PDA

View Full Version : Quark fights back w/OpenType


ktinkel
03-03-2005, 12:20 PM
Quark is beginning to reveal aspects of QuarkXPress 7. According to an article (http://www.publish.com/article2/0,1759,1766264,00.asp) in the online magazine Publish, the next version of the layout program will have a brand new type engine, based on Unicode and capable of accessing all the features and extensive character sets of OpenType fonts.

The company previewed the typographic features at Linotype’s TypoTechnica 2005, which was held at the St. Bride Printing Library in London last month. According to Gavin Drake, Quark’s U.K. marketing director, “this upgrade represents the biggest change to QuarkXPress in the last 10 years.”

Read more from a brief Quark press release (http://www.quark.com/about/presscenter/prview.jsp?idx=519).

ElyseC
03-03-2005, 07:38 PM
Finally! Sheesh, but it took them long enough! <shaking head>

Shane Stanley
03-03-2005, 09:56 PM
Sheesh, but it took them long enough!

What do you mean? It still isn't anything but vaporware yet. And then Fred's got to work out how he can support it, but still keep up the Passport extortion game.

Shane

ktinkel
03-04-2005, 06:25 AM
What do you mean? It still isn't anything but vaporware yet. And then Fred's got to work out how he can support it, but still keep up the Passport extortion game.Fred has left the company, which is under new management.

They claim it is a brand new company, and they are certainly making changes in how they develop the software, which is going to use XML somehow as a file format. I think the article (http://www.publish.com/article2/0,1759,1766264,00.asp) in Publish gets into the issue of how support for multiple languages is going to be handled.

I have my own kind of skepticism about this company (as you know), but Fred’s departure seems like a huge step forward. Time, of course, will tell.

ElyseC
03-04-2005, 07:55 AM
With Fred gone the company at least has a chance to turn around.

ElyseC
03-04-2005, 07:57 AM
...the Passport extortion game.My, isn't that the truth?

don Arnoldy
03-04-2005, 07:59 AM
I have my own kind of skepticism about this company (as you know), but Fred’s departure seems like a huge step forward.I too am skeptical of the "kinder, gentler Quark," but I must give them their due-- they've established educational pricing--$200, and are allowing third parties to sell it (rather than having to buy it directly from Quark). This is a huge step forward.

Shane Stanley
03-05-2005, 12:43 AM
Fred has left the company, which is under new management.

But doesn't he still own it? And if so, he can step back in any time -- he did that at least once before.

They claim it is a brand new company

Call me a cynic, but to do therwise would be suicidal.

and they are certainly making changes in how they develop the software, which is going to use XML somehow as a file format.

Buzzword-ism? FWIW, I think their file format is the least of their problems.

I think the article (http://www.publish.com/article2/0,1759,1766264,00.asp) in Publish gets into the issue of how support for multiple languages is going to be handled.

I thought it said they hadn't decided, but I might be mis-remembering. The only real way to solve the problem is to drop the whole Passport charade, and make QXP multi-lingual like InDesign. But that has enormous potential implications for Quark's bottom line -- they would have to either ramp up their US price drastically, or drop their international prices drastically. Now if management decides to do the latter, and Fed still owns the place... Who knows?

I have my own kind of skepticism about this company (as you know), but Fred’s departure seems like a huge step forward. Time, of course, will tell.

Right. There's no question they've lifted their game, but there's still no sign that they've solved serious issues like massive deadline overruns.

Shane

Shane Stanley
03-05-2005, 12:51 AM
I too am skeptical of the "kinder, gentler Quark," but I must give them their due-- they've established educational pricing--$200, and are allowing third parties to sell it (rather than having to buy it directly from Quark). This is a huge step forward.

They've had educational pricing for a long time. It used to be a dongle-based version, so everyone who bought it was left with the problem of how to secure the dongles. You can imagine how well that went down in school labs. But yes, you had to buy it direct from Quark.

Why, they even do NFRs these days. And down here they recently dropped the upgrade price -- twice in the one day!

But I can't see it as anything more than a reaction to the massive battering they are taking in the market. They haven't changed spots, IMO -- they're just realising what a mess they've let things get into, and are being driven to desperation. Fair makes my heart bleed...


Shane

don Arnoldy
03-05-2005, 05:51 AM
They've had educational pricing for a long time.Yes and (at least in the US) it wasn't much of a discount. And they've had multi-licence discounts for schools--but they were dongle (now key server) protected--*and* you had to by passport.

ktinkel
03-05-2005, 06:31 AM
But I can't see it as anything more than a reaction to the massive battering they are taking in the market.Have you seen any hard data on what sort of battering that is? I have the same impression you do, especially as I know some fairly sizable organizations (Hearst publications, for example) that have switched to ID.

And Adobe has actually been both steadfast and clever, sewing up a CS workflow with PDF and working hard on ID. Considering that five years ago (say) XPress had virtually defined the prepress workflow, that position was Quark’s to lose. And amazingly, it does seem as if they have lost it.

