QuarkXPress for Mac User Reviews
-
"keep your prejudice, it's better than adobe"
Version: QuarkXPress 9.2
Pros
Since version 8 quark gained up to indesign at last. The 9.2 version (rated here) runs absolutely reliable and there are many added features.
The old strength of quark lost after computers stone age (version 3.xx) returned. Handling is quite intuitive and all my layout imaginations are simply realisable.Cons
I don't know cons - nearly perfect
Summary
All Adobe believers: It's all right, but I am using Quark!
-
"Layout app done wrong."
Version: QuarkXPress 9.0
Pros
Have yet to find some that Indesign not already has since several version steps. At least it tries to compete, but miserably fails.
Cons
Still too much to mention. Read my summary below for more.
Summary
Same piece of crap as it always was. Where are the new features, yet really, that justify a new full version step?
Bugs are still there. Plenties. I can't quit Quark 9 without crashing it. Menus and dialog boxes show a weird mixture of English and German.
And I still can't zoom in more than 800%. Come on. Get a life. Is it really so hard to implement? Indesign CS5 weighs in at 4000%.
And the pricing? Still ridiculous for what you get for your money.
No thanks. Avoid at all cost. -
"Gosh......"
Version: QuarkXPress 9.0
Pros
Um........
Cons
They announced v. 9, but you can't buy or upgrade to it yet. Seems you can re-purchase v. 8, and get v. 9 for "free." But you can't upgrade yet.
2) There's a "test drive" to download, but I've been trying for hours, and I only get error messages.Summary
They announced v. 9, but there is no reasonable way to actually try it yet. Oh well.
Okay, got it downloaded finally. WoW! They migrated the same XFontUtiMac crash from v. 8.5 straight into the new version. V.9 crashes on launch in 10.6.7, same as the old version. :-(
Updated on Apr 6, 2011
Updated on Apr 6, 2011Process:QuarkXPress [749] 9/QuarkXPress.app/Contents/MacOS/QuarkXPress Identifier: com.quark.QuarkXPress Version: 9.0.0.0
Code Type: X86 (Native)
Parent Process: launchd [303]
Date/Time: 2011-04-06...
OS Version: OS X 10.6.7
Exception Type: EXC_BAD_ACCESS (SIGSEGV)
Exception Codes: KERN_INVALID_ADDRESS at 0x0000000085af28ea
Crashed Thread: 0 Dispatch queue: com.apple.main-thread
0 com.quark.QuarkXPress 0x00659392 XF::XFontUtilMac::SwapResourceFOND(FamRec*, unsigned char, unsigned long) + 756
1 com.quark.QuarkXPress 0x0065aa73 XF::XFontUtilMac::SetLastFONDResourceAndFileFormat(long) + 287
2 com.quark.QuarkXPress 0x0065abc2 XF::XFontUtilMac::CheckFONDResourceAndFontFileFormat(long, unsigned long&) + 24
3 com.quark.QuarkXPress 0x0067f959 XF::XFontManagerMacImp::ResetFonts() + 163
4 com.quark.QuarkXPress 0x006801c0 XF::XFontManagerMacImp::Init() + 18
5 com.quark.QuarkXPress 0x00af11d2 QFontManager::InitializeQFontMgr() +32
6 com.quark.QuarkXPress 0x00810f52 InitQFontManager... -
"crashes in 10.6.5 conflicts w apple font manager"
Version: QuarkXPress 8.5
Pros
used to be good a long time ago
Cons
crashes in 10.6.5 due to conflicts with apple font manager
Summary
waiting for update patch so it stops crashing in 10.6.5 on 12 core intel machines
-
"its not very fast or user friendley"
Version: QuarkXPress 7.2
Pros
its not very fast or user friendleyits not very fast or user friendley
Cons
its not very fast or user friendleygg
-
"8.15 clears crash problem on Intel Macs"
Version: QuarkXPress 8.15
Summary
This review was originally posted on VersionTracker.com.
We struggled to get the download for this update, because the Quark website kept on sending us in circles. However, Quark support were very good and got it on FTP for us. Once installed, it has cured our crashing problem.
I have now been using Quark for 14 years, from version 3.32. I've also used Pagemaker, Ventura Publisher, Indesign, and some budget applications such as PagePlus.
I felt Quark lost the plot with version 5. Version 6 was better, and 7 was better than that. It's only version 8, in combination with today's hardware, that has given me the old 'quick Quark' feel that I had under version 4 for System 8. By comparison, Indesign feels very sluggish, and, now that Adobe have boosted their upgrade prices, I'm not longer seeing benefits in keeping CS3 updated.
Quark suffers from dreadful documentation â?? like most modern software, there is no book, just online help â?? and from a few unintuitive controls. On the other hand, the speed, including speed of refresh, makes it a winner for time-critical work. We haven't got into the advanced shared composition features, and may never do so â?? the job of design and publishing hasn't changed a great deal, and features we never missed are not necessarily welcome.
Quark is not really a winning application for multimedia or web authoring. You can do much more with Flash in Apple's KeyNote, if working with Flash itself is too arduous. Virtually any HTML editing platform beats it for web-pages, though it is possible to mock them up in Quark and then finish them in Dreamweaver. On the other hand, the extra features don't interfere with the core features. -
"Fair software, bad business practices"
Version: QuarkXPress 8.12
Summary
This review was originally posted on VersionTracker.com.
