http://quarkvsindesign.com/articles/a1/features/2006/quark-versus-indesign-in-newspapers/ The Authority for News & Opinion on the War of the Desktop Publishing Giants QuarkXPress and Adobe InDesign Fri, 04 Jul 2008 20:32:20 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.11 http://quarkvsindesign.com/articles/a1/features/2006/quark-versus-indesign-in-newspapers/#comment-1597 Sun, 05 Mar 2006 17:42:16 +0000 http://quarkvsindesign.com/articles/a1/features/2006/quark-versus-indesign-in-newspapers/#comment-1597 Having operated in the digital realm of page make up and design for a good 15 years - starting with Pagemaker and currently being forced to operate Tera/ GN3 (Goodnews) as deciated newspaper and layout package I would have say that GN3 is an effeciate if not souless package, you forced to operate in a source code window and it feels far to much like DOS environment sometimes. At home I produce a range of publications, adverts and design projects using the entire Creative Suite . For pure newspaper design, layout, editing etc... a basic if not cheap and nasty package does a very workman like job of putting our newspaper. There are no frills, no transparency, or bells or whistls just an ability to wack out pages with the minmum of fuss. So if we are talking no frills - GN3 does a fair job, but I am designer dammit!, not just a sub editor and sometimes information needs soul, colour, deep etches and transparencies, nothing touches Indesign for ease of use, tools and stability. Quark crashed when I wanted to output .pdfs, it was a cranky progeramme that cost me money. Indesign, Creative Suite has paid for itself again and again need I say more ......? Having operated in the digital realm of page make up and design for a good 15 years - starting with Pagemaker and currently being forced to operate Tera/ GN3 (Goodnews) as deciated newspaper and layout package
I would have say that GN3 is an effeciate if not souless package, you forced to operate in a source code window and it feels far to much like DOS environment sometimes.
At home I produce a range of publications, adverts and design projects using the entire Creative Suite . For pure newspaper design, layout, editing etc… a basic if not cheap and nasty package does a very workman like job of putting our newspaper. There are no frills, no transparency, or bells or whistls just an ability to wack out pages with the minmum of fuss.
So if we are talking no frills - GN3 does a fair job, but I am designer dammit!, not just a sub editor and sometimes information needs soul, colour, deep etches and transparencies, nothing touches Indesign for ease of use, tools and stability. Quark crashed when I wanted to output .pdfs, it was a cranky progeramme that cost me money. Indesign, Creative Suite has paid for itself again and again need I say more ……?

]]> http://quarkvsindesign.com/articles/a1/features/2006/quark-versus-indesign-in-newspapers/#comment-1415 Sun, 08 Jan 2006 09:40:43 +0000 http://quarkvsindesign.com/articles/a1/features/2006/quark-versus-indesign-in-newspapers/#comment-1415 Having used programs such as Pagemaker, RSG3 , Quark and In Design over the last 20 years these programs are essentially for page make up. Programs such as Creator do a much better job for you in setting individual advertisements that can then be placed in Quark or In Design. This is a very clean and rapid way of producing newspaper pages. Tom McGowran Having used programs such as Pagemaker, RSG3 , Quark and In Design over the last 20 years these programs are essentially for page make up. Programs such as Creator do a much better job for you in setting individual advertisements that can then be placed in Quark or In Design. This is a very clean and rapid way of producing newspaper pages.
Tom McGowran

]]>