PDA

View Full Version : Quark 6.5, SLOW startup when Suitcase is running


limacguy
08-04-2005, 03:50 PM
Anyone have any suggestions for this? I have 5 G4s 2GB RAM, just upgraded to Quark 6.5, two have 11.0.4 Ver of suitcase installed, two have 11.0.4. If you launch quark 6.5 it takes about 14 mins for the initial launch, if you relaunch it, it is faster. If you disable suitcase - it starts immediately. I cannot reach anyone at their support line.

Suggestions?

Thanks!!!!

SGM

ktinkel
08-04-2005, 05:55 PM
Anyone have any suggestions for this? I have 5 G4s 2GB RAM, just upgraded to Quark 6.5, two have 11.0.4 Ver of suitcase installed, two have 11.0.4. If you launch quark 6.5 it takes about 14 mins for the initial launch, if you relaunch it, it is faster. If you disable suitcase - it starts immediately. I cannot reach anyone at their support line.Ouch. No idea, and I set Suitcase aside in favor of Font Agent so cannot easily test this.

But I did find it slow in general — figured it was because I have hundreds of fonts and it was somehow checking them (or something) at times. I have XPress 6.5, but haven’t installed it — this was with other apps.

Someone else may have more experience with the Quark/Suitcase interaction.

limacguy
08-04-2005, 06:12 PM
Kathleen - thanks for the prompt reply. I hate to do it but I guess if need be I can move them to font agent. What was your reason(s) for using font agent?

Thanks!

Shane Stanley
08-04-2005, 10:17 PM
Anyone have any suggestions for this? I have 5 G4s 2GB RAM, just upgraded to Quark 6.5, two have 11.0.4 Ver of suitcase installed, two have 11.0.4. If you launch quark 6.5 it takes about 14 mins for the initial launch, if you relaunch it, it is faster. If you disable suitcase - it starts immediately. I cannot reach anyone at their support line.

You don't mention what version of the OS you're using -- there was a known problem of slow startup with someof the 10.3.x releases.

Shane

limacguy
08-05-2005, 03:58 AM
Hi there.

OS Version 10.2.8. This only occurs if Suitcase is running.

Thanks!

djb
08-05-2005, 06:45 AM
Hi there.

OS Version 10.2.8. This only occurs if Suitcase is running.

Thanks!

What happens if you remove the auto-activation Xtension from Quark?

ktinkel
08-05-2005, 10:18 AM
Kathleen - thanks for the prompt reply. I hate to do it but I guess if need be I can move them to font agent. What was your reason(s) for using font agent? I was frustrated with Suitcase for a variety of reasons, including general slowness.

We have had several discussions about Mac font management. Perhaps you will get the gist of the issues with Mac OS X and font management.

And meantime someone here may know about your specific XPress problem.
InDesign CS and Suitcase 10.2 (http://www.desktoppublishingforum.com/bb/showthread.php?t=516&highlight=Suitcase)
Font Management: Font Agent Pro (http://www.desktoppublishingforum.com/bb/showthread.php?t=284&highlight=fontagent+pro)
OS X & fonts: Grrrrrr! (http://www.desktoppublishingforum.com/bb/showthread.php?t=444&highlight=fontagent+pro)
More "Mac OSX Fonts, grrrrr!" (http://www.desktoppublishingforum.com/bb/showthread.php?t=728&highlight=fontagent+pro)
FontAgentPro: export/import libraries? (http://www.desktoppublishingforum.com/bb/showthread.php?t=811&highlight=fontagent+pro)
FontAgent Pro (http://www.desktoppublishingforum.com/bb/showthread.php?t=955&highlight=fontagent+pro)

limacguy
08-08-2005, 05:15 PM
Kathleen:

Thanks again for the info!!!

limacguy
08-08-2005, 05:17 PM
Hi DJB

Ok - here is what I see, after further testing. If I disable scan for dubs within the Xtension for suitcase in quark 6.X - it really didn't help, If I disable the extension (I have to verify) but I believe it is still slow. If I exit Suitcase - it is fine.

Additionally, if I remove the prefs from suitcase, and let it create new prefs it is fine, haven't re-added the font lib to suitcase as of yet. I should be doing this Tues/Wed.

With the xtension enabled, and the prefs trashed for suitcase it is quite fast.

Thanks!

