[msc1974]

After working with Quark since it first came out many moons ago I and many others have had very little else to choose from, well Pagemaker...but thats a different story.
Anyway, my boss has the idea that Quark is at the end of its life as the NUMBER ONE page layout applcation.
Has anyone any FIRST HAND working knowledge of Indesign?
I need info so me and my boss can make a decision on which software to purchase.
Quark or Indesign

Please tell me what YOU think!

[G-mac]

Hi!

Although I'm not a professional, I've started using InDesign 2.0 for publishing my magazine and I really like it. First of all, it's the only one of the two that runs native on OS X (nice), although Quark runs in Classic mode. Quark hasn't really said when their OS X version is arriving, so it seems Adobe is more devoted to the Mac user in that sense. Also, if you use Photoshop, Illustrator, etc., InDesign's layout is very similar and as easy to understand.

I've used Quark a little before. Others in this forum can provide you with definite advantages to using Quark over InDesign if you can overlook the OS X thing. One thing for sure is that lots of publishers still swear by Quark, so it may be easier for now to know both or just Quark. However, Adobe is paying Quark customers a few hundred bucks to switch. We'll see if the people start switching...

Hope this helps! Some of the pros should be addressing your question more in depth any minute now....

[godzookie2k]

As much as I love what Indesign is attempting, I'd have to suggest quark, though it really depends on what you do. I'd never design, like, full issue of rolling stone in its 4-color 60 odd page glory in Indesign (I wish) but I have (and would) design a small black and white 'zine in it. The problem here is that Indesign is unproven territory in that it still has some growing pains to work through before its *really* ready for primetime. (printing issues, acceptance with printers, etc. see ps7 thread) Most agencies I know are kinda entertaining the concept of indesign, kinda like osx by leaving it installed on that one machine in the back corner of the office for lunch hour entertainment. Designers by nature do not have the time or patience to deal with uncentainties and grey areas, both of which are categories that indesign fall into. Quark is the tried and proven, and as shoddy a company they are, their product can't be considered in its death throws until the major publications start to stray, and that aint happenin anytime soon.

Nick

[mitchell_pgh]

My boss was thinking the same thing about 1.5 years ago, but guess what, we are still using Quark. Perhaps if you have an open thinking boss that would let you try it out, that would be cool. You might even want to take a class with it. Quark isn't going anywhere. It's THE STANDARD, and it's not going anywhere overnight.

[l008com]

I've been using InDesign 2.0 for a little while, I definatly like it better than Quark. It works with other Adobe software much easier than Quark (Quark might be the layout standard, but Adobe is the Everything Else standard), plus it can save directly to PDF. InDesign is just more modern, Quark is still in 7.5 land. Plus 2.0 is still beta, its not final yet, at least the copy I have is. I say take the plunge, switch to InDesign.

[NDA]

I am a big InDesign fan, but I suggest you talk your boss out of jumping in with both feet.

InDesign is a great application, but it takes some getting used to, and getting reliable output from it can take trial and error. (PDF is not a silver bullet)

None of these are knocks against InDesign. In fact, I would expect some growing pains while switching to a new application.