Skip to main content

No, really, I'm sorry. You still suck.

WARNING: thar be jargon ahead, matey!

Quark XPress sucks.

Actually, it doesn't just suck, it invents new ways to suck. It's actually so good at doing so that you kind of have to admire the dumbass engineers at Quark for being able to delve to new realms of suckage. It's quite spectacular.

Quark XPress is, unfortunately, the current standard for desktop publishing (DTP) page layout programs. Back in the day, when we could only work in square interfaces and RAM still cost upwards of $20 per megabtye, it was the bomb, yo. It was mean, lean and let you put whole categories of businesses out of work with a single click (typesetters, etc.). But then they started upgrading, casually ignoring advances in the system software it was running on for years at a time.

And then there's the bugs.

Bugs so bad that some major releases (*cough* 4.0 *cough*) got categorically ignored until the next point release (x.1, x.2, etc.) in which the bugs were squashed to the point of the program being somewhat useable again. I'm sure that Microsoft took it as a personal attack that a company could release a product buggier than Word or Windows. Either that or they were extremely impressed.

The current release is awful. The only thing good about it is that it runs in OS X instead of having to