SGM

djb
08-09-2005, 10:55 AM
How many fonts do have active (as opposed to in sets but inactive) in Suitcase when Quark is slow? How much RAM in the Macs?

limacguy
08-10-2005, 07:01 AM
DJB:
Thanks for the response! I do have to verify, I believe I can just show open fonts in suitcase. I should be there tomorrow, or thurs and will check. With fresh prefs - Quark launches quite well. As for RAM these machines are maxed out at 2 GB.

SGM

limacguy
08-28-2005, 06:17 PM
Hi there!

Ok here the update on this - I do hope someone has a recommendation.
Os 10.2.8, Suitcase 11.0.4. When using Quark 4.x or 5.x - the launch of the application is as expected.
When starting Quark 6.5 (with suitcase enabled), it takes 7 minutes for the initial start. Trashed all prefs associated with Suitcase - without dragging the font lib folder to the bottom window within Suitcase (Suitcase Fonts Window) which I believe creates an index as to where the location is of the fonts, no fonts activated - launch of Quark 6.5 takes about 7 mins. I was told by support to disable - within Quark under Utils/Suitcase Prefs I disabled: Sync and check for duplicates. Still slow as hell.
I would say it is the font lib - yet it works perfectly with Quark 4.x as well as 5.x. Suitcase also works fine with 4.x. 5.x versions of Quark. Anyone have any other thoughts at all?

Thanks!!
SGM

ktinkel
08-28-2005, 06:25 PM
Os 10.2.8, Suitcase 11.0.4. When using Quark 4.x or 5.x - the launch of the application is as expected.
When starting Quark 6.5 (with suitcase enabled), it takes 7 minutes for the initial start. …

I would say it is the font lib - yet it works perfectly with Quark 4.x as well as 5.x. Suitcase also works fine with 4.x. 5.x versions of Quark. Anyone have any other thoughts at all?The only thought I have — and it may be a long shot — is that 6.5 would be happier with OS 10.3 (Panther).

Not sure of the timing, but 10.2 is pretty old now, and I just wonder if that could be a factor.

limacguy
08-29-2005, 05:19 AM
Kathleen:

Thanks for the response. Yes it is a thought. What do you think though - from 10.2.8 to Panther - not Tiger? On a production machine, do you suggest blowing it away and installing 10.2 fresh? Or do you have experience with an in place and is it as stable?

Thanks!

ElyseC
08-29-2005, 05:20 AM
I would say it is the font lib - yet it works perfectly with Quark 4.x as well as 5.x. Suitcase also works fine with 4.x. 5.x versions of Quark. Anyone have any other thoughts at all?Kathleen may be onto something with the version of the OS. QX 4.x and 5.x will all be launching into Classic, IOW OS9, so it sounds like the extreme slowness with the combo of QX 6.5 and Suitcase only occurs in OSX 10.2.x. Unfortunately, the only way I can think of to test the theory is to upgrade one machine to 10.3. If it's still slow, you could try disabling all non-essential Quark XTensions.

I do know, however, that QX, as one of its earliest steps in starting up, checks all active fonts, so the more fonts you have the longer it takes and if Suitcase is very slow in serving them up for checking by QX, the whole startup process will be slower than without Suitcase.

Like Kathleen, I use Font Agent Pro and when I've cranked up XPress (I'm doing more and more in InDesign these days) there was no noticeable slowness.

ktinkel
08-29-2005, 07:23 AM
Thanks for the response. Yes it is a thought. What do you think though - from 10.2.8 to Panther - not Tiger? On a production machine, do you suggest blowing it away and installing 10.2 fresh? Or do you have experience with an in place and is it as stable?What was QXP 6.5 optimized for — that’s what I would choose, and it may well be Panther.

I am just now getting used to Tiger. Installed it last week, a clean install in a separate partition (so I can always scuttle back to Panther if need be). Doing it that way caused a lot of problems — had to drag files around to make sure Eudora worked properly, for example; and need to install Font Agent and set it up. One silly program is crashing a lot (Solitaire Til Dark), and I will have to install Classic separately so I can continue to use Fontographer until the OS X version comes out. But so far, Tiger itself seems to be a relatively transparent upgrade with some useful (or cool) new features.

But if your main app is XPress, you might want to cater to it. I found Panther 1.3 to be a big improvement over 1.2, so you probably would benefit in other ways as well. (On the other hand, Tiger might be fine — but you should check around, see if 6.5 users are having problems with it.)

Good luck with it. The sort of slow start you are experiencing would be driving me crazy!

limacguy
08-29-2005, 05:59 PM
Hi Elyse!



