'Innovate or Die' Has Become Quark's Mantra

With the PSD Import Xtension and QuarkVista Quark began innovation that must continue for XPress 7 to provide an alternative to InDesign.

In response to “First Look At QuarkXPress 7,” lay­out artist and occas­sion­al Quark VS InDesign con­tribut­ing writer Samuel John Klein observes:

It’s past time Quark sup­port­ed OpenType. Good deci­sion, but like migra­tion to OS X native, some­what behind the curve, to say the least. 

As I said else­where on this site, Quark play­ing catch-up will do no more than slow the ero­sion of staunch­ly loy­al mar­kets (pre-press, news­pa­per, etc.). It will enable Quark sup­port­ers and those for whom switch­ing is too dif­fi­cult or expen­sive a propo­si­tion the tem­po­rary safe­ty to hold out a lit­tle longer; they will gain the abil­i­ty to do what InDesign has been tempt­ing them with for years (trans­paren­cy, OpenType sup­port, etc.).

Such near fea­ture par­i­ty will not inspire any­one to switch from InDesign to Quark; it will sim­ply allow them to delay the deci­sion to switch–perhaps indef­i­nite­ly, if Quark con­tin­u­ous­ly meets InDesign head-on after a rea­son­able peri­od. Such a stale­mate will not ben­e­fit Quark. It will slow but not pre­vent mar­ket ero­sion; with Adobe’s dom­i­nance in all oth­er areas of pro­fes­sion­al print design–PostScript, PDF, Photoshop, Illustrator, fonts–San Jose will even­tu­al­ly push back Denver, even if the advance comes only in inch­es. Simply striv­ing for fea­ture par­i­ty will only slow Quark’s inevitable loss of this war.

For Quark to stand its ground and begin win­ning bat­tles it must inno­vate. Which it did with 6.5.

Until Adobe releas­es InDesign 4, Quark 6.5 stands proud as the vic­tor on the field of native image manipulation–as both Samuel and I observed in our respec­tive reviews of the XPress 6.5 QuarkVista and PSD import fea­tures. InDesign CS (ver­sion 3) can­not meet Quark’s abil­i­ty to style images. Even with ALAP’s InEffects plug-in, InDesign can­not style pho­tographs as well as XPress 6.5. Whether it holds the field in that area in a few months will depend on how much effort Adobe puts into image manip­u­la­tion in InDesign 4; they may not have had time to catch up.

With image-styling Quark inno­vat­ed, and that inno­va­tion won the battle. 

With PSD import, Quark played catchup with InDesign. The fact that XPress 6.5 could place native Photoshp PSD files was ho-hum news to those famil­iar with InDesign’s years-old abil­i­ty to do the same. However, Quark did­n’t stop at sim­ple place­ment. They took it fur­ther, beyond InDesign, by enabling selec­tive lay­er acti­va­tion in PSDs. Not only was this ter­rif­ic inno­va­tion, but it was a black eye for Adobe; Quark now does a bet­ter job with Adobe’s flag­ship Photoshop doc­u­ments than does InDesign. Innovation won the day.

If Quark intends to make any con­verts, it must do more than sur­vive against InDesign. It must first meet InDesign head-on with features–including those we know 7 will not have, like multi-line composer–but it must go fur­ther. It must inno­vate, adding fea­tures and sup­port InDesign does not. Quark 7 must give design­ers a rea­son to ques­tion whether InDesign has every­thing they need, not just a choice of which user inter­face is preferable.