features all pioneered by InDesign. Back in 2002, Adobe caught Quark napping and beat it to market in releasing the first desktop publishing tool native to Mac OS X. Adobe subsequently began eating into Quark's business by bundling the relatively new InDesign with its popular Photoshop and Illustrator in the Creative Suite package. It has since added Flash to the mix, which it acquired when buying Macromedia in 2006.

Quark was a year behind in offering a native version for Mac OS X, but has since scrambled to catch up. It beat Adobe in delivering native support for Intel Macs with a Universal Binary distribution of QuarkXPRess 7.01 that arrived eight months ahead of Adobe's universal version of InDesign CS3 (5.0). Â*

Over the last year, Quark has also delivered official support for Windows Vista and Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard via point updates. The latest version of InDesign 5.0.2, released in January 2008, still does not properly support Leopard. Adobe reports in its update notes that the application may unexpectedly quit under Leopard and offers no workarounds for the issue. Quark is now aiming to maintain its lead with the new 8.0 release poised to take on Adobe's popular Creative Suite.

The New Look of QuarkXPress 8

According to people familiar with Quark's plans, the next version of QuarkXPress will deliver more intuitive layout tools and an updated interface designed to allow users to do more with fewer clicks. The new version will also use more standard keyboard shortcuts intended to be more familiar to users who work between several applications, and should add resizable thumbnail page navigation (below).



Hey Hey, It's Adobe

In addition, the update is expected to expand native support for Illustrator and Photoshop files, which is currently a strong feature advantage for InDesign. QuarkXPress 8 should even see the addition of new standardized Bézier pen tools (below) expressly designed to "reduce reliance upon Illustrator," according to those people familiar with Quark's planned marketing push.



The existing version similarly added picture effects intended to minimize the need to use Photoshop. In version 8, the Picture Content Tool (below) will allow users to crop, scale, and rotate graphics within a picture box using standard controls, obviating the need to do basic graphics tasks in an external editor.Â*



Quark is further including authoring tools for Adobe's Flash to help develop interactive web layouts in SWF directly within QuarkXPress (below). Adobe's Open Screen Project should make further support for creating Flash content easier for third parties, but Adobe faces some hurdles along the way, as noted in AppleInsider's recentÂ*Flash exposé.



International House of Text

QuarkXPress 8.0 will also add improved international publishing features that include support for typographical layouts in 39 languages, including expanded support for East Asian languages such as Japanese, Korean and Chinese (below). It should likewise leverage a universal file format, making it easy to exchange documents between regions.



Version 8 moreover brings flexible and easy to use tools for creating shadows and transparency effects, PDF/X Plus export via pre-loaded Quark Job Jackets, and "what you see is what you get" font selection menus (below).



Another new addition is user modifiable Design Grids (below) for applying custom baseline settings for text in individual boxes to adjust the look of hanging characters. Settings can be saved as a Grid Style, and linked to a Style Sheet for easy updating throughout a project.Â*



Item Styles (below top) similarly make it easy to develop document wide consistency with item attribute search and replace features (below bottom).





Buy 7 Get 8

In advance of the new release, Quark hopes to spur sales this year with an offer for a free upgrade to the new version 8 for users who buy QuarkXPress 7 prior to the new update's release. The significant upgrade costs Quark has previously charged its users have left many customrs on previous versions. According to sources familiar with Quark's marketing plans, the company will aggressively pitch the version 8 upgrade to users of both QuarkXPress 6 and 7. Offering the future version 8 upgrade for free to new buyers of Quark 7 should also help migrate Quark's installed user base up to the most recent version now, in an effort to stave off defection to InDesign, which many designers get for free when they buy Adobe's Creative Suite 3.

To qualify for the free upgrade to the new QuarkXPress 8, users will need to present proof of purchase of the existing version 7 between May 1, 2008 and August 1, 2008, when the program will expire. Version 8 is planned for release around the same time in August.
post #2 of 51
Good for them.

I'm an InDesign (and former Pagemaker) user, but I have no desire to be held hostage by Adobe.
Already, Adobe foregoes any recent Mac advances with OS X in favour of maintaining parity with Windows.

If QXP 8 is compelling enough, I may consider switching.
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #3 of 51
This is good. I haven't used Quark since 2003, when I realized that booting into OS 9 was just too annoying and Adobe CS was just a more efficient package. These features seem strong enough for most users, especially with decent Photoshop alternatives like Pixelmator now available.

