Re: Quark

Subject: Re: Quark
From: John San Filippo <johnsf -at- CTS -dot- COM>
Date: Sat, 6 May 1995 09:49:21 -0700

>>QuarkXpress is really very much an advertising designer's or colour
>>publisher's tool. All my graphic deisgner friends use & love it - its great
>>for colour seps, etc - but then they don't notice the lack of automatic
>>TOCs, indexing, etc (and as one of them said, 'it's great for less than
>>three pages'). If you were using Ventura, and thinking of Framemaker, Quark
>>is probably not for you. It's certainly not something I'd think of for
>>technical publication.

>Quark is THE program in magazine and book publishing. The vast majority of
>magazines you see on newsstands, and books you see in bookstores, are done
>using Quark (Time, Newsweek, People, Details, USA Today, the list is
>endless). It is superb for long documents.

>TOC and Indexing does not come standard with Quark, but there are several
>extensions that do these functions.

>I've taught people to use Quark and to use PageMaker. Quark is much easier to
>learn than PageMaker. It works more logically and allows for more precise
>alignment and text adjustment.

This is the first time I ever heard Quark described as superb for long
documents. Maybe it is superb for long documents like the ones you describe
(newspapers, novels, etc), but it's surely not the tool for long technical
documents. Also, comparing the latest versions of Quark and PageMaker, I'd
say it simply boils down to personal preference (although PM does include
many functions that you have to buy as Xtensions for Quark.)

John San Filippo

Internet: johnsf -at- cts -dot- com
CompuServe: 75237,3605
AOL/eWorld: JohnSanF

"No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money."
- Samuel Johnson, ibid., April 5, 1776

Previous by Author: Re: OCR Software?
Next by Author: No Subject
Previous by Thread: Re: Quark
Next by Thread: Re: Quark

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads