Quark vs. InDesign

The battles have been fought. Paragraphs have been destroyed. Entire documents slaughtered. What for? To test the skills of both QuarkXpress and InDesign.

First Things First

It doesn’t make a bit of difference which program you use if you don’t know how to design. Page layout programs are just tools. They don’t make anything without the human touch. A layout will not evolve from nothing if the computer is left idle for a long period of time.

However, if you are knowledgeable in the area of graphic design (which I’m guessing you are since you are reading this), there is a large margin of difference between the two programs. Capabilities, productivity, and flexibility will be covered in this review.

Round 1: Capabilities

Both programs can be used to layout absolutely stunning pages. Quark (6.0) has been the standard for years. It’s typographical treatment has been revered. But with InDesign (3.0), Quark will have to put up a hard fight. The hyphenation and justification rules in InDesign work far better than any page layout program to date. The paragraph composer helps eliminate rivers and large gaps between words in full justified text.

Preview renders in Quark have always been a bit qwerky. Pixilated images and rough text seemed bearable, but took out the joy of seeing the layout come together. InDesign’s settings for the viewing quality allow you to work at the best resolution your computer can output, or preview in rough mode, especially helpful when working with large images and multiple layers.

Round 1 Winner: InDesign

Round 2: Productivity

I can safely say that nearly every graphic designer knows how to operate QuarkXpress. Many of those people have never known anything else, and may not want to. Productivity is so important when meeting deadlines, and no one is going to put the job on the line to learn a new program.

The best part about InDesign is it’s interface. For those familiar with Illustrator, or even Photoshop. working in InDesign will be a breeze. It’s new, Quark-like, toolbar provides the user with parameters pertaining to the currently selected object. The slide out drawers hold other adjustments and the styles.

Just because of the pre-established user base, Quark comes out a winner on productivity.

Round 2 Winner: QuarkXpress

Round 3: Flexibility

Working with pure Photoshop and Illustrator native files is a dream, and can only be done in InDesign. Quark’s picky input and output makes it a pain to work with most all of the time. Printing seems to take forever on a good day. I don’t even want to mention how horrible Quark is at .pdf output. InDesign is still a young program, but its features already fathom those of Quark’s.

Round 3 Winner: InDesign

Designers will adopt InDesign more and more. I think it will soon replace Quark as the industry standard.