I'll have to see if this is worth it instead of upgrading to CS4 in a year or too.
MacBook Pro C2D 2.4GHz and a battle-scarred PowerBook G4 1.33GHz

"When you gaze long into a dead pixel, the dead pixes gazes also into you"
Reply
MacBook Pro C2D 2.4GHz and a battle-scarred PowerBook G4 1.33GHz

"When you gaze long into a dead pixel, the dead pixes gazes also into you"
Reply
post #4 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

Good for them.

I'm an InDesign (and former Pagemaker) user, but I have no desire to be held hostage by Adobe.
Already, Adobe foregoes any recent Mac advances with OS X in favour of maintaining parity with Windows.

If QXP 8 is compelling enough, I may consider switching.

Funny, just eight years ago everyone was jumping to InDesign because Quark had the page layout market held hostage. In 2001, QuarkXPress still looked and functioned like some kid's Hypercard-built school project. Serious competition from Adobe with the introduction of InDesign is what forced Quark off their butts and made them try to be competitive again. Hopefully, someone can return the favor for Adobe, who has little to no incentive to advance Photoshop, Illustrator, Flash or Dreamweaver.
post #5 of 51
Sorry, but I refuse to send any money Quark's way. I hate XPress and I don't even care if they end up putting out a superior product.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #6 of 51
Do you think you can alter the angle of a piece of type and keep it displayed as an anti-aliased vector? Wow, we really ARE making strides, huh?

I have no faith in Quark whatsoever. Their previous limitations were a plague to the industry that shouldn't be forgiven. Moreover, their claims of no longer needing photoshop are laughable. The ability to scale, rotate and crop? Whoopdiedoo, you could do that in previous versions. Certainly not in an intuitive way, but that's hardly a NEW feature. Furthermore, if it were, it's embarrassing enough to keep out of a press release.
post #7 of 51
I suspect it's a too little, too late for Quark. Boy, did they mis-predict the market.

But I wish them well. With Adobe rapidly becoming the new Microsoft, I hope Quark become a formidable competitor.
post #8 of 51
For 95% of all DTP you'll ever do, Quark 6 is still easier to use than InDesign 5.0 is. It's also better for templating and maintaining documents.

Adobe CS3 is a mess. It runs slow, crashes frequently, and has a terrible user interface. In short, it's everything that people didn't like about Quark. I will be happy to ditch InDesign. The only good thing about InDesign is InCopy, which allows your less-savvy coworkers to collaborate. Of course, you have to buy it separately. I assume Q8 will have something similar.

Plus, Quark has the alien delete guy. That makes me smile every time.
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
post #9 of 51
One issue it addresses is that the designers I know constantly switch between illustrator and indesign. If those two packages could be merged then that would certainly cut down a lot of work.

However, the company I'm at will not buy Quark on a whim when our design team are familiar with and like the CS Suite. It means a whole lot of relearning and unnecessary expense when it may turn out that it's still not as good.

I also think that to simplify Photoshop to rotating, resizing, cropping etc is bad marketing. If that's all it has then it just shows their desperation to get back what they lost through their own negligence.
post #10 of 51
but does it do hanging punctuation? missing feature since 1987...
post #11 of 51
It is too late.

It is already the same battle as Netscape Communicator vs. Internet Explorer, Freehand vs. Illustrator, WordPerfect vs. Word.

They will not get a lot of new users, because the most of those already have InDesign (with CS bundle) on their computers and are not too anxious to spend another $1000. And they will not stop loosing existing users, because many of those still use Quark 4-5 (and keep an eye on InDesign to switch).

If Quark wants to survive, they should stop this stupid "Standard"/"Passport" duo and sell what is now Passport for the same price (or cheaper) than InDesign. And yes, they should add to new version "export in Quark 4 format", putting it on top of the features list.

Otherwise it will be a slow decline for another 5-7 years, with the user base slowly shrinking to eccentric individuals and big publishing houses (who already invested too much in QPS, just to trash it).
Hello, and thanks for all the Macs!
Reply
Hello, and thanks for all the Macs!
Reply
post #12 of 51
Looks like a lot of work has gone in to this app. Good job, and thanks for being competition to Adobe.
post #13 of 51
As with everyone else - I think this is really good news. (I use both - ID and Quark.)

I was chatting to someone the other day and we both agreed we probably wouldn't see Quark 8! Sounds like we were wrong.

Possibly though it's too little too late. (Quark's story would make an excellent business studies case on how to lose a monopoly...) You don't forget having to pay an extra £150 on top of £700-£800 to be able to load it onto your laptop, the suggestion by Quark we should switch to Windows during the OS9 - OSX change over and the dogs that were Q5 and Q6 in a hurry...

