[mitchell_pgh]

Well, it'd downloading now... is anyone else pumped...

(I know many people have switched to InDesign, and all the wonders of the program, but my firm is NOT going to switch... not today, not tomorrow, and if this upgrade is any good, potentially not ever)

Please report on your success or issues.

[mishap]

Originally posted by mitchell_pgh:
Well, it'd downloading now... is anyone else pumped...

(I know many people have switched to InDesign, and all the wonders of the program, but my firm is NOT going to switch... not today, not tomorrow, and if this upgrade is any good, potentially not ever)

Please report on your success or issues.

That's the good thing about freelancing.

[Timo]

I see that there are three different downloads: one for MacOS, one for Jaguar and one for Panther.

Why this isn't more clearly marked is, to me, utterly bizarre.

[Busemann]

Originally posted by Timo:
I see that there are three different downloads: one for MacOS, one for Jaguar and one for Panther.

Why this isn't more clearly marked is, to me, utterly bizarre.

Yeah, especially since it don't run on MacOS

[::maroma::]

Originally posted by Timo:
I see that there are three different downloads: one for MacOS, one for Jaguar and one for Panther.

Why this isn't more clearly marked is, to me, utterly bizarre.

That's just the big brains over at Quark thinking on a different level than anyone else. The problem is, they think it's a higher level.

[voodoo]

Originally posted by ::maroma:::
That's just the big brains over at Quark thinking on a different level than anyone else. The problem is, they think it's a higher level.

Is dissing Quark a religous thing to you?

May I suggest you spend your energies at something more useful like bashing M$?

[Art Vandelay]

The "Mac OS" download link is the actual updater for OS X 10.2 and 10.3. The "Jaguar" link is just the help files for 10.2. The "Panther" link is just the help files for 10.3. Another example of Quark's brilliance.

[gorickey]

Quark has been wrong for awhile now...this is no surprise...

[solbo]

Originally posted by voodoo:
Is dissing Quark a religous thing to you?

May I suggest you spend your energies at something more useful like bashing M$?

I don't know, I think Quark is way up on my lists of worthless, arrogant software makers who would love nothing better than to lock you into their utterly worthless software that looks like it was developed by a bunch of monkeys and hasn't had any worthwhile improvements since 1990. Oh yes, and still maintains the worst rendering engine every create for a LAYOUT program! I mean really, the whole point of the software is to visually lay things out and it can't even display with some actuality what it will look like printed out? Not to mention what they want to charge for this POS.

So basically bashing Quark is just as worthwhile as bashing Microsoft. IMO

[Timo]

Originally posted by Art Vandelay:
The "Mac OS" download link is the actual updater for OS X 10.2 and 10.3. The "Jaguar" link is just the help files for 10.2. The "Panther" link is just the help files for 10.3. Another example of Quark's brilliance.

Yeah, finally figured that out. Beats the heck out of me where to put the ensuing "For Panther" folder. I'll let someone more in tune with Quark sort it out.

[Art Vandelay]

Originally posted by Timo:
Yeah, finally figured that out. Beats the heck out of me where to put the ensuing "For Panther" folder. I'll let someone more in tune with Quark sort it out.

The QuarkXpressHelp file in the "For Panther" or "For Jaguar" folders replaces the file of the name name in the Help folder in the Quark application folder.

[Developer]

Can you post some screenshots for those of us who don't use this program?

[Timo]

Originally posted by Art Vandelay:
The QuarkXpressHelp file in the "For Panther" or "For Jaguar" folders replaces the file of the name name in the Help folder in the Quark application folder.

Hmmm...I thought of that. But some get infos stayed my hand:

My existing "QuarkXpressHelp" file is 216.8 MB. The one in the "For Panther" is 336KB, with "Languages: Danish" checked.

Perhaps I should download the "For Panther" bit again.

Edit: the "For Panther.sit" file is 52.1 MB. So I unstuffed it again and got a 220.1MB file -- this looks better.

[Art Vandelay]

Originally posted by Timo:
Hmmm...I thought of that. But some get infos stayed my hand:

My existing "QuarkXpressHelp" file is 216.8 MB. The one in the "For Panther" is 336KB, with "Languages: Danish" checked.

