[design] QuarkXPress=The Evil? Still?

Returning to an old saw I just can't quit using, "It' takes 10 atta-boys to make up for one aw, hell". As tired as that's starting to sound, I keep turning up instances where someone burned by Quark's past performance still holds little goodwill toward the quondam layout king and its signature product, QuarkXPress.

This time's bit of evidence for the file comes from the Live Journal blog The Scenic Route (pixeldrift.livejournal.com). It's a short-short entry you can read in its entirety here, but here, AFAIC, is the money shot:

The previous designer in my position was a Quark guy. His work has that style to it. I don't know what it is, but just looking at some spreads you almost want to say, "That looks Quarkish." Maybe it's because early, even clunkier versions of Quark influenced designers in their formative years and it just sort of stuck.

Well, now I'm stuck having to make updates to his old Quark files. Grrness.

Grrrness, indeed. One more Aw, Hell Quark has to make up for. Multiply this by the thousands of customers Quark took for granted Back In The Day™, and you'll get some idea why Quark is still in some trouble despite generally positive reviews for XPress 7.

In Quark's defense, the poster didn't say whether the software in question was XPress 4, 5, 6, or even 7, for that matter. And, in the interests of disclosure, The poster links to QuarkVSInDesign with the "Quark Sucks" button (it's at the bottom of the post).

Technorati Tags: QuarkXPress, InDesign, Quark vs InDesign