But I wonder whether objective data support this.

fhaber
03-05-2005, 11:44 AM
Topic-drift warning:

You know, Kathleen, that would make a nice article for someone, somewhere. I'm not the one to spec it, since I've not visited a service bureau since Quark 4 days. And my IIci was barely adequate to open and browse the files I had to noodle around in. The contemporary Win version? Well, this is a family forum, and the less said...

But broadly

- PDF as a working environment?
- they say PDF's open; how open is that?
- would you dare submit a page outputted by GhostScript or a cheapie PDF maker?
- what's a RIP, these days? How do people prep files and test RIPs?
- what's left of SB's? Of their function?
- say I wanted to color proof an ad for a series of trade journals, full-page A4-ish size, and I wanted to know how it would look in both a standard glossy weekly and a sleazoid-tissuepaper-dim broadsheet/folio-size weekly? Who could do that for me? Am I talking $600/sheet? More? How about midnight iterations?

It's probably on the web somewhere, right? Executive guide to occasional workflow, or something like that?

-not an executive, but....

ktinkel
03-05-2005, 01:24 PM
You know, Kathleen, that would make a nice article for someone, somewhere.Yeah. There used to be quite a few places for such an article; can’t really think of any now, though (that pay, I mean).

Guess we’ll just noodle on about it here. Your outline looks good to me!

Shane Stanley
03-05-2005, 09:33 PM
Have you seen any hard data on what sort of battering that is?

Not officially, but the rumors I've heard are pretty dramatic. Mind you, such figures are for new sales, so they're an incomplete picture of useage anyway.

And Adobe has actually been both steadfast and clever, sewing up a CS workflow with PDF and working hard on ID. Considering that five years ago (say) XPress had virtually defined the prepress workflow, that position was Quark’s to lose. And amazingly, it does seem as if they have lost it.

Adobe's timing was exquisite.

But I wonder whether objective data support this.

I'd like to see something published, but I think the "unscientific" evidence we see is convincing enough that a big change is happening. Hey, Quark dropped prices here twice in one day -- is that objective enough for you? ;-)

Shane

ktinkel
03-06-2005, 06:25 AM
Hey, Quark dropped prices here twice in one day -- is that objective enough for you? ;-)Well, not exactly objective, but interesting.

I imagine there is information available from TrendWatch or Gartner or another of the high-priced consultants.

terrie
03-06-2005, 01:57 PM
>>don: I too am skeptical of the "kinder, gentler Quark,"

In the latest PC Graphics Report there is an article on Quark's "free" tech support...apparently, if you have upgraded to a newer version of the software, they won't answer any questions on earlier versions because according the Quark, your older serial numbers become void when you upgrade--you have to buy the FULL version to get support for the older versions...

So much for kinder, gentler...'-}}

Terrie

ElyseC
03-06-2005, 02:30 PM
apparently, if you have upgraded to a newer version of the software, they won't answer any questions on earlier versions because according the Quark, your older serial numbers become void when you upgrade--you have to buy the FULL version to get support for the older versions...!!!

Oh, for dumb...

terrie
03-06-2005, 02:44 PM
>>elyse: Oh, for dumb...

Indeed...PG Graphics Report said "Quark declined to comment about this story"...perhaps they're embarassed...'-}}

Terrie

ktinkel
03-06-2005, 04:00 PM
But doesn't he still own it? Jeepers — I have no idea. Must have been guilty of sloppy thinking. Have to find that out.
Call me a cynic, but to do therwise would be suicidal.Well, let’s not get histrionic, here! <g>
Right. There's no question they've lifted their game, but there's still no sign that they've solved serious issues like massive deadline overruns.Well, guess we still have some serious research to do.

I do get a sense that their PR efforts are a bit fragile. FWIW.

tphinney
03-06-2005, 06:43 PM
I can't share any 3rd-party stats, but I do know that in the last week or two, besides the Washington Post/LA Times switch to InDesign becoming public, Advance Publications, parent company of Conde Nast (among others) announced just last week that they were switching to InDesign and the K4 publishing system. "Among their 27 publications are Vanity Fair, Glamour and Women's Wear Daily. The additional K4 installations will support nearly 1,200 users. Title-by-title implementation is in progress, with completed installations already at Wired, GQ, Details, Cargo and House & Garden." (from a press release)

As for QuarkXPress's OpenType support, it's nice to see Quark following our lead of years ago and agreeing that OpenType and Unicode are important standards to support. Broader support for these standards is good for end users, whichever product they choose to use.

Regards,

T

Cristen Gillespie
03-08-2005, 07:20 AM
Yes and (at least in the US) it wasn't much of a discount. And they've had multi-licence discounts for schools--but they were dongle (now key server) protected--*and* you had to by passport.

And if you were in the school system, you know how badly passport worked. We had more down time in our Quark class just getting running than any other class I've ever taken. It didn't endear me to Quark, not that there weren't many other reasons I didn't like the product, but I've tried to be fair--I prefer the Adobe interface, so taking to Quark wasn't all that likely.

marlene
03-08-2005, 08:17 AM
It would also. IMHO, be a huge step forward if they would allow (single-license) users to also install Quark on a laptop (in addition to one big computer).

