[designerste]

I know this is an age old debate among designers and others whether to use Quark or InDesign. Im still getting work through supplied as Quark files and finding myself converting them to InDesign simply because i prefer the software. Are you finding yourself doing this? or is it just me?

[Ozwaldo Sanchez]

Did have that a while back, but can't remember the last time i saw a quark doc!

[LovesPrint]

Originally Posted by designerste

I know this is an age old debate among designers and others whether to use Quark or InDesign. Im still getting work through supplied as Quark files and finding myself converting them to InDesign simply because i prefer the software. Are you finding yourself doing this? or is it just me?

We do convert at our place at times (if we had a file we set up in Quark originally), but mainly just work with files as they are. Quark is still around, and there are still a lot of people who prefer it to InDesign. I think it's better to learn to use both rather than always convert, makes you more versatile. I do try and work with Quark where I can, just so i know how to use it - you never know which software your next company will prefer!

I think InDesign is much better in terms of working with the rest of the Adobe suite, and so I prefer to use it.

[designerste]

I can use both of them i just think i prefer InDesign to Quark i tend to get on much better with InDesign. Quark seems a little clunky to me? Not to mention the copious phone calls all over the world just to get the upgrade set up. I think its probably personal preference as InDesign as an adobe product works well with photoshop etc

[Silverfox]

Quark doesn't do a fraction of what Indesign, Corel or any other similar products do. I stopped using it about 10 years ago, it's a prehistoric package in my opinion. If we get anything from Quark, we automatically convert it to import into other packages. Stay away from it...

[SparkCreative]

Originally Posted by Silverfox

Quark doesn't do a fraction of what Indesign, Corel or any other similar products do. I stopped using it about 10 years ago, it's a prehistoric package in my opinion. If we get anything from Quark, we automatically convert it to import into other packages. Stay away from it...

Ummm... it does. And Corel? Since when's that been an industry standard? Having said that, I switched to Indesign at version CS2 and I've never looked back. Can't stand using Quark now. But lots of people still do. And it was pretty much what everyone used until Indesign CS came out.

[Silverfox]

Originally Posted by SparkCreative

Ummm... it does. And Corel? Since when's that been an industry standard? Having said that, I switched to Indesign at version CS2 and I've never looked back. Can't stand using Quark now. But lots of people still do. And it was pretty much what everyone used until Indesign CS came out.

No one mentioned Corel being industry standard... it was an example of a piece of software that does a lot more design wise and production wise than Quark.

I'm not a fan of it and never have been. I personally find it's used my newspapers and people who require very little vector/bitmap design input. OF course, that's just my opinion!

[bigdave]

I can happily work in both and have them both installed on my MacBook Pro for freelance jobs. The company I work for solely use InDesign so thats what Im on most often but I have to say I do quite like the hidden quirks in quark like the aliens that run across the screen etc...