Comments on: Sneak Peek: InDesign CS3

by: FrankenShank

Fri, 02 Feb 2007 18:48:33 +0000

Gotta hand it to Quark… QX 7 is great!
The Alpha Mask feature just makes my life so much easier, and the transparency features allow me to do my usual “you have 5 minutes to do this ad GO!” ads with new life.

by: jojo

Wed, 27 Dec 2006 11:38:58 +0000

Aren’t you excited about Table styles? And the new features in Find/Replace?

by: M Jenius

Mon, 23 Oct 2006 15:21:26 +0000

Yes, yes, and yes… but this is in comparison to Indesign. PDF export in 7 is great, I’m not sure about 6.5, we have to use Distiller with 6.5 to get a good PDF (and my god it takes so long). I agree, the war won’t be decided over PDF. All I’m saying is that Adobe will probably come out with something new in future PDF versions….. OK OK, i’m just crazy

by: Peter

Sat, 21 Oct 2006 09:28:51 +0000

@Jenius:
Strange thinking…
-
Quark has been exporting PDF since version 4.x (ok, with many issues) and is finally doing a good PDF export job in version 6.5 and 7.
-
Furthermore, Jaws is included free of charge, whereas for PDF creation on the client via Distiller you have to buy an Acrobat license.
.
And then I think the war won’t be decided over the ability to output PDF, as PostScript is also an Adobe technology and both, Pagemaker and Quark do output PostScript.

by: M Jenius

Fri, 20 Oct 2006 22:24:15 +0000

sorry for the typos. That’s why we have copywriters here… phew

by: M Jenius

Fri, 20 Oct 2006 20:46:05 +0000

We’ll have to see. I was surprised that Quark 7 is able to export (functional) PDF without having to use Distiller. I heard that there’s still a few printer issues, but Adobe had those initial issues too. Now that Acrobat and Acrobat Pro is so integrated in every business. I doubt that users will ditch Acrobat and jump to JAWS. I’m guessing that JAWS has the same features as Adobe’s (I’ve never used JAWS products). But as more Quark users use PDF files, they no an longer claim that you can’t get a decent print from PDF, and that only helps Adobe. If anything they’ll only soften the wall of the many Quark only printers. I’m sure that they have of known this, but I think that Quark is done playing “high and mighty”. It looks like they stoped resisting progress and is now wanting to compete. At the same time Adobe probably saw this coming (I seriously think that they employ a secret deparment of soothsayers). This is why I think that Adobe is going to up the ante with PDF.

by: Pariah S. Burke

Thu, 19 Oct 2006 22:49:27 +0000

Very astute, M Jenius. Quark has been trying to work with JAWS PDF for quite some time. Do you see JAWS as a means of enabling Quark to compete with Acrobat?

by: M Jenius

Thu, 19 Oct 2006 20:17:57 +0000

Those are all great features. But in the end I tink that one of the tricks Adobe has up it’s sleeve it’s not really in Indesign but rather in PDF. Even hardcore Quark fanatics have to come across PDF. Everyone in the office is familiar with PDF, if not already in love with it. Same with the printers, Even those who are sticking with Quark are able to take PDF files. Even if Quark came up with it’s own photshop-like program and stoped it’s users from buying adobe programs. They still can’t fill the gap held by Acrobat Pro. that’s one thing Quark has no control over. Quark just plain out sucks when it comes to PDF and don’t even get me started with EPS. That’s my guess. And in case anyone hasn’t noticed, I just love this website. I’ll shut up now. What does everyone else think?

by: Herbert

Tue, 12 Sep 2006 09:53:44 +0000

Quark makes my neck hurt. But InDesign makes my other neck hurt. Many things make my neck hurt. I don’t like when my neck hurts. Please stop hurting my neck.

by: S.H.

Tue, 06 Jun 2006 21:47:48 +0000

“Why don’t they take best features from Framemaker to InDesign?”

While there are a lot of good features in FrameMaker that InDesign could benefit from, do remember they are for different things. FrameMaker is all about text authoring, while InDesign is about graphic design. They use very different philosophies in producting different styles of documents.

by: Kathleen

Thu, 01 Jun 2006 01:13:44 +0000

This is going to put the Quark boys to ultimate shame. Next week in New York they are going to need more than an asprin and salt in their drinks while they celebrate the release of Quark 7… they are going to need some major downtime.

by: Alistair Dabbs

Sat, 27 May 2006 22:04:00 +0000

Funny how Adobe has been rubbishing Quark Vista for ages, and is now planning to do exactly the same thing in InDesign CS3. Also intriguing is that Quark has a commercial interest in making it unnecessary for page layout artists to own Photoshop (it reduces the chances of them buying a low-cost Creative Suite upgrade and therefore a copy of InDesign by default), while I had imagined it would be against Adobe\’s commercial interests to be actively doing it as well.

by: Mike Perry, Inkling Books

Thu, 25 May 2006 20:23:52 +0000

Bringing more Photoshop features into InDesign is great. I’ve shifted to doing book covers in InDesign but I’ve been frustrated by what it can’t do that Photoshop can. But as a book publisher, I keep wondering when Adobe is going to bring the marvelous features of FrameMaker into InDesign. As others have pointed out, we need headings that span columns, running heads, and FM-like sidebars. All are features FrameMaker had over a decade ago. Endnotes would be great too. Publishing abandoned footnotes in the 1960s.

by: RJay

Thu, 25 May 2006 17:38:14 +0000

How very Microsoft-like of them.

Can’t people just compete on features in shipping products? We don’t need this “yes, but” our product that’s going to ship in a year will be even better than the one available now.

by: Dishch

Tue, 23 May 2006 07:07:52 +0000

Running headers and footers, spreading heads like in framemaker needed. How long must we wait for that features? Why don’t they take best features from Framemaker to InDesign?

by: Bolla, Zoltán

Mon, 22 May 2006 13:08:47 +0000

Very-very need „Opacity Mask” in InDesign CS3 v5.0, like Illustrator CS2 v12.0. QuarkXPress 7.0 too, as mint alpha (channel) transparency.

Please Adobe coders, please!!!

by: Peter

Sat, 20 May 2006 17:13:18 +0000

@hunter:
I agree, the disclosure date of the CS3 features, especially the Quark 7-like transparency settings, could not have been a coincidence.

That’s clever marketing:
Put some salt into the drinks of the Quark guys celebrating the release of Quark 7 next week in New York.

Greetings
Peter

by: woz

Sat, 20 May 2006 16:11:47 +0000

Oh…My…God…!
And these are features Adobe DID NOT mind coming out in the press? I can’t wait see what features are still secret!
Somebody send some asprin to the boys from Quark…

PS: 2 screenshots from transaprancy here at:
www.digitalmediadesigner.com

by: carmen

Fri, 19 May 2006 22:25:22 +0000

quark is a very interesting site about the article i’m always searching information about adobe’s new features.
Do you have any gmail invitations left??????I really could use a gmail account. Thanks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

by: hunter

Fri, 19 May 2006 19:26:19 +0000

Early press on CS3 = excellent marketing. Effectively downgrades the release of Quark 7.