IIRC, Adobe allows most -- if not all -- of their programs to be installed on a laptop (in addition to one computer), provided that only one installed version will be used at a time.

Of course, it's possible that Quark has changed their policy and I don't know about it, since I haven't checked.

mxh

Shane Stanley
03-08-2005, 09:48 PM
It would also. IMHO, be a huge step forward if they would allow (single-license) users to also install Quark on a laptop (in addition to one big computer).[...]Of course, it's possible that Quark has changed their policy and I don't know about it, since I haven't checked.

Yes, they've even backtracked on that one too.

Shane

marlene
03-08-2005, 09:53 PM
Yes, they've even backtracked on that one too.

Are they charging for it? I just remembered reading somewhere that they would permit you to do a second install on a laptop, but they wanted an additional fee -- maybe $50?

mxh

Shane Stanley
03-09-2005, 01:59 AM
Are they charging for it? I just remembered reading somewhere that they would permit you to do a second install on a laptop, but they wanted an additional fee -- maybe $50?

No -- as of 6.5, it's free, and 6.5 is a free upgrade from 6.1. There's a most un-Quark-like theme here...

Shane

marlene
03-09-2005, 01:04 PM
No -- as of 6.5, it's free, and 6.5 is a free upgrade from 6.1.

Cool! Then I might just have to upgrade to 6/6.5.

I'm still waiting for a deal, though. Last fall I got a postcard offering a $50 discount, but I dragged my feet until it expired.

mxh

ktinkel
03-09-2005, 01:18 PM
Cool! Then I might just have to upgrade to 6/6.5.Today I received the oddest mailing from Quark.

A set of 6 round-cornered cards extolling new XPress 6.5 features. Very defensive in tone, and sort of punky in style. The first one has this headline:
The newest QuarkXPress 6.5 features were designed to blow your doors off. Making Adobe cry like a baby was just an added bonus.
On the back it says “… they were designed to really hit InDesign where it hurts (and they say there’s no truth in advertising).”

The features they highlighted: Multiple undos, Layers, Transparency (via a free ALAP ShadowCaster XT, free with upgrade offer), and Image manipulation in the layout (leaving the original image intact). The last card also lists PSD import, Shared style sheets, Non-destructive filters, Multiple XML element import, and Synchronized content.

Until June 15, I could upgrade for $199 (or purchase a new copy for $700), and get the free ALAP XT.

Ends with “Quark has always been the market leader. And that’s not about to change.” I guess they forgot the years before XPress took hold as market leader, but why quibble?

Andrew B.
03-09-2005, 01:41 PM
Here's what Tom Arah had to say about the QuarkVista XTension, which is new to Quark 6.5

...offers a full range of the most common image adjustments – Levels, Curves, Brightness/Contrast, Colour Balance, Hue/Saturation, Gamma Correction, Invert, Threshold, Posterize and even Selective Colour. And in each case the power is impressive – the Levels dialog for example offers Shadow, Midtone and Highlight sliders, Before and After histograms and a live preview.

And this is only the beginning. As well as adjustments, QuarkVista offers a range of effects from Gaussian Blur through to Unsharp Mask, Despeckle through to Add Noise. Multiple effects can be applied simultaneously, each appearing in a re-orderable list in the palette, and these can be saved as re-usable presets. Best of all, all adjustments and effects are applied non-destructively which means that at any time you can fine-tune your settings while your original image remains unaffected (though you can also save changes to a new file or overwrite the original if desired). And because QuarkXPress is applying effects live this is handled intelligently based on the current picture box transformations regarding scaling, skewing, rotation and cropping – a factor which can lead to major improvements in print processing time.http://www.designer-info.com/DTP/quark.htm

marlene
03-10-2005, 07:49 PM
Today I received the oddest mailing from Quark.

Wonder why I didn't get it? Maybe it's only for Mac users ...

mxh

ktinkel
03-11-2005, 07:28 AM
Here's what Tom Arah had to say about the QuarkVista XTensionErika Kendra wrote about QuarkVista in the April 2005 Macworld (unfortunately not yet available online).

She called it “a powerful tool” but points out a few limitations — you cannot manipulate layers or channels, create new images or change individual pixels or selected areas of an image, for example. But her bottom line is favorable:Is QuarkVista a replacement for Photoshop? Of course not. But is QuarkVista a viable tool for correcting color and adding visual appeal with effects and filters? Absolutely.
Here is a link to the Macworld online magazine (http://www.macworld.com/magazine/) (I believe they post the contents of an issue a week or two after publication.)

JVegVT
03-13-2005, 03:52 PM
I got the same mailing, and I don't even use Quark and never have.
--Judy M.

ktinkel
03-13-2005, 05:27 PM
I got the same mailing, and I don't even use Quark and never have.And certainly do not use a Mac!

Typical sort of mindless junk mail! <g>