Thanks for your input! It is very helpful. These are production machines and I generally shy away from doing an in place upgrade from 10.2.8 to 10.3. Correct me if I am wrong, but this is a paid upgrade- yes? If you do an in place, does it break anything from before inclusive of classic? Cost of course will be a factor, if you feel that Font Agent handles things a bit different, it may be worth a look. I disabled within Quark Utilities, Suitcase Prefs –Synchronize and Check for duplicates, which had little affect. Once the initial 7 or so minute startup completes, if you exit Quark and restart it does start normally (unless you reboot, and then relaunch Quark). What OS Ver are you running? I am not sure if at this time they prefer to invest in the cost of upgrading the OS, or changing font mgmt utils. As I remember Font Agent, (correct me if I am wrong), isn’t much different than Suitcase, in terms of a learning curve etc.

djb
08-29-2005, 06:09 PM
Okay, this has been bugging me for a few days...

Why are you quitting Quark to begin with? Why, In OS X, do you need to quit any app? If an app isn't active it uses virtually no resources.

My most used applications stay running for weeks at a time...

Yes, weeks. Whether I use them or not.

Don't quit your apps. Leave them running.

ElyseC
08-30-2005, 07:44 PM
Thanks for your input! It is very helpful. These are production machines and I generally shy away from doing an in place upgrade from 10.2.8 to 10.3. Correct me if I am wrong, but this is a paid upgrade- yes? If you do an in place, does it break anything from before inclusive of classic? Cost of course will be a factor, if you feel that Font Agent handles things a bit different, it may be worth a look. I disabled within Quark Utilities, Suitcase Prefs –Synchronize and Check for duplicates, which had little affect. Once the initial 7 or so minute startup completes, if you exit Quark and restart it does start normally (unless you reboot, and then relaunch Quark). What OS Ver are you running? I am not sure if at this time they prefer to invest in the cost of upgrading the OS, or changing font mgmt utils. As I remember Font Agent, (correct me if I am wrong), isn’t much different than Suitcase, in terms of a learning curve etc. Yes, 10.2.x to 10.3.x is a paid upgrade. I don't know if it breaks anything or not, because I jumped from three old machines running OS9 to three brand new machines that shipped running 10.3.5.

As for the differences between Suitcase and Font Agent Pro, I cannot tell you now. The last time I used Suitcase was, I think, under OS8. I started out way back when with Suitcase, but switched to Font Reserve on one machine, ATM Deluxe on the other two. When I switched to OSX almost a year ago, I had to either upgrade an existing license for something (meaning Suitcase or Font Reserve - ATM Deluxe was not in the OSX picture) or go another route. Landed on Font Agent Pro and have been happy.

limacguy
09-14-2005, 05:19 PM
DJB:

It brings us to what "should" be working correctly and is not. Also it brings up the argument if you will - whether or not the machines should be on 24X7X365.
I have been a technician/consultant for 11+ years, and I have a rule of thumb that based on the fact that all equipment has an estimated MTBF, and the power in this particular building isn't wonderful - I don't see any advantage to leaving desktops on 24X7. Servers yes, but desktops not necessarily.
Just a habit, based on the fact that all electromechanical devices, which contain moving parts, will wear out.
I should say that it really is up to the end user, if they want to leave it on - that also is acceptable.

limacguy
09-14-2005, 05:22 PM
ElyseC (member.php?u=4)

Well, if Font Reserve is working that well, I am going to start testing and recommending it. I have found more issues with Suitcase and it really isn't worth the battle. Although not required, the global auto activation setting seems to need to be enabled in order for all fonts to be auto-actvitated within a quark doc with Quark 6.5. They say it shouldn't be this way - and they are working on it.
When it is enabled it takes about 7-10 mins for the initial launch.
Font Agent Pro in terms of usability, if I remember correctly is pretty much the same concept and should have a small if any learning curve for the users.

Thanks

djb
09-14-2005, 06:45 PM
It brings us to what "should" be working correctly and is not. Also it brings up the argument if you will - whether or not the machines should be on 24X7X365.
I have been a technician/consultant for 11+ years, and I have a rule of thumb that based on the fact that all equipment has an estimated MTBF, and the power in this particular building isn't wonderful - I don't see any advantage to leaving desktops on 24X7. Servers yes, but desktops not necessarily.
Just a habit, based on the fact that all electromechanical devices, which contain moving parts, will wear out.
I should say that it really is up to the end user, if they want to leave it on - that also is acceptable.

What does MTBF have to do with quitting apps?

I'm in a particulary grumpy mood at the moment, so will try to temper my response as my immediate inclination is to say something rather nasty as I have little patience at the moment for stupidity.

