Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Desktops (Apple) Businesses Apple Hardware

Apple Bundles InDesign With Power Macs 117

Posted by pudge from the take-that-quark dept.
analog_line writes "Apple is firing a shot across the bow of Quark with a new promotion bundling Adobe InDesign 2.0 with every new PowerMac G4 (that is, the towers). News.com has a story on this as well. I say go Apple. Hopefully this will either get Quark to release their Mac OS X version of XPress or start the process of killing them off once and for all." I really liked QuarkXPress a lot when I used it extensively back in the version 3 days. It'd be a shame if it they lose out on Apple's new platform. But as a capitalist, I say, let the best product win!
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple Bundles InDesign With Power Macs More

Apple Bundles InDesign With Power Macs

Comments Filter:

  • Capitalist? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 13, 2002 @02:59PM (#4252809)
    But as a capitalist, I say, let the best product win!

    But if Apple bundles the product wouldn't that give a distinct advantage to Adobe without regards to whether they have a better product? This to me is just Apple's way of slapping Quark's wrist and rewarding Adobe, who aside from Microsoft is Apple's biggest software producer.

    • Re:Capitalist? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Dephex Twin ( 416238 ) on Friday September 13, 2002 @03:09PM (#4252883) Homepage
      Well, Adobe's brought a good number of products over to Mac OS X, whereas Quark's one product is not only still OS 9, but as a real insult Quark released version 5.0 for OS 9 long after everyone had begun bringing out OS X ports.

      So I say, Adobe has earned it in this case. Just my opinion.

    • Re:Capitalist? (Score:3, Informative)

      by LordNimon ( 85072 )
      Agreed, this really isn't symbolic of capitalism at all. This is Apple sending Quark a message, no more, no less. And frankly, I'm glad. Quark has been pissing on Mac users for years, so it's about time they were bitchslapped. However, it is rather "Microsoftian" of Apple, so I apologize for being a hypocrite, but I think Apple's decision is the lesser of two evils.

      • Re:Capitalist? (Score:2, Informative)

        by abulafia ( 7826 )
        Agreed, this really isn't symbolic of capitalism at all. This is Apple sending Quark a message, no more, no less. And frankly, I'm glad.

        Erm, huh. I'm glad, too.

        But this is, exactly, Caplitalism at work. How do you "send a message" with providers you disagree with? Hopefully, you're like the rest of us, and encourage a different provider monetarily. That seems to be what Apple is doing.

        I spent a couple of work-years living in Quark, and loved 3.1 to death. Times do change. Hell, I don't do graphic design very much any more.

        -j
      • No really Microsoftian because it's still removeable from the system. WHen you can't remove it and install quark (assuming ti ever arrives) then it will be microsoftian.
    • But if Apple bundles the product wouldn't that give a distinct advantage to Adobe

      This isn't "bundling" in the sense that Apple does with iTunes or M$ does with IE. It's a temporary sales promotion. You need to send in a coupon in the mail and wait two months for the free copy to be sent to you; this isn't something you can exploit to make a deadline or market window.
    • you have to have the good sense to reward development efforts, or you will soon have none. quark needs a spanking of the worst kind!
  • "But as a capitalist, I say, let the best product win!" Holy cow!! Someone actually believes in capitalism around here. Sweet!

  • Damn, it's about time someone stepped up and did something about Quark. Almost embarrasing the way people(read: print services) have hung on to that outmoded relic.

    This is nothing but good news.

    • InDesign is so OS X.2, while Quark is soooooo WIndows 3.1. I'm a graphic artist of more years than I'd like to count, first working with traditional tools and then with every Mac since the original. Started in desktop with a beta of Pagemaker, but used Quark almost exclusively, daily since the second version of it. Since InDesign went native, I've been a switcher, keeping a copy of Quark 4.1 in classic for quick updates to projects not worth porting over. I imagine that's what many of my breathern will do. Quark is dead by suicide. 5.0 is an insult. The company has always been a one-trick pony. Mind you, I made my living using it many years and was thankful during the early years, but Quark has spent the last how many years with no real updates to its product, and shown an active disinterest in OS X. But you know, they'd still get away with it if InDesign wasn't such a great product. It takes a transition time to get used to it, but when you bring yourself to understand that a layout program can work intuitively, without "quirks" (pun intended) you will never go back.
  • Why did I just picture a little UFO deploying out of a giant red A, and zapping Quark's headquarters?