I have just tried the 8.2 version after having stayed with the 3.2 version for years and the current version is quite good in both GUI and features. I was able to import older documents without any problem as well. The only performance issues I experienced were with the way Xpress caches memory for images and other purposes. One really needs more than the recommended 1 Gig of installation space on their boot drive. There were other issues such as requiring one to install to the boot drive ONLY which is a strange imposition upon the user. So far I have found none of the horrible bugs that have haunted versions 4-7, thus Quark seems to finally be making headway in perfecting the glacially slow move to OSX. That is why I have used 3.2 up to now.
The real issue for users of today's Xpress IMHO, is the preditory pricing policy of Quark. Users in different countries pay different amounts for Xpress though it is the same software. This means that someone in Australia or Europe is forced to spend a good bit more money for the same software and this is poor judgement on the part of Quark. I note that Sibelius has tried the same model for their software and it and poor programming for OSX has driven away more than a few users. As noted by one other reviewer below, why pay so much for Xpress when for a little more one can update their complete Adobe suite!? -
"AMAZING PROGRAM"
Version: QuarkXPress 8.12
Summary
This review was originally posted on VersionTracker.com.
Quark have come a LONG way!! this version brings me back to Quark from Adobe!
Try it out, everything Adobe has promised is in Quark already!
Great job Quark and glad to be back with you guyz.
-
"If you don't like Quark, WHY ARE YOU HERE?"
Version: QuarkXPress 8.02
Summary
This review was originally posted on VersionTracker.com.
I don't understand the comments on this page. I have used Quark for many years. This most recent version is considerably better in some ways than version 7. There ARE bugs, but hopefully they will be resolved. But if you're NOT a Quark user, then WHY are you on this page? Personally, I can't stand InDesign, or Pagemaker for that matter -- but you don't see my comments regarding those programs on those pages, do you? The battle between Quark and InDesign has been long-standing, as it was with Pagemaker. There are benefits to each. Quark is a better layout program, and InDesign is exactly what it's name implies, a design program. If you didn't spend the money for the program, and you're just adding your personal preference comments to this page, then you really don't know what you are talking about. I USE Quark every single day for my job -- and it is relatively decent, with some minor separation issues (which may not even be Quark's fault). -
"When will they ever learn?"
Version: QuarkXPress 8.01
Summary
This review was originally posted on VersionTracker.com.
Used Quark since v3 (3.32 was great), but they lost their way around then and never had the intelligence or commercial acumen to retrace their steps and find it again. InDesign is as horrid as PShop and Illustrator are wonderful, and QXP could be so much better. But it's not.
Bought 4 (ok-ish) and 6, and that became perfectly acceptable by the time 6.52 appeared. Got 7 with all the add-ons, and that was all right too. My v8 upgrade arrived in a plain white envelope, and that's where Quark's big problem lies, methinks. They don't think enough of their own software to send it out into the world in anything but a plain, cheap, crap white envelope. When I spend five-hundred and something dollars on a product I want it to arrive packed in cotton wool, and served up with fireworks, champagne and dancing girls. I want Scarlett Johannsen to deliver it to my door, naked. Oh, and I want it to be worth the money.
Spin and PR work in their place but not when I'm buying software at several hundred quid a pop (that's British pounds sterling). To Quark and Adobe - who clearly believe that all Brits can afford to pay in Sterling what Americans pay in Dollars - get a grip. The economy sucks and you are therefore about to see the warez boyz going crazy all over your stuff because it 's just soooo overpriced and you're not as smart as they are.
Quark lost their way because the corporate boys took over from the clever guys. Quark 9 will be the last version because no one is going to buy it. Quark 8 sales will suffer because it's a triumph of PR over anything real. It sucks. It's badly presented, and a triumph of puff over content. Quark sucks, Adobe have gone mad, so what remains? Back to QXP 3.32 (revision 5). Fast, simple, effective - and no one has to sell their daughters for thousands to buy the pointless upgrades. The money I forked out for the upgrade to 8 is quite likely the last time I pay for pointless software. If the printers I use can't be arsed to upgrade beyond 6.5, I don't need to do so either.
I recommend QXP above InDesign, but they both suck, frankly.
Add Your Review
Submit your reply
E-mail this review
Report offensive content
You must be 13 years of age or older to submit personal information to CNET Networks. In compliance with the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act of 1998, CNET Networks does not accept name and e-mail address information from users who are under 13 years of age.
All submitted ratings and written comments become the sole property of CNET Networks, Inc. (CNET) and may be used at CNET Networks' sole discretion. Ratings and written comments are generally posted within two to four business days in batch groups, not in real time. However, CNET Networks reserves the right to remove or refuse to post any submission for any reason. You acknowledge that you, not CNET Networks, are responsible for the contents of your submission.
CNET Networks is not responsible for the content of the publisher's descriptions or user reviews on this site. We encourage you to determine whether this product or your intended use is legal. We do not encourage or condone the use of any software in violation of applicable laws. CNET Download.com does not sell, resell, or license any of the products listed on the site. We cannot be held liable for issues that arise from the download or use of these products.
