One of the best reasons to use XPress has always been its ability to run efficiently on a slow, RAM-deprived computer. We could discuss ad nauseam details such as the relative merits of how QuarkXPress and InDesign each handle character styles or layers, but for this particular article, my goal is simply to provide an overview and share my opinions. For the more complex answer, read on.īy the way, please note that I make no pretense that this article is The Definitive Comparison of these two programs. However, that doesn’t mean you should immediately switch to InDesign. It incorporates superior technology, is written using a superior programming methodology, the features it has in common with XPress are implemented in a superior way, and while XPress has a few important features that InDesign does not, InDesign clearly has the superior feature set in toto. That said, I will make one (more or less) definitive statement: Comparing the two programs in a vacuum, all things being equal, it is quite clear that Adobe InDesign is the superior program.
The question I hear most often these days is “Which is better: QuarkXPress 6 or InDesign 2?” Of course, while everyone wants a definitive answer, any honest reviewer must respond: “It depends.” It depends on who you are, what your workflow is, and what you need to accomplish in your work. If you’ve been wanting to know what David Blatner thinks about QuarkXPress and InDesign, here’s your answer. He co-authored “ Real World Adobe InDesign 2” and, most recently, “ InDesign for QuarkXPress Users.” He also speaks at conferences and user groups - including seminars sponsored by Adobe - on his assessment of the two programs.
Author of “ Real World QuarkXPress,” long considered the definitive book on QuarkXPress, Blatner has lately turned his attention to Adobe InDesign. Editor’s note: There is perhaps no one more knowledgeable about page-layout applications than David Blatner.
0 kommentar(er)