    (That's a DTP joke, for those of you in the back)

  • best product win? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by dunkelfalke ( 91624 )
    shouldn't it be: as a capitalist, I say, let the product with the best advertising win.

  • I love competition (Score:5, Insightful)

    by legLess ( 127550 ) on Friday September 13, 2002 @03:17PM (#4252922) Journal
    I love competition. Look at graphics cards: ATI has just overtaken nVidia, who overtook 3dfx, who overtook Matrox, who overtook ATI ... The big winner is the citizen with her wallet, getting an order of magnitude performance increase, for similar cost, every couple years.

    I started doing desktop publishing with PageMaker 4, which was right before Quark started to really kick their butts in PC-land. Adobe bought PageMaker from Aldus, who'd invested a lot of effort in working with designers and creating a great product. Adobe got complacent and sat on their ass, with the result that Quark crossed platforms and ate their lunch. Now they're coming back with InDesign, which has some great features and usability enhancements that Quark can't touch (OS X support aside).

    Another thing helping Adobe is their frankly brilliant positioning of PDF. The network effect of PDF is huge - many print shops are taking files in PDF for complex jobs, and our local paper (The Oregonian - not high class, but not little) asks for ads in PDF. PS is still the standard, but PDF is a nice intermediary. Adobe's turning it into the XML of page layout and design.

    Random thought: Artistic and design tools is the one of the hardest areas for OSS to compete, because these programs (like Photoshop, Illustrator, Final Cut, etc.) are all about interface and polish. I'm not saying that OSS can't do this, just that it takes a strong vision and committed management to pull off this type of software.

    Anyone want to lay odds on Adobe porting it's suite to Linux? OS X support could pull that argument in either direction.
    • Random thought: Artistic and design tools is the one of the hardest areas for OSS to compete, because these programs (like Photoshop, Illustrator, Final Cut, etc.) are all about interface and polish.

      I don't agree. Creative tools like Photoshop are all about getting the job done. If you're of an artistic bent-- I work with people who are, and I suppose I am myself-- you want to use tools that are as transparent to you as possible. You want to use tools that don't get in the way. Photoshop is a great tool because it doesn't get in the way. If all you want to do is paint, you can get from zero to painting in about five mouse clicks. It's perfect, or close enough that it doesn't matter.

      It's a common misconception that these kinds of programs are all about the UI. In truth, they're all about being really great tools. OSS doesn't generally produce really great tools. It produces tools that range from utterly useless to merely mediocre. The open-source artistic tools out there (Gimp, et al.) are so bad that I happily forked out $1,000 today for yet another copy of the Adobe Design Collection. I would rather pay $1,000 and use those tools than save that money by using the tools that are available for free. And lots of people feel the same way about it.
      • It's a common misconception that these kinds of programs are all about the UI. In truth, they're all about being really great tools.
        Show me a great tool with a shitty UI and I'll show you a shitty tool. For all intents and purposes (unless you're hacking the source - and even if Photoshop's source were freely available, what tiny percentage of its users would ever care?), a tool is its UI. Photoshop rules because it's production-oriented - everything keyboard-accessible and highly customizable (e.g. good UI). It rules because all its little bits work this way, all the different sub-tools work as expected (e.g. good polish).
        OSS doesn't generally produce really great tools.
        I think and hope that you meant to insert "artistic" in there somewhere. OSS has produced some of the greatest tools ever (like Vi and Emacs). But the interface of those tools is appropriate for the audience.

  • Quark is in trouble (Score:3, Informative)

    by rigmort ( 584960 ) on Friday September 13, 2002 @03:21PM (#4252966)
    I've been a Quark loyalist for years, and almost took a job with them last year. I'm so glad I didn't, because since then: 1) They've moved most of their programming to India. 2) They've fired some of their sales reps around Chicagoland. 3) One of their big guns as far as keeping corporate customers happy has left Quark and started a company that consults businesses migrate from QuarkXPress to InDesign. I'm losing faith in Quark by the minute. Version 5 was a complete waste of time. Luckily, 50 percent of my job consists of simply trying to keep QuarkXPress running on 60 machines without crashing. Another 30 percent is spent restoring jobs from backup that got corrupted when QuarkXPress crashed, and the last 20 percent is figuring out how our in-house asset management system can be modified to work with InDesign instead of QuarkXPress...
    • Rigmort, would you be so kind as to drop me a line with contact info for that Quark>InDesign migration shop ?

      dontspammike@yahoo.com

      Thanks !