Perhaps I should download the "For Panther" bit again.

Yeah, you need to download it again. It should be about 220MB when decompressed.

[::maroma::]

Originally posted by voodoo:
Is dissing Quark a religous thing to you?

May I suggest you spend your energies at something more useful like bashing M$?

Don't worry, my energies are equally spent on both Quark and M$.

[Vader’s Pinch of Death]

Alright, so does it suck less or what is the story?

[tdvorak]

It seems to launch faster... but other than that I can't really tell. So yes it does suck less. Haven't really had a chance to go through it yet.

[I'mDaMac]

Originally posted by ::maroma:::
That's just the big brains over at Quark thinking on a different level than anyone else. The problem is, they think it's a higher level.

Yeah, and I'm sure the brain trust at Adobe thought it was a good idea to not let inDesign users save their document in a format compatible with the previous version.

[voodoo]

Originally posted by ::maroma:::
Don't worry, my energies are equally spent on both Quark and M$.

Spank you!

Now let's get back to the topic at hand. What bugs were fixed?

[LightWaver-67]

Originally posted by I'mDaMac:
Yeah, and I'm sure the brain trust at Adobe thought it was a good idea to not let inDesign users save their document in a format compatible with the previous version.

I'm experiencing this with QX right now. The company I work for is still OS9 runnng Quark 4 (fairly stable) on all its graphics machines. I, on the other hand, am "Beta Testing" OSX in their environment, so they have gotten me the QXP6 upgrade.

Guess what...? I found out 2 things:

1) According to Quark customer service... now that I upgraded that 4.0 serial number to v6... I can NO LONGER GET SUPPORT FOR THE 4 Version... EVER for that machine. Even if we decided NOT to go "OSX" and I went back to booting into OS9... they say they STILL would not support me.

okay.. fine.

2) We instantly ran into compatability issues. Our "main" designer had to upgrade to v5 because v4 cannot read v6 files and v6 cannot "downsave" any lower than v5... so v4 became an achilles heel for interoperability. So... I need to CONSTANTLY go through the process of downsaving files when I work.

I can never just hit "save"... I have to constantly TELL the app to keep it in the version I want. So, I create a document. I save it. I need to TELL it to be a 5.0 document (twice, actually, because of a bug), then I cannot begin outputting my file yet because it did a SAVE AS when it down-saves, so the "open document" still says "Document 1" in the header information, so I need to CLOSE the layout, then relaunch the SAVED v5 file again, now I go and output all the necessary assets; PDFs, Print proofs and output film and usually, I will want it to save again due to adjustments I may have made, but I have to navigate to the original file, again choose v5 (twice) and hit save... it will ask me to overwrite and replace...? and I say "yes"... I have to do this EVERY time I save the document.

It never just "knows" that the file is already v5 and to just save over the old one... NO... it has to annoy me EVERY TIME I want to save a document. I wish there was a mode telling it:
"HEY! Dufus! I work in a collaborative environment and need to stay baselined at v5... save as this version unless I say differently and let me overwrite files without asking for permission every goddamned time...!"

Gee... why don't I think this has changed in 6.1...?

Heheheh...

If it weren't for all the tens-of-thousands of archived quark files, and the fact that we are currently setup with dozens-of-dozens of QXP Templates for all our different types of output and it is the company's "required" submission method... I'd convince them to switch to InDesign.

I've already migrated a portion of their "Marketing Material" to InDesign documents and I LOVE how much easier it is to work with that app.

anyhow... enough of my rant... I gotta go GET to that job now... running late. c-ya

[LightWaver-67]

Oh yeah...

P.S. - I'm bringing the 6.1 updater into work with me (their internet connection stinks) and updating the app. I will try to convey any/all that I find that has changed... for better or worse.

G'day...

[kdogg73]

Originally posted by LightWaver-67:
6.1 updater ...

I'm in the exact same boat as you are, Lightwaver. But I'm working from the production end, which can make more sense. Didn't catch where you were in the chain of creativity, LW.

6.1 is installed, but no work for it, yet. <twittles thumbs>

The dilemma continues, however, now that Adobe has the CS out and has integrated their products even further. How long can I last with my beloved Quark? InDesign CS looks quite tempting.