Hopefully they can pull something out of the bag though! Adobe are starting to get rather too comfortable for my liking.
post #14 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

Good for them.

I'm an InDesign (and former Pagemaker) user, but I have no desire to be held hostage by Adobe.

Without one of the two, you'd be held hostage by the other one.

Quote:
Already, Adobe foregoes any recent Mac advances with OS X in favour of maintaining parity with Windows.

It will make a difference, only assuming that Quark will use those features. Besides, what new OS X feature would help page layout software?
post #15 of 51
I wish Quark luck, they have stumbled badly. But Quark could rebound, Adobe's transition with CS3 to Leopard/Intel was a mess also.
post #16 of 51
Quote:
To qualify for the free upgrade to the new QuarkXPress 8, users will need to present proof of purchase of the existing version 7 between May 1, 2008 and August 1, 2008, when the program will expire. Version 8 is planned for release around the same time in August.

Too bad Quark knows nothing of this deal. I just called them and they had no information or do you have to wait for a secret email?
--------------------------
"Why join the navy if you can be a pirate?"
-Steve Jobs
Reply
--------------------------
"Why join the navy if you can be a pirate?"
-Steve Jobs
Reply
post #17 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

Without one of the two, you'd be held hostage by the other one.



It will make a difference, only assuming that Quark will use those features. Besides, what new OS X feature would help page layout software?

QuickLook plugins
Spotlight import plugins (be able to search for metadata)
.Mac Sync plugin ( sync prefs between your desktopsnd laptop)

Just a few off the top of my head.
post #18 of 51
I love QuarkXpress, their saved files are small but what I really hate is to attach the fonts together with the layouts. i hope with this version they got it right by being able to convert fonts to vector graphics.
post #19 of 51
Quote:
Quark, Inc. is preparing to release a major new version of its flagship QuarkXPress software this fall, aimed at cementing its lead in the market for professional desktop publishing against Adobe's rival InDesign product, AppleInsider has learned.

Quark has a lead to cement? I thought inDesign had surpassed it awhile ago.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #20 of 51
"...aimed at cementing its lead in the market for professional desktop publishing against Adobe's rival InDesign product"

Perhaps this delusional comment is indicative of the fools running the company?
post #21 of 51
I use both Quark and InDesign very frequently. I still prefer Quark slightly, except for the hanging indent feature in InDesign. I find working with text and moving/scaling images t be quicker in Quark. I also find that IDCS2 and IDCS3 are still buggy and crash frequently, especially when pulling files over a network (CS2 is almost unusable!)

I had occasion to meet some of the software designers from Quark last summer and speak to them about some "wish list" items and some things I didn't care for. #1 on my wish list is an easier, more intuitive drop shadow tool that is clickable, like Photoshop's. But the same goes for ID also. Why they would reinvent the tool instead of using Photoshop's I can't understand.

Anyway, the Quark team seemed genuinely interested in moving Quark in better directions and were very interested in how I use Quark day to day.

People who spew hate for either product based on what they remember from 2001 need to wake up and try them again. Quark is a MUCH better product in 6 and 7. Its transparency functions and drop shadows have really reduced my reliance on Photoshop to do some of those things. ID is just too pallette-heavy and is still REALLY slow.

That said, I think Quark is moving in the wrong direction by trying to incorporate "interactivity" into XPress for Flash and web. It should follow Adobe's lead and roll out separate products for these purposes, if for nothing else than to avoid the bloat that these unnecessary things bring to XPress.

The publishing market is ripe for a third-party dark horse to ride in and shake up both products with a simplified product that specializes in just print and is zippy and intuitive. Both Quark and Adobe (especially Adobe) need some addition competition to keep them honest and responsive.
post #22 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by DestructoTex View Post

That said, I think Quark is moving in the wrong direction by trying to incorporate "interactivity" into XPress for Flash and web. It should follow Adobe's lead and roll out separate products for these purposes, if for nothing else than to avoid the bloat that these unnecessary things bring to XPress.

Yeah, they already tried that once with Quark 4. What was it called Intermedia or something. Biggest waste of $600 I ever spent.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #23 of 51
I hope Quark brings some good competition, but seriously I nor the company I work for will switch to Quark. We went all InDesign and haven't looked back. As lead Applescripter, InDesign is worlds ahead for workflow options (at least last time I looked). Quark will be second fiddle forever now.
post #24 of 51
QuarkXPress 3.x made me decide to become a web designer. Haha.

