06-02-2008, 05:34 PM
I wouldn't be part of that crowd. I've never liked the Quark way of doing things when it comes to laying out a page. It just feels clunky somehow.
Quark didn't exist when we moved from transfer lettering and various primitive implements of torture (e.g. IBM Electronic Selectric Composer) to a computer (Mac Plus, I think, plus a Linotronic 100 RIP and Imagesetter, plus Linotronic's bottom of the line processing unit, which was also an implement of torture). We began with Pagemaker 1.5. I did eventually get Quark, and used it quite a bit, but never got to like it, and couldn't use it for a lot of projects because it couldn't handle foreign languages properly.
ID does not remind me of Pagemaker, although it has a couple of features that PM also had that I really like, and that Quark has consistently failed to implement. So many things are clunky and irrational in the Quark interface: I have to assume that they only seem more user friendly and "logical" if you began with Quark and have never gotten comfortable with anything else.
Quark didn't exist when we moved from transfer lettering and various primitive implements of torture (e.g. IBM Electronic Selectric Composer) to a computer (Mac Plus, I think, plus a Linotronic 100 RIP and Imagesetter, plus Linotronic's bottom of the line processing unit, which was also an implement of torture). We began with Pagemaker 1.5. I did eventually get Quark, and used it quite a bit, but never got to like it, and couldn't use it for a lot of projects because it couldn't handle foreign languages properly.
ID does not remind me of Pagemaker, although it has a couple of features that PM also had that I really like, and that Quark has consistently failed to implement. So many things are clunky and irrational in the Quark interface: I have to assume that they only seem more user friendly and "logical" if you began with Quark and have never gotten comfortable with anything else.