      Death to Quark ! Sloooooooooooooooooow
  • Oh, let the death be slow, messy and painful. Let it drag on at least as many months as that dog cost me in lost productivity due to crashes, conversions, etc. The more you learn about the software the more friggin screwed up it seems. Bad design, bad implementation, bad interfaces, bad support, bad roadmap. Bad, bad, bad.

  • Apple is desparate (Score:2, Insightful)

    by extrarice ( 212683 )
    The Mac is really a niche market - graphic design. If there are no apps to support the designer, Apple goes kaput.
    Most (meaning over 90%) publishing houses use Macs and Quark, exclusively, keeping InDesign around just for experimentation and compatability. If someone sumbits a job in Page Maker, they will get the job returned. Apple knows this, and since Quark really has made little public indication of an X-native XPress in the future (let alone before January 2003 -- when all new Macs will only boot in to X), Apple's main consumer base is at risk. As for right now, migrating all users to InDesign (which can read XPress documents, sort-of) is the best solution for Apple. At least until Apple decides to make that market its own and release iPublish or some other such rubbish.
    • I agree. I have been using Macs since '93 when I got into graphic design. Quark is the standard in the print world. The reason I haven't upgraded to OS X is because of Quark. I'm still running OS 8.6 with Quark 5. People said OS X would take off when Photoshop was released for it. I think OS X will really take off when QuarkXpress is released for it.
    • Ironically, it was Apple that pushed QuarkXpress in the first place. When Aldus decided to port PageMaker to the PC, Apple got annoyed at them, and because the then-new QuarkXpress was Mac-only, they threw their considerable marketing weight behind it.

      Perhaps if Quark had been a cross-platform developer, they might have been more nimble about porting to OS X.

    • Re:Apple is desparate (Score:1, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      You don't know what you're talking about. Quark has said over and over again there IS an OS X version of Quark coming. No definite date, but the rumblings are early 2003. And considering the computers that run Quark now do just fine, it's hard to imagine any service bureau insane enough to update their systems until Quark is native X.

      You ought to think through the implications of what you say - and read a bit more.
  • I don't see how this will help companies adopt os x. these companies use quark because it is what they are used to. they are just going to switch because apple bundles it with the machine? i imagine until there is an os x version of quark, companies will simply ignore os x. and then perhaps even after it is available they will still ignore it, since alot of what the print world uses are applescripts that just won't work in os x because features are different/missing.
    • these companies use quark because it is what they are used to. they are just going to switch because apple bundles it with the machine?
      Well, no, not for that reason. However, they do seem to be making the switch. You seem to be overestimating the stranglehold that Quark has on the print production world. Yes, for years Quark has been the industry standard and for the time being still is.

      However,I know a number of folks who work at ad agencies (my wife for one) and they all seem to being sloooowly adopting InDesign. I'm not entirely sure why, though. I am not a designer, art director, etc. so I can't tell you how good of a program Quark XPress is from that perspective. But as someone who's had to support it for years, I can tell you that it sucks. Adobe tends to be a much nicer company to deal with. Also, Adobe is a well-known and respected name. They make good software (usually). What the hell else does Quark do? And Quark's licensing! Christ.

      So will this software bundling push people over to the dark side? No. They were headed there anyway. This will just get them there quicker.

    • Re:i don't get it (Score:4, Insightful)

      by sebi ( 152185 ) on Friday September 13, 2002 @08:48PM (#4254930)

      If what people are used to would prevent them from switching to anything different the world would be pretty boring. Its not like the switch from InDesign to Quark is hard to do. You can change the InDesign shortcuts to the Quark layout if you want to. Importing XPress files into ID works pretty good (So far it worked perfect for me, but the documents I tried it on were not that complex).

      If your Printer wont accept either InDesign or PDF files then find one that is allready comfortable with the new millenium. Converting XPress files into PDFs is a nightmare. Exporting ID to PDF is flawless.