I eventually learned InDesign, then was forced kicking and screaming (more like pissing and moaning) to learn QuarkXPress 7. Now I'm back to using InDesign again (CS3) and there's a lot of stuff that I miss about QuarkXPress 7 that seemed more efficient than InDesign.

I'm pretty agnostic at this point. And I see my attitude before as a sign of my immaturity.

Adobe has a great product with some terrific features and a few problems.
Quark has a great product with some terrific features and a few problems.

Competition is a good thing. The industry is growing up, and I hope the design community can grow up too.

I think QuarkXPress 8 is going to be pretty excellent, and I can't wait to check it out.
post #25 of 51
Quark what, Quark who?

I thought new software was supposed to start off with '1' in their version name; they can't just jump to '8'.

Although the name vaguely resembles this killer piece of software I used back in 1999 on my Intergraph workstation running Windows NT 4.0. I also vaguely remember the company just letting things go, feature upgrades were far and few between, and then--WHAM!--I was using InDesign 1.0.
post #26 of 51
InDesign 1.0 was a totally ridiculous - and virtually unusable - piece of software.
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #27 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

InDesign 1.0 was a totally ridiculous - and virtually unusable - piece of software.

And nearly as good as Quark 5 was.

The point is Quark f-ed up. And it didn't help that Fred Ebrahimi was a gigantic idiot, writing checks his development team couldn't possibly cash. (Hehe, I love 'Top Gun'.)
post #28 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by macinthe408 View Post

And nearly as good as Quark 5 was.

On Intergraph workstation? Could be.

On Mac system InDesign 1.0 demanded unreasonable amount of RAM and crashed all the time (on my B&W G3 of those times) while Quark 5 had "great brave new Fit Box to Picture" command and was more stable than 4.11

It was Quark 6 that was a mess and big mistake. It was a messy behemoth with features it can not properly do (like PDF export). XPress 6.5 was better, but still, frankly, I wish that they just port 4.11 to Mac OS X's Carbon without any extra features (except for multiple Undos/Redos, maybe).

Quark 7? Well, I do have to use it when some German agency sends us qxps from Quark 7 Passport (with several European languages on different layers). And it more or less works. But. Why couldn't this application to load just a bit faster?
Hello, and thanks for all the Macs!
Reply
Hello, and thanks for all the Macs!
Reply
post #29 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zlyden View Post

Quark 7? Well, I do have to use it when some German agency sends us qxps from Quark 7 Passport (with several European languages on different layers).

That is one thing that inDesign totally sucks at. Once a text box is created it keeps its language preference so after you translate you can't spell check. There is a way to spell check a single text box in another language but not a layer or a document. At least none that I've been able to discover.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #30 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

That is one thing that inDesign totally sucks at. Once a text box is created it keeps its language preference so after you translate you can't spell check. There is a way to spell check a single text box in another language but not a layer or a document. At least none that I've been able to discover.

Language in InDesign is not a text box attribute. You can have text in a text box that is one language and other text that is another language in that same box.

You change the language using the Character palette: select the text you want and the change the language from the pop-up menu in the Character palette.

InDesign's spell check will use the appropriate dictionary for that language.
post #31 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by jabohn View Post

Language in InDesign is not a text box attribute. You can have text in a text box that is one language and other text that is another language in that same box.

You change the language using the Character palette: select the text you want and the change the language from the pop-up menu in the Character palette.

InDesign's spell check will use the appropriate dictionary for that language.

You are correct but essentially the problem is that once you draw a text box it has a default character style in the language the document was created in. In order to change the document language you have to change the character styles attribute of every style in the document.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #32 of 51
I also use both and have for years, but while the people pointing out Quarks previous nastyness are correct, I think that they are forgetting how bad a product Adobe CS3 is and (more importantly) why.

The two main reasons CS3 sucks are:

- It's basically a "Windows only" product that ignores Mac users and Apple UI conventions
- It's got everything *including* the kitchen sink in it (bloated crap)

If Quark is redesigning XPress to both focus on the single task at hand (Publishing), and trying to make the UI for Mac more intuitive and useable, then that's pretty much exactly what is needed IMO. Adobe's CS suite does so many things it does *none* of them well.

You can't use InDesign without being pummelled to the mat with the needs and quirks of the entire CS suite, especially the ill-advised, virtually useless "online" components. Hell, even with a brand new Mac Pro and 10 Gigs of RAM CS 2 is hardly even useable. I spend the majority of my time "managing" the program, trying to get it to stop downloading optional components in the background, and letting Adobe know for the millionth time that I don't actually give a crap about their online picture resources they want to sell me.
In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...
Reply
In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...
Reply
post #33 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Yeah, they already tried that once with Quark 4. What was it called Intermedia or something. Biggest waste of $600 I ever spent.