[LightWaver-67]

HOLD OFF ON THIS UPDATER..>!!!!!

More to follow...!!!

[LightWaver-67]

I am running 6.1 in a network environment and just lost 2-HOURS of work due to a "bug" (unconfirmed, but on-hold with Quark as I type this). I hwas working on a project and kept routinely "Saving" over the previous file... it would ask me to "Replace" the file (as it usually does) and I would say yes.

I just went to RE-OPEN the file I was working on AFTER closing it... and it was in the state of when I FIRST SAVED IT... it ignored all the dozens of times I told it to save SINCE then... and Yes, the modification date is consistent with my last attempted "Save".

PHUCK!!!!!!

It gets worse...

The v5 files it is "supposedly" creating, are NOT openable in version 5. If I open a v5 file and RE-Save it as a v5 file... my co-workers running v5 CANNOT open the file.

DAMNIT! Did anyone even TEST this frickin' thing first...?

(Sorry for the venting, but we now ahave a lot of catch-up to do and we still have no solutions) - still on hold with QXP.

GGGRRRRRRRR...!!!!!!!

[I'mDaMac]

Originally posted by LightWaver-67:
I'm experiencing this with QX right now...

Hey, no doubt Quark has its problems, but so does inDesign. Both have their quirks but at the very least Quark gives you the option to save down if you have to.

I'm doing some contract work for a company that has inDesign 2; my copy is CS. I start moving some older marketing materials over to new updated templates in CS. Guess what? The in-house designers can't open them. Check the manual...OK, if I save in ID Exchange format and get a plugin for ID 2....wait....carefully hidden fine print from Adobe...please disregard that.... ARGH! Now I'm stuck with two installs of inDesign on my computer taking up HD space. Nice

Both programs have their merits, and both programs have their own set of problems. That's the point I'm trying to get across. I use both but prefer XPress. In a sense, inDesign fanboys are like PC fanboys. They always seem to troll the Quark topics with their suggestions that Quark sucks and ID rules. Get over it already

[voodoo]

Originally posted by I'mDaMac:
Both programs have their merits, and both programs have their own set of problems. That's the point I'm trying to get across. I use both but prefer XPress. In a sense, inDesign fanboys are like PC fanboys. They always seem to troll the Quark topics with their suggestions that Quark sucks and ID rules. Get over it already

Good post and all true

It's like slashdot here when someone dares post something about QuarkXPress! Sheesh.

[LightWaver-67]

Originally posted by I'mDaMac:
Get over it already

Get over what...? I am talking about REAL issues I am having with QXP. I'm sorry if I'm not experiencing the same problems YOU are with ID... but it doesn't negate the issues I'm having.

I am not arbitrarilly bashing QXP and blindly praising ID...

I think it is you, my friend, that needs to get over it.

[lookmark]

Originally posted by I'mDaMac:
Both programs have their merits, and both programs have their own set of problems. That's the point I'm trying to get across. I use both but prefer XPress. In a sense, inDesign fanboys are like PC fanboys. They always seem to troll the Quark topics with their suggestions that Quark sucks and ID rules. Get over it already

The ID Exchange Format screw-up (or delay, if you want to remain optimistic) is definitely frustrating -- I've been bitten by it too, and have to keep two copies of InDesign on my machine. A dumb move by Adobe.

That said, IMO, InDesign CS is well ahead of Quark 6 in features, usability, and (especially) polish. You just have to use both of them, each for some time; it's very hard to miss the difference. The trolling of Indy users is annoying, I'm sure, but it's painful to watch Quark users struggling with the company's slow support (an update for Panther *4* months after Panther was released?) and general kludginess when better software exists. But anyway. No more on that subject.

I'm curious about QX 6.1's new Font Mapping utility. How does that work, and does it work well?

[voodoo]

Originally posted by LightWaver-67:
Get over what...? I am talking about REAL issues I am having with QXP. I'm sorry if I'm not experiencing the same problems YOU are with ID... but it doesn't negate the issues I'm having.

I am not arbitrarilly bashing QXP and blindly praising ID...

I think it is you, my friend, that needs to get over it.

When apps are updated there are always some that have technical issues. Others do not.

Does the save bug happen frequently? Always? Have you reinstalled QXP?

etc

Panic later.