      If you are comfortable with the other Adobe products (every designer should at least know Photoshop) then getting used to the UI is trivial. And the interface is really intuitive. Working with InDesign sometimes really feels to me as if the application has got some kind of "Do What I Want" functionality. XPress allways made me feel like a sucker with no way out.

      Apple bundling this software will give desing shops an incentive to check it out (if they didnt get it in the latest Adobe Design Collection anyway) and see that it truly is a better product.

      • the software is of minor consequence. i can learn new technologies and applications rather quickly, but integrating entire industries takes time. imagine thousands of 500 pages books designed in quark, and imagine how much money was required to design and produce them. so you have half a billion dollars in developmnent, and you are on one publisher. now multiply by five, and you have covered about two-thirds of the publishing sector my business works within. these titles need to be reprinted, modified, updated... when decisions to publish a program revolve around many costs, adding another couple $10k's can squash a project. the printers and separators we work with are very technologically savy, but the process is the point. does intel simply switch fabrication processes? and, why not?
  • I don't think this will really do anything. InDesigns's market share is tiny, and no one's really adopting it. In addition, the first thing any serious design, production or prepress firm does upon recieving a new machine is nuke the drive and install their own build.

    Poof! G'bye InDesign!

    • Re:Nothing means nothing (Score:5, Informative)

      by foobar104 ( 206452 ) on Saturday September 14, 2002 @02:33AM (#4255850) Journal
      InDesigns's market share is tiny, and no one's really adopting it.

      Been to a newspaper or magazine lately? Since the release of version 2.0, InDesign has come to own that market. For good reason, IMHO.

      In addition, the first thing any serious design, production or prepress firm does upon recieving a new machine is nuke the drive and install their own build.

      You, like pretty much everybody else here, seem to be under the mistaken impression that InDesign is going to be pre-installed on new Macs, like iTunes. That's not right at all. If you buy a G4 between now and the end of the year, you can mail Adobe a coupon and they'll send you a copy of InDesign for free. If you don't want it, don't send in the coupon. On the other hand, if you like getting expensive things for free....
      • I have been working in the industry since 1989, and, in that time, I have never, ever seen a shop which ran anything other than Quark. Every major magazine I know about (and that's a bunch, as many are based in NYC) use Quark: Time, Rolling Stone, US, Spin, etc. The New York Times uses Quark. The Post and the Daily News use Quark. All the major ad agencies use Quark. Bloomberg uses Quark.

        Quark, Quark, everywhere I look I see Quark.

        You, like pretty much everybody else here, seem to be under the mistaken impression that InDesign is going to be pre-installed on new Macs, like iTunes. That's not right at all. If you buy a G4 between now and the end of the year, you can mail Adobe a coupon and they'll send you a copy of InDesign for free. If you don't want it, don't send in the coupon. On the other hand, if you like getting expensive things for free....

        In other words, all those coupons will be recycled, along with all the extra paper.

        I actually have a copy of InDesign 2.0, and I have yet to find a reason to use it. I have nothing against InDesign - if it does a better job I'm all for it - but there is no reason to switch. If Adobe wants InDesign to take over, it needs to be Killer App better, not just a bit better here and there. And I am tired of people saying, "InDesign's gonna kill Quark" without having experience in the industry. It's as silly as people saying, "OS X's gonna crush Windows!", and I'm a Mac person.

  • Bundling (Score:1, Troll)

    by Perdo ( 151843 )
    Look at those dirty rat bastards, Microsoft, bundling Internet Explorer in with the OS for free.

    It is no wonder that Netscape couldn't compete.

    Look at those dirty rat bastards, Apple, bundling InDesign with Powermacs for free.

    It is no wonder that Quark couldn't compete.
    • why is this modded as a troll post? It's a legitimate analogy.

      Hmmm makes me think: "Have you metamoderated today?" ;-)

      neye

      • Re:Bundling (Score:1, Troll)

        by Perdo ( 151843 )
        It is rated a troll because I regulary cut through the "Steve Jobs reality distortion feild".

        No one likes their distorted reality crushed, especially the hardened core of mac zealots that apple has been reduced to.

        There are not as many "switchers" as Apple would have us belive. Plenty of "twitchers", people that like OS X but balk at the platform's inflated price and poor absolute performance.