Yeah - QuarkImmedia. One of the worst pieces of software - EVER.
post #34 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by boss sauce View Post

Adobe has a great product with some terrific features and a few problems.
Quark has a great product with some terrific features and a few problems..

But designers generally work in one or the other most of the time, and since it is difficult to master them both, most people end up with a preference. Because we often reuse pieces and parts of documents, it is convenient to standardize on one application. In our case we switched to inDesign for all new documents and only use Quark for revising old qxd files. Lately I've started redoing the old Quark files in inDesign, if they are short documents, and at my own expense just because I prefer inDesign much more now that I've gotten so use to it.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #35 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil-TB2 View Post

I also use both and have for years, but while the people pointing out Quarks previous nastyness are correct, I think that they are forgetting how bad a product Adobe CS3 is and (more importantly) why.

The two main reasons CS3 sucks are:

- It's basically a "Windows only" product that ignores Mac users and Apple UI conventions
- It's got everything *including* the kitchen sink in it (bloated crap)

If Quark is redesigning XPress to both focus on the single task at hand (Publishing), and trying to make the UI for Mac more intuitive and useable, then that's pretty much exactly what is needed IMO. Adobe's CS suite does so many things it does *none* of them well.

You can't use InDesign without being pummelled to the mat with the needs and quirks of the entire CS suite, especially the ill-advised, virtually useless "online" components. Hell, even with a brand new Mac Pro and 10 Gigs of RAM CS 2 is hardly even useable. I spend the majority of my time "managing" the program, trying to get it to stop downloading optional components in the background, and letting Adobe know for the millionth time that I don't actually give a crap about their online picture resources they want to sell me.

really? i don't have any nagware problems with cs3. i'm not sure what you're doing so differently than i am but i have no idea what you're talking about here. plus, you're complaining about cs2 on a mac pro? it doesn't even run natively on that computer.
post #36 of 51
Looks quite familiar in layout to NeXTSTEP/Openstep users of old.
post #37 of 51
After 10 years of Quark, switched to InDesign 2 and have seen nothing but improvement in this app. While Iwasn't thrilled at Adobe's move to the "Suite"-life, InDesign continues to impress me in it's feature set, mature user interface, and evolving user experience.

Reviewing Q8's screenshots certainly reveals their overdue adoption of a palette-based interface, and yet Quark has so many things to catch up on. Their layers operation, for instance, is so poorly thought out as to be near useless. In fact, so much of Quark's operational approach is cut from the 90's graphic apps' cloth that I doubt they will ever be considered a viable alternative to InDesign.
Diplomacy- The art of saying "Nice
Doggie" until you can find a big rock.
Reply
Diplomacy- The art of saying "Nice
Doggie" until you can find a big rock.
Reply
post #38 of 51
I remember seeing their booth at this year's MacWorld, and it was pretty much empty, if that's a sign of anything.

I love InDesign and the PDF workflow. I could never go back. But I do wish Adobe would address little bugs that seem to run across several versions, and not just implement new features.
post #39 of 51
Most of the files I work with (catalogs) get revised all the time. It was quite a bit of work converting from Quark to InDesign, and the thought of doing it all again in reverse isn't something I relish.

They're both great programs, though. The only time I use Quark anymore is when I have to auto-add pages, flowing in text files.
post #40 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

You are correct but essentially the problem is that once you draw a text box it has a default character style in the language the document was created in. In order to change the document language you have to change the character styles attribute of every style in the document.

So if you want your document in a certain language, wouldn't you just make sure it has defaulted to the language you need before you go full speed ahead on it, instead of realizing after you're done that you typed it all in the wrong language? Either that, or make good use of style sheets, and it's a quick change depending on how many style sheets you use. I always make sure I set up my documents in InDesign according to the needs of the project, so that any changes and corrections can be made quick and with little effort.

How does QuarkXpress handle languages? Can it only do language on a per-document basis? In that case I would say InDesign has the leg-up.

I had trouble when first switching to InDesign, but now that I understand how it works differently from Quark, it is over all much better - this I can say for sure since I had to go back to Quark at a job for over a year and it was painful. That and in the print shop industry, the separation preview in InDesign is a killer feature.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac Software
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › QuarkXPress 8 to target Adobe's Creative Suite this August