Steves Software Keynote Comment

objra10objra10
Posted:
in Mac Software edited January 2014
Okay, first of all, this is about software mentioned during Steve's keynote, not the new Keynote app. Just wanted to clear that up immediately so you don't read this and then be disappointed when you find this out.



Anyway, Steve talked about the number of apps that had been ported to X but said something to the effect of, "with the exception of a few stragglers" and then "oh come on you all know exactly which one we're talking about.." to a huge amount of laughter from all of those in the audience.



Am I dense? I'm trying to figure out which software program for OS9 only is so well used by so many that everyone in that room knew what he was talking about, but that I don't know about? Help?



The only two I could think of that are probably highly used on MAC that would seem to apply are ProTools and Quark? I mean, ProTools got updated (even though it's not actually out yet).



Help!

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 11
    chuckerchucker Posts: 5,089member
    Well, Quark of course.
  • Reply 2 of 11
    objra10objra10 Posts: 679member
    Quark is that big a heavy hitter that everyone in that room knew what he was referring to? I'm just curious because I am a design professional and I haven't used it since Adobe came out with InDesign 4 years ago or whatever. And most of the people I work with are the same way. Quark is dying, so I find it hard to believe. I mean, I'll take your word for it because I'm obviously dense... but I just didn't know if there was something else huge out there that we're waiting on being ported.
  • Reply 3 of 11
    outsideroutsider Posts: 6,008member
    [quote]Originally posted by OBJRA10:

    <strong>Quark is that big a heavy hitter that everyone in that room knew what he was referring to? I'm just curious because I am a design professional and I haven't used it since Adobe came out with InDesign 4 years ago or whatever. And most of the people I work with are the same way. Quark is dying, so I find it hard to believe. I mean, I'll take your word for it because I'm obviously dense... but I just didn't know if there was something else huge out there that we're waiting on being ported.</strong><hr></blockquote>

    Are you serious? We haven't moved to OS X because of Quark. Well that and Outlook. I know of so many graphics shops that cannot move to OS X with out Quark moving either. I've been pushing for InDesign here for at least 2 years. The Artists are reluctant to change.
  • Reply 4 of 11
    buonrottobuonrotto Posts: 6,368member
    Our graphics department -- the only one that IT will tolerate Macs in -- bought licenses for InDesign, took training courses, installed it on all their machines... and got cold feet. The head of the department just doesn't know how to use anything but Quark, so it's there to stay. Quark could go out of business and all Macs would boot in OS X, and they will choose to stick with 10 year old machines running XPress 4.
  • Reply 5 of 11
    nebagakidnebagakid Posts: 2,692member
    Quark, just like when he said "but photoshop does not run on X yet"



    HAHAHAHAHAHA everyone went, and the Adobe team peed on themselves in shame



    or so Mac OS Rumors said...
  • Reply 6 of 11
    objra10objra10 Posts: 679member
    On Quarks site is says that they are working on an X version but are basically waiting for Apple to get their act together, as though blaming the delay on the OS. Why then are they basically the last huge app to translate. If there's something so terribly wrong with the app, why would Adobe, Digidesign, Avid, etc all port to X?
  • Reply 7 of 11
    cindercinder Posts: 381member
    InDesign is still not quite up to snuff.

    The next version, howver, should be the nail in the coffin.



    I think my boss could use it for wht she does. I told her all about it. I showed her how to use it . . . how damn easy it is compared to Quack.

    But she won't change.



    So, basically, your answer is . . .



    Graphic Designers are stubborn luddite MFs



    and printers are 10x worse.
  • Reply 8 of 11
    objra10objra10 Posts: 679member
    Well, I've used Quark for 6 years, and then switched to InDesign, and there's no doubt that InDesign is far superior, especially for its integration capabilities with illustrator and photoshop. This isn't even close to matched with Quark. InDesign is easier to use, better equipped and and more adaptible. And better supported.



    I don't understand why people don't use it instead?!
  • Reply 9 of 11
    buonrottobuonrotto Posts: 6,368member
    [quote]Originally posted by OBJRA10:

    <strong>I don't understand why people don't use it instead?!</strong><hr></blockquote>



    F . U . D .



    [EDIT: That's my reply to this question, not a snide comment about the previous post. ]



    [ 01-16-2003: Message edited by: BuonRotto ]</p>
  • Reply 10 of 11
    drumbug1drumbug1 Posts: 155member
    Nope. You are all wrong. Finale by CodaMusic is the lagging product.



    (well.... I'm waiting for it)...
  • Reply 11 of 11
    buonrottobuonrotto Posts: 6,368member
    [quote]Originally posted by drumbug1:

    <strong>Nope. You are all wrong. Finale by CodaMusic is the lagging product.



    (well.... I'm waiting for it)...</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Hey, one target -- I mean developer -- at a time! Just like Adobe got theirs, and Quark is getting theirs, CodaMusic can get theirs too.
Sign In or Register to comment.