        This will get a poor mod also, even though I am just answering your question.
      • It's either a troll or ignorant. The "analogy" doesn't hold up for a nanosecond.

        For the zillionth time: the software is not bundled. There's a coupon for a free copy. The software is not installed on the computer when shipped.

        In Design is not an Apple product. It's in Apple's interest to have lots of software products available for the OSX. They don't really have an interest in crushing Quark. They do have an interest in promoting OSX software. If that's at the expense of programs that don't run on OSX, then that's how it is.

        It's just a marketing tie in. If Quark had an OSX version of their product, and wanted a similar deal, I'm sure Apple would be more than happy to put a coupon in the crate.

  • Let's face it, Xpress is archaic yet incredibly expensive, and better yet, is made by a company which has about as much appeal as seeing Janet Reno doing a strip tease at LinuxWorld.

    The only reason that Quark is still considered the industry standard is because Adobe biffed InDesign's introduction and 1.0 release so badly.

    I've hated Quark ever since they decided to ship XPress 4.0 on 1 floppy disk (with the 400K installer app) and 1 CD for years...thus making it impossible for new PowerMac owners (without floppy drives) to install without having to do backflips through Quark's flaming hoops of DOOM. Not only that, but it's extremely temperamental, and breaks all the time.

    I hope this is the last nail in Quark's coffin. Industry standards are only a hinderance when they stagnate in badly managed software, archaic code, and gold-plated pricing.

  • You should be suspicious of companies that give away commercial software for free. Such a move is generally aimed at eliminating competition, and you'll be paying a lot more in the long run. The same also holds for some companies that "give away" dual licensed software: they may be trying to use open source as a way to drive out competitors.

    Accept something for free if it is clear that the giver has no commercial interest in giving it to you or if the relationship is such that the giver can't exercise control over you or the product later on. Otherwise, be very suspicious and try to avoid the "gift" if you can.

  • As someone who has walked into the Layout/ Design world over the last few years... I have become a major fan of Adobe Pagemaker. Yes, yes, I know... Sigh, moan, and wonder what is wrong with me. Wait... just sit down and read. :-) What program has been here for years, working better and better with every upgrade? It's not Quark or InDesign; I use all and I know the major bugs with all of them. I do know in the world of Prepress, Pagemaker is THE underdog and unloved by most of my fellow prepressers. But, I still have hope for the old giant, PAGEMAKER. Take a look at the kind old Pagemaker and GIVE it a hug!!! InDesign 2.0, Quark 5.0... You have a long way to go to reach the godlike role of Pagemaker... It is your DADDY and you will like it!!! One Rebel with a cause!!! PAGEMAKER FOR EVERY PREPRESS AND PREWEB HOUSE!!!!! LOVE Bad Andy (AKA) Pagemakerguy!
  • I switched to InDesign for new projects almost the momment it came out. I only kept Quark around for old projects that needed reprinting or tweeking. There were problems with InDesign 1.0, but since 1.5 it has been great, and 2.0 is a dream.

    I was looking for any out from Quark. The company has treated customers horribly for a long time. This includes bad tech support, crazy licensing schemes (including overpriced licenses), and a crusty product that was prone to crash a lot and not do what they said it would do.

    Pagemaker was not updated in quite some time precisely because Adobe was working on InDesign. They built it from the ground up so that every piece of it is modular and easily updated. It has lots of great features and a great interface. I think the pricing structure is very straightforward, and Adobe has made many different upgrade paths available (a long time offering it for $99 to any Photoshop user).

    I believe Apple is only playing favorites right now because Quark is growing more and more behind. If they don't start getting people to try out InDesign (and by using it realize how much better it is), if Quark doesn't deliver, they are screwed.

    But Quark brought this on themselves long ago.

    That's the end of my rant.

    -trout

  • Maybe you will all say I am a whining boy, but I always wonder why the nice deals are not available here in Europe. I am planning to buy a new G4 system for home use and I would just love it to have a copy of InDesign for free with it. But no luck, as this promo is not available over here. Only the LCD-monitor promo is running here now. When I asked Apple staff about it at Apple Expo Paris last week, they didn't even know about the promo. If Apple or Adobe is reading this: please make it a globally available promo! Thanks in advance.

Slashdot Top Deals

Those who can, do; those who can't, write. Those who can't write work for the Bell Labs Record.

Close