2 reviews


$799.00 Released January, 1987

Product Shot 1 The Pros:Quick & efficient, space-saving user interface. Industry standard for years, XPress files are reliable on press. Intuitive hotkeys and palettes.

The Cons:Horrible customer support. Too expensive. Has difficulties creating large PDF documents.

QuarkXPress ("Quark") is a desktop publishing application for creating and editing complex page layouts in a WYSIWYG environment. It is used by individual designers and large publishing houses, primarily to produce any kind of layout, from flyers to complex page layouts required by magazines, newspapers, catalogs, and similar printed materials.

Where to Buy

loading.. Loading latest prices from ProductWiki...

It is one of two products (the other being Adobe InDesign) that dominate that market space.

User Reviews (2)

Add Pros & Cons
  • 2

    Quick & efficient, space-saving user interface

  • 2

    Industry standard for years, XPress files are reliable on press

  • 2

    Intuitive hotkeys and palettes

  • 2

    Relatively straight-forward learning curve

  • 1

    The measurements pallet is still the best feature.

  • 2

    Horrible customer support

  • 2

    Too expensive

  • 0

    Has difficulties creating large PDF documents

  • 0

    Some tools (Rotate, Pen Tool) are clunky

Comments (1)

What's on your mind? See more ProductWiki Talk
Howlsthunder: #quarkxpress

Quark XPress was the first design layout software I learned and I used it pretty solidly up until 2009, at which point the company I work for (with great urging from myself) switched to Adobe InDesign. (I started with QXP in the 90s and didn't touch ID until 2007. My primary comparisons here are between QXP 6.5 and IDcs4).

QXP is a great program, don't get me wrong, and perhaps they've fixed some things since version 6.5. But my experience with it just got worse over the years as various graphics applications across the board were blossoming and QXP seemed to take its good time between updates, leaving loyal users in the dust with buggy problems that *might* be fixed in the next version. When they bother to put one out.

First, what I love about QXP:
. Its easy to learn and most of the hotkeys are very intuitive and easy to memorize
. It takes up minimal desktop space and the palettes you DO use a lot are similarly compact and efficient.
. QXP is all about precision with guides, object placements, type, etc. Very tight.
. QXP is an industry standard, so professional designers can't go wrong using it.

Now, the things that got to me in the end:
. QXP crashed WAY more than any other software on my Mac
. QXP is cumbersome and weak w. PDF creation
. Some things, like table creation and object alignment, are basic and/or clunky
. QXP is very slow in its upgrades & development, constantly a step or two behind the upstart InDesign
. QXP is much more strict with what image file types it will allow to be Placed than ID
. QXP sometimes has odd quirks that even Quark or press techs can't figure out; in comparison we've yet to run into any quirks w. ID
. In particular, QXP always had issues with files made in Illustrator.

I really wish there were some middle ground between QXP and ID. Even after a couple years of using ID I still don't feel it is as svelte or intuitive as QXP in terms of the interface. But I really like that ID "gets along" with all other Adobe file types with no quirks in sight.

Like I say, Quark has been updated once or twice since I switched but so far I'm not regretting it. We've sent all kinds of huge and complex files to press and have had no problems with ID. True, we didn't have TONS of issues with QXP but enough on the creation end of things that it has just been much less of a headache to use something that is fully compatible with PDFs, Photoshop, and Illustrator. It just makes sense since all three are Adobe products.

Apr 14, 10
post a reply

You may also like...