[LightWaver-67]

Update:

My "Downsaved" (From QXP6.1 to v5) cannot be opened in QXP5 by double clicking them. Nothing happens. If they try to open the file through the Open dialog box, it shows a preview and allows them to select it. Upon selecting it, it claims "Cannot perform ...blah blah... file is LOCKED"

Checked the file on the server box... not locked.

File is not in-use elsewhere.

THIS IS A REAL ISSUE! NOT a complaint against Quark because "I think they suck" or anything. I have lost 2-hours of work and it's now been 45-minutes since the issue became evident and I STILL cannot get work done (still keep getting put on hold by Q's CustServ.)

I'm 10-Minutes from trashing this install and going back to v6.0 again. It is inevitable.

I hate being an 'early adopter'

[LightWaver-67]

Originally posted by voodoo:
Does the save bug happen frequently? Always? Have you reinstalled QXP?

It happened this one-time after updating, when I spen two hours on a multi-page layout and it's all-gone.

Not about to take a chance and try it again.

I am about to down-grade to v6 right now. Wish me luck... I'm goin' in.

[Timo]

Did you try copying the file from the server to your local drive before opening it?

[I downsaved via "save as" from 6.1 to 5.0, and opened the file in 5.0 -- but all on my local computer]

[LightWaver-67]

Originally posted by Timo:
Did you try copying the file from the server to your local drive before opening it?

[I downsaved via "save as" from 6.1 to 5.0, and opened the file in 5.0 -- but all on my local computer]

Yes & no... I don't have time to keep testing permutations and troubleshoot this thing... I'm almost done re-installing 6.0 and then I have close to 3-4 hours work to make-up.

I learned MY lesson this time.

[::maroma::]

Wow, a guy can't make a little joke about Quark without being labeled an "InDesign fanboy". Heh, oh well. I guess Quark does have the saving down feature over InDesign... oh wait... no it doesn't.

Signed,
indesign_fanboy_044

[::maroma::]

double post

[Don Pickett]

I was just talking to the tech support people here about possibly making the switchover. They are neutral on it, and will leave the final decision up to the studio manager, who is the one who will have to take any heat.

My take on Quark vs. InDesign:

For simple layout work, such as brochures, posters or the kinds of layotus you do at ad agencies, there isn't much to choose between the two programs. People used to working in Illustrator and Photoshop will find InDesign easier to use than Quark because it has the same information paradigm. For this kind of work, the two programs are pretty much feature equal.

For businesses who do mostly web work and need to print an occasional small piece, InDesign is a good option because of its workalike nature compared to Photoshop and Illustrator. Businesses such as these don't have very complex printing needs, so nothing will be missed.

For businesses which do long, complex documents – annual reports, books, catalogs, high level magazines, etc. – Quark still has features InDesign lacks, such as custom kerning tables and Xpress tags. I have not used InDesign enough to know how well it's index and TOC tools work, but Quark 6 handles both these functions with ease. I do not think that businesses such as these will be switching over any time soon.

I have the 6.1 update at home, ready to install. Thanks for all the people who ginuea pigged it for me.

[voodoo]

Originally posted by ::maroma:::
Wow, a guy can't make a little joke about Quark without being labeled an "InDesign fanboy". Heh, oh well. I guess Quark does have the saving down feature over InDesign... oh wait... no it doesn't.

Signed,
indesign_fanboy_044

This is like the political lounge

[::maroma::]

Originally posted by voodoo:
This is like the political lounge

Sorry... I just felt like rockin' the boat a bit. It was getting a little boring around here with all these calm seas.

Quark will always have a place in my heart. Only, it's in the cold dead portion of my heart (which is admittedly getting larger).

And I steer clear of the Political Lounge. That's trouble in a basket!

[Don Pickett]

One more thought, from my conversation with the tech people here:

The thing which bugs me about InDesign is the same thing which bugged me about PageMaker all those years ago. PageMaker and, it seems, InDesign, was designed as if one is layout out a page the old fashioned way, with a waxer, blades and rulers. Layout takes precedence over handling text and page items; it is easy to place a text box, but difficult to link text boxes. This holds true in other areas as well, where the ability to design the page takes precedence over the ability to get into the nitty gritty of page manipulation.

