Does anybody else have to use this awful package?

I started a course in it and packed it in half way through. Too much measuring with rulers. Tedious.

Yes, Quark sucks at most things. It is so long in the tooth now and depends on such an outdated plugin architecture (although I really haven't touched it for 6 or 7 years, it may have changed in that time but I doubt it.)

What are you trying to do with it.

Was always a big fan of Aldus Pagemaker, but now use Freehand for multiple page work, even though its not really a full DTP package, it has enough multipage features to make it quite useful.

Have yout tried adobe InDesign ? Its good, borrows heavily from illustrator, but afaik still only prints to postscript, so make sure you have a postscript printer or one with emulation.

I'm a graphic designer and our company has just upgraded to InDesign.

I'm really glad, and I just wanted to slag off Quark cos I've always hated it.

I've always resented the fact that Quark became industry standard because it is a lazily developed, pathetic, out-dated package.

They should be ashamed of themselves for not updating it properly over the years, and I hope the introduction of Adobe's InDesign is the final nail in the coffin for Quark. They deserve to pay for their lethargy. Quark has done nothing but stifle my creativity all the time i've ben forced to use it.

Thank god we've ditched it.


The only thing is, I cant see it dying off fully yet. The oldies are too scared to move from the safety of what they know. Get a grip you old buggers and learn another package!!!

The upgrades are the worst part (after shelling out £1000 for the full package, that is).

£300 a pop, and there's bugger all improvements or functionality in there. Versions 3 to 4 for Windows brought long filenames, fancy text boxes...and that's it :loopy:

Has their copy protection system / product upgrade system improved lately? Or do you still have to phone mainland Europe and wait three days for a response?

I'm a Licensed quark xpress developer.

The documentation for developing plug-in is the worst I've ever seen.

Glad to say I don't actually use the package itself.

I'm glad I'm not the only one.
It seems like a situation of 'The Emperors New Clothes' to me. Everyone says they love it and it's the only package worth it's salt. Yet I cant help but think that anyone with a bit of design ability should find it very restrictive, overly simple and just generally pathetic.

It's gonna have to get a whole lot better very quickly, or Quark may find it's going to die a very quick death.

I'm a graphic designer too and have been using Quark since version 3, it's always been an overpriced dog of an application.

My favourite is when you go to a large magnification and it just all shuts down on you - thanks Quark.

I did a large job recently in InDesign - It's pretty easy to use for me being an Illustrator person (Freehand - yak!), problem is not many printers use it so you have to save out as a hi res PDF, this tends to mess the colours up. I also found it really slow when the document got big. So it's looks like it's back to crappy Quark!

Yes Quark has its faults, but it's better than PageMaker. I never could get used to those venetian blinds for text frames - I much preferred Quarks more logical text and graphic boxes.

I have never used In Design in any depth...I would like to, but my career has taken me in another direction.

Freehand is a good package. Last version I used was 8, which I found to be a quick and powerful app to boot and use - especially compared to the bloated and sluggish Adobe Illustrator.

Originally posted by jackthedog
Does anybody else have to use this awful package?

I have tried it - but to be honest - Publisher suffices for my meagre needs, except for when I need something more complicated, in which case I turn to my wife who uses QuarK Express.