Oh, what the heck...

RAM is not an "electromechanical device" that contains moving parts that will wear out.

If this was usenet, I would rip you a new one. It isn't, so I have to be polite.

Politely: "this is a very rude comment suggesting that you have a lack of expertise that precludes you from commenting on certain subjects including this one, which is, if I'm not mistaken, why you posed the question in the first place.

limacguy
09-14-2005, 08:13 PM
Firstly, I can assure you I was responding to your comment " Why are you quitting Quark to begin with? Why, In OS X, do you need to quit any app? If an app isn't active it uses virtually no resources.My most used applications stay running for weeks at a time...
Yes, weeks. Whether I use them or not.
Don't quit your apps. Leave them running."

This of course doesn't resolve the problem. I have no idea why you were referring to RAM in your incredibly nasty response. I was referring to electro-mechanical devices such as hard drives for the most part. Not sure why you would assume RAM. Also by leaving the computer on 24 X 7 X 365 it doesn't resolve the problem. As a technical person when the user is complaining that it takes 7-10 minutes to start an application and your response is - Hell just leave your computer on the around the clock for weeks!!! You will not be a technician for them for much longer. The users require a resolution. Rip me a new one? If you in anyway misinterpreted my response to have any attitude whatsoever - my apologies, I am simply not like that and you did misread it. On the other hand, if you are generally this grumpy and unprofessional you should refrain from answering questions here. Again, I basically am not the type of person to slam anyone, and nothing negative was meant by my response. These forums can be very helpful.



What does MTBF have to do with quitting apps - it of course is not logical and it has nothing to do with it, leaving your computer on constantly because you can't fix a problem is why I brought up MTBF.



So are you suggesting that if I have a difficult time starting my car I should just leave it running as a solution? Not sure where your attitude came from. I don't really think anyone here appreciates it though - unless I misunderstood you.



Little patience for stupidity? You are quite the professional aren't you? Someone with your attitude shouldn't be responding to questions here - it doesn't benefit anyone - go beat your dog or something. I am certainly not a know it all, but at the same time I have certifications from several vendors inclusive of Cisco, support and install Enterprise solutions, Virtualization and a number of other area. Your comment about calling someone stupid - benefits people in this forum how?

Nice!

djb
09-15-2005, 06:26 AM
Sigh.

"Doctor, it hurts when I do this."

"So, don't do that."

Your problem is that Quark takes a long to time to start up, right? So, don't start it up.

There's little need in OSX to quit apps, as opposed to OS 9 and earlier.

Don't do that.

As someone with many certifications, have you never learned that working around an intractable problem is often more effective than continuing to try to solve an intractable problem?

I once solved a printer problem for a client by telling the computer it was printing to a VT600 instead of a QMS. It wasn't the "correct" solution, but it worked so it was the right solution.

In this case, perhaps the "right" solution is to not quit an app that takes a long time to start again, n'est ce pas?

Stephen Owades
09-15-2005, 07:43 PM
What does MTBF have to do with quitting apps?

I'm in a particulary grumpy mood at the moment, so will try to temper my response as my immediate inclination is to say something rather nasty as I have little patience at the moment for stupidity.

Oh, what the heck...

RAM is not an "electromechanical device" that contains moving parts that will wear out.

If this was usenet, I would rip you a new one. It isn't, so I have to be polite.

Politely: "this is a very rude comment suggesting that you have a lack of expertise that precludes you from commenting on certain subjects including this one, which is, if I'm not mistaken, why you posed the question in the first place.I'm astonished at the incivility of your post, and it seems uncharacteristic of you--or anyone who has been a part of DTP Forum for any length of time. What inspired you to "go off on" a forum newcomer, anyway? Do you really call people "stupid" at the drop of a hat in real life, or does the relative anonymity of forum interaction bring out the lout in you?

His question about slow launch times for an application is a reasonable one, and the answer you suggested--to keep all his apps running constantly--is foolish. There should be a real explanation for his problem, and a real solution, and he's entitled to ask for advice on finding the latter.

Computers contain a lot more than RAM, including mechanical components like hard drives that do wear out over time. I've heard arguments pro and con about keeping desktop machines on all the time, and i don't believe that the answer is so obvious that any doubter deserves scorn and ridicule.

limacguy
09-28-2005, 07:52 PM
Hi Stephen:

Thank you for your well thoughtout response and coming to my defense! For a moment I thought I was losing my mind based on the posting of djb. I was a bit surprised at his response in terms of lack of professionalism and his suggested solution.

Again thanks!

SGM