Quark was designed by people who came up through dedicated typesetting systems, and it shows. Quark puts text manipulation at the forefront of its informational paradigm. Quark is not as flexible when it comes to making funky shaped text boxes and adding transparency, but when it comes to managing the smallest areas of text, Quark excels. The same holds true with master pages and other areas. For documents in which the text is equally as important as the design (annual reports come to mind) Quark still has the edge.

[lookmark]

Hmm, I have to respectfully disagree. Text in InDesign is wonderful (check out how the multiline paragraph composer handles rivers) and is every bit Quark's equal (and rather better in a number of ways) for multi-page layout. I recommend the Ars Technica review for a very hands-on, thorough (and entertaining) comparison.

So, any word on 6.1's new features? Font mapping?

[I'mDaMac]

Originally posted by LightWaver-67:
Get over what...? I am talking about REAL issues I am having with QXP. I'm sorry if I'm not experiencing the same problems YOU are with ID... but it doesn't negate the issues I'm having.

I am not arbitrarilly bashing QXP and blindly praising ID...

I think it is you, my friend, that needs to get over it.

I don't have to get over anything. I don't troll InDesign topics trying to convince users that it sucks. I was commenting on InDesign fanboys. If you feel that applies to you then so be it.

[I'mDaMac]

Originally posted by voodoo:
Good post and all true

It's like slashdot here when someone dares post something about QuarkXPress! Sheesh.

Yeah, it's a pretty accurate comparison. It's the kind of response I get from PC users when I tell them I use a Mac. "A Mac! You use that overpriced POS? Why? You can get a faster PC for half the price?"

Whatever

[LightWaver-67]

Originally posted by I'mDaMac:
I don't have to get over anything. I don't troll InDesign topics trying to convince users that it sucks. I was commenting on InDesign fanboys. If you feel that applies to you then so be it.

Well... considering you DIRECTLY QUOTED ME when you said that, it was kind of hard NOT to think it was directed at me... correct...?

[Don Pickett]

Originally posted by lookmark:
I recommend the Ars Technica review for a very hands-on, thorough (and entertaining) comparison.

Hmmm. With statements like:

The measure tool
In Quark, in order to see how big a distance was from the edge of the page, you'd create a box and read its width.

I have trouble taking him serously, and must assume his Quark knowledge is superficial at best.

[lookmark]

Originally posted by Don Pickett:
I have trouble taking him serously, and must assume his Quark knowledge is superficial at best.

Hmm, a detailed 11-page review, and the fact that he uses a box to measure distances (like, um, a lot of Quark users do) instead of calculating from X-Y coordinates in the Measurements palette -- or whatever other trick you have up your sleeve -- voids the entire thing? Right.

If you actually read the review, you'll see he's a technically savvy art director of a magazine who's been using Quark for years, and somewhat suspicious of Adobe.

So, has *anyone* actually installed 6.1 successfully?

[Don Pickett]

Originally posted by lookmark:
If you actually read the review, you'll see he's a technically savvy art director of a magazine who's been using Quark for years, and somewhat suspicious of Adobe.

Art directors are not production and pre-press people. There is a huge difference. He makes enough goofs in the article to make me cringe a little.

I am not a Quark fanboy, but this review leaves something to be desired for my purposes, which is heavy duty production with intricate, text heavy documents. I've been doing this since Pagemaker 3 and Photoshop 1.0, so I'm pretty sure I know what I'm talking about.

[tdvorak]

I have it installed. Its seems ok, and even launched a bit faster.

[mitchell_pgh]

I'm just tired of high school "designers" saying. InDesign is the best!

When their design work sucks. I'm on Quark and my designs are rather good.

IT'S A TOOL

In the hands of a good designer, it doesn't make a major difference.

[mitchell_pgh]

I also have never heard anyone make the "ugh" noise when I say I have Quark files (in contrast to InDesign)...

Other then people that only use Word.

[Don Pickett]

FWIW: The IT folk here made thd decision to stay with Quark 6. The huge library of completed jobs already in Quark, the lack of a learnnig curve and some uncertainity about Adobe prompted by Adobe's recent screwups with Illustrator 9 and 10 made up their minds for them.