Increasing the OSX userbase and then some...

Posted:
in macOS edited January 2014
Apple should use it's cash reserves to buy Quark and then do what it has done with Logic and phase out the Windows version. Then hey presto, the Windows XPress users would *have* to go to Apple. Apple could also use its software engineers and Interface propellerheads to make a worthy OSX version of XPress instead of the System 7 looking POS we have now.



Whaddya reckon?

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 16
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    Is Quark even for sale? It might be a good thing for Apple to try. However, like many things in publishing a certain orthodoxy gets set-up and people become unwilling to change it. I'd bet most people doing pre-press have quark working the way they want it to and would just rather not make any changes if they can avoid it. I knew people that were still using WordPerfect for DOS (3.3?) untill two years ago.
  • Reply 2 of 16
    ..grate idea.



    why dont they buy $4bn worth of m$ shares while theyre at it..?
  • Reply 3 of 16
    Hell why not buy Micro$oft and kill the Windows versions of all their apps?
  • Reply 4 of 16
    [quote]Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg:

    <strong>Hell why not buy Micro$oft and kill the Windows versions of all their apps?</strong><hr></blockquote>



    I like your "Can Do" attitude. Okay, now we're cooking on gas...
  • Reply 5 of 16
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    Apple can buy up all the software companies it wants, but they won't do it much good unless it gets it's hardware pricing and performance up to modern standards.



    Jobs may talk about the other 95% but that's pretty optimistic considering their marketshare isn't even close to 5% (actually it's 2.6) and they're pricing grows (weekly) out of touch with their competition.
  • Reply 6 of 16
    defiantdefiant Posts: 4,876member
    <a href="http://money.cnn.com/2002/09/16/technology/techinvestor/hellweg/index.htm"; target="_blank">though year, anyone ?</a>
  • Reply 7 of 16
    Quark is entrenched, but not because it is a good app. I haven't seen V5, but V4 is like working in the stone age.



    I work in a small print shop (doing web work for them) and have just watched the owner buy a new G4 with the free InDesign deal. He is a grumpy guy, but he is in there making all kinds of slightly perverted sounds of pleasure learning how to use InDesign.



    When one company looks to buy another it should be because the products they make are innovative, not entrenched. Quark didn't release a new version of their software for something like 3 or 4 years. In computer terms that is decades.



    The print industry is like a battleship - you can't turn it like a race car, but once it starts going you are going to have a hard time stopping it. I personally think it is starting to realize Quark sucks, and is making the move (albeit it will probably be 5 years before market share for Quark sees a significant dent).



    The folks at Apple aren't stupid (just blind to reality sometimes). They aren't going to buy the maker of second rate software.



    Course that's just my opinion.
  • Reply 8 of 16
    Apple shouldn't buy Quark, but I wouldn't mind them borrowing it for a few years, long enough to at least give XPress a half-decent interface.



    Print and design shops are among the most conservative markets out there. (And it's a good thing, otherwise most of them probably would've gone Windows by now.) Quark won't go anywhere anytime soon, though I hope InDesign does well enough to give them some restless nights.
  • Reply 9 of 16
    I think Apple should buy Adobe. Withour Photoshop, Illustratorr, InDesign, LiveMotion, AfterEffects and all the others. All windows users would have to switch to mac for all there digital work.
  • Reply 10 of 16
    Why would Apple do that when they can accomplish the same thing by continuing (with Adobe) to give InDesign away - thereby increasing it's userbase, thereby increasing it's production schedule and resources (because it's more popular now) thereby killing Quark.



    Much cheaper this way!



    I mean, InDesign already is a huge leap ahead of Quark in low-to middle grade pre-press applications simply because it's a lot more friendly looking, easier to use, and it actually runs in OS X.



    The next major revision will probably almost completely settle the Quark vs InDesign argument.



    Seems pretty clear cut what the easiest action would be.
  • Reply 11 of 16
    Does Quark even have an OS X version of their flagship app in development? It seems like I've heard NOTHING about it...like Quark just doesn't care or something!
  • Reply 12 of 16
    [quote]Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg:

    <strong>Does Quark even have an OS X version of their flagship app in development? It seems like I've heard NOTHING about it...like Quark just doesn't care or something!</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Yes, Quark said that XPress 6.0 will be OS X compatible, and it'll be out in 2003 sometime. But you're right, Quark doesn't care. I've been pushing people to switch over to InDesign for a while now.
  • Reply 13 of 16
    satchmosatchmo Posts: 2,699member
    What many of you InDesign backers don't realize is that probably 90% of design firms and printers still use QuarkXPress.



    I'm not saying InDesign is bad, but it'll take a while before the tide turns in their favour. Many printers have invested heavily into Quark and have got things humming just right. Switching to InDesign means months of tweeking to get everything up to speed.



    Quark has the upper hand. Many have not moved to OSX because Xpress is not ready.

    And Quark knows designers don't change easily. Xpress works well...it's just not OSX compliant. But once it is, users will no doubt upgrade to it, rather than going the InDesign route.
  • Reply 14 of 16
    serranoserrano Posts: 1,806member
    [quote]Originally posted by Matsu:

    <strong>Apple can buy up all the software companies it wants, but they won't do it much good unless it gets it's hardware pricing and performance up to modern standards.



    Jobs may talk about the other 95% but that's pretty optimistic considering their marketshare isn't even close to 5% (actually it's 2.6) and they're pricing grows (weekly) out of touch with their competition.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    You're way off base. What Apple needs to do is buy Linux and cut the x86 version. Ya!
  • Reply 15 of 16
    [quote] What many of you InDesign backers don't realize is that probably 90% of design firms and printers still use QuarkXPress.



    I'm not saying InDesign is bad, but it'll take a while before the tide turns in their favour. Many printers have invested heavily into Quark and have got things humming just right. Switching to InDesign means months of tweeking to get everything up to speed.



    Quark has the upper hand. Many have not moved to OSX because Xpress is not ready.

    And Quark knows designers don't change easily. Xpress works well...it's just not OSX compliant. But once it is, users will no doubt upgrade to it, rather than going the InDesign route. <hr></blockquote>



    I agree, generally.

    BUT



    InDesign has been out for a few years now.

    It's maturing.

    It's gaining respect from printers and designers.



    When ID1.0 came out I went to a lecture/presentation by Frank Romano, faculty at my school RIT, and renowned Quark and Pre Press expert.



    He basically said



    Indesign has a lot of cool features, it needs to catch up with Quark in some areas. I can see where it can be immediately used in place of Quark with benefits but it's not quite ready for Big Things or Difficult things. But this is only version 1.0.

    I expect this will mature into a extremly strong competitor with Quark.



    and that was 1.0



    I told my bosses all of this, and they shrugged it off - not believing that InDesign could do what I said it could.



    So I made my boss install the trial copy we had.



    She was pretty much dumbfounded by how easy it was to find and do stuff. Granted, placing and managing the content is one thing - getting it to output/rip/image is another.





    The bottom like is - if designers start using InDesign - printers will have to at least support it . . . once it gets its foot in the door . . .



    as users move to X - eventually people will have to switch to support the designers and users - unless they want to keep those old G3s running Quark 3.2.1 forever.
  • Reply 16 of 16
    no point.



    quark user base is 80% mac.



    too much money for ppeople who already are and will stay mac.
Sign In or Register to comment.