 |
 |
macfixit on quark v.6
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Minneapolis, MN U.S.A.
Status:
Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Regular
Join Date: Jan 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Minneapolis, MN U.S.A.
Status:
Offline
|
|
where'd you get it and what do you think?
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: The Sar Chasm
Status:
Offline
|
|
I've had a look over someones shoulder, and got to sit down at it for a few minutes. Not sure about all the new features, except for the Layout feature which might be handy if you're wanting to build the same doc for DTP and web, which I don't have any personal use for, so far.
Multiple undo's work. It felt just about as quick as Quark 4 in OS 9. I slapped down about 3 tiffs and filled some text boxes with jabber, across a 2 page spread, and it seemed to scroll and respond pretty well. Hi-res previews work. Clicking back and forth between apps didn't display the sluggishness that plague Adobe apps in X.
It's just not that different from Quark 4 or 5, from what I saw.
A major bug with the beta: Doesn't play nice with Suitcase. Opening a font in Suitcase while Quark 6 is open results in only Courier being available in the font list. Quitting and relaunching Quark brings all the fonts back, though. I suppose we'll see a new Suitcase XT before long, though.
A major drawback is that it'll only save back as 5 and not 4. I know not a lot of people have gone for 5, so sending out files built in 6 is going to be iffy for a while.
|
When a true genius appears in the world you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him. -- Jonathan Swift.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Minneapolis, MN U.S.A.
Status:
Offline
|
|
chris v:
thx for the input. sounds like they mostly made q.v.5 run in osx and left out the new options aside from the long awaited multiple undos. i won't be quick to judge but the ability to save only down to q.v.5 sounds like suicide for q. let's hope they get it straight before the release date in january 2030.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Capitol City
Status:
Offline
|
|
Seems like most people I know use Quark 4. That seems to be the most stable/efficient version. Seems insane to do this. What is Quark thinking? Probably thinking, ah, we still have a vast majority of this market, and our designers would rather stay with quark...
doesn't matter, MS will own them sooner or later. MS will own everything. Doom on you!
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Minneapolis, MN U.S.A.
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by DeathMan:
Seems like most people I know use Quark 4. That seems to be the most stable/efficient version. Seems insane to do this. What is Quark thinking? Probably thinking, ah, we still have a vast majority of this market, and our designers would rather stay with quark...
doesn't matter, MS will own them sooner or later. MS will own everything. Doom on you!
You said it, DeathMan. My guess is that they're trying to force users into buying either v.5 or v.6. It's a gamble because many will undoubtedly have ID2 in their consideration set when the wallet comes out.
To Quark or not to Quark...
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Regular
Join Date: Jan 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
(haven't checked the post in a few days) The answer to your question, is I found it up on KDX.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: CT
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by DeathMan:
Seems like most people I know use Quark 4. That seems to be the most stable/efficient version. Seems insane to do this. What is Quark thinking? Probably thinking, ah, we still have a vast majority of this market, and our designers would rather stay with quark...
doesn't matter, MS will own them sooner or later. MS will own everything. Doom on you!
Quark 4.11 was the stable version and is still used. Mostly all the large design houses are still at 3.02.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Baltimore, MD
Status:
Offline
|
|
I had to opportunity to sit down with it last night for the first time.
To start, I whipped together a quick 9 page document, 3 pages were full bleed tiffs, all 300 dpi, 2 pages of 3 or 2 column copy only, the rest were a mix of titling text, copy and large 300 dpi images. all pages were 8.5 x 11"
Text entry is god awful slow. Painfully so, but for now I'll attribute that to beta-ness and leave it at that. UI is snappy and responsive, even considering the big ass tiffs that I was moving around, and it remained snappy even with high res previews on. This is good. UI sluggishness is a major issue of mine with ID2. Drag/scrolling is fast and as snappy as I can move the mouse, scrolling through all the pages moved very quickly, on par with Quark 4, which is what I'm comparing this with.
Very convenient 'scripts' menu with some nice applescripts like 'set all background to none', 'add crop marks', 'drop shadow', 'save each page as EPS', 'save each page as PS or PDF', etc etc. Basically a hierarchically organized catch all of miscellaneous useful stuff. About 30-40 scripts total. You can add your own, it has many more scripts than previous versions of quark, out of the box. And way more useful.
Nice little touches that ID has that I have wanted for Xpress like 'fit picture to box' 'fit box to picture', 'save text', 'remove all guides' and of course, unlimited undos.
It still feels a little rough around the edges, but its a beta 0 so I kind of expect some things not to work right and general roughness. It feels like a more polished Quark that has been made X-happy. It works like you would expect it to. UI is the familiar quark interface with less bright white and more gray. The utility pallet/type pallet at the bottom which is the most important and used quark pallet has a bit more space and is a bit larger, but not significantly so, and a little more breathing room between settings is nice. Everything is gray gradated (i.e. buttons, etc) except for things like the page layout pallet, style sheet selection pallet, etc. These are straight from previous versions except for the buttons, the text areas are the old black and white. Bulletproof font anti-aliasing unlike the redraw issues like in previous versions.
Basically, this is everything I wanted in an Xpress 6. Appears stable. Its fast. The interface has changed significantly enough for it to be uncomfortable. Nice polishing. I assume bug fixes, but I haven't used it long enough to really give it a good rogering. The same old key commands for everything which I know and love. All that and X happy. So, if you are a Quark user and you're comfortable in Quark and have no need or urge to change except for needing/wanting X compatibility thats what you are going to get. No mammoth life-changing feature improvements, or anything, but at this juncture there isn't much I can really think of at the moment that would make a killer feature improvement to a page layout application that doesn't exist, but I'm not really thinking hard enough. I don't really see any significant ID2 advantages to warrant a complete program changeover unless there is some killer feature of ID that can't be done in Quark and you need it desperately, I'm not seeing one, but feel free to point something out.
Regarding lack of being able to save to version 4:
Can Xpress 5 save to version 3? Can 4 save to version 2? Xpress has always only been able to save down by one version number, and in my experience, its rare for a studio to have machines that have more than a one version number variance in programs on their machines. I work in a PDF workflow, so PDF's are shipped to the press, so there is no need to save out to lower versions. Sure, it would be REALLY NICE to save down to 4, but it doesn't bother me that much. Plus, as the ID advocates say "Press people need to keep up with the current software, anyway" 
(Last edited by godzookie2k; Mar 31, 2003 at 10:35 AM.
)
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Minneapolis, MN U.S.A.
Status:
Offline
|
|
Regarding lack of being able to save to version 4:
Can Xpress 5 save to version 3? Can 4 save to version 2? Xpress has always only been able to save down by one version number, and in my experience, its rare for a studio to have machines that have more than a one version number variance in programs on their machines. I work in a PDF workflow, so PDF's are shipped to the press, so there is no need to save out to lower versions. Sure, it would be REALLY NICE to save down to 4, but it doesn't bother me that much. Plus, as the ID advocates say "Press people need to keep up with the current software, anyway" [/B]
thanks for your feedback. a macnner, who shall remain nameless, was kind enough to give me access to the beta but i have yet to install it -- too darn busy to dabble with a beta at the moment.
about the saving to v.4 vs. v.5, i respectfully disagree with your position, zookie. imo, because only four quark users have upgraded to v.5, i would hope that quark would see the wisdon of being able to save down through v.4. the only way they'll save their a$$es is to allow folks to skip v.5 and move straight to v.6. they should also give the four of us v.5 users a healthy discount for the piece of dung that is v.5.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 
|
|
|
Forum Rules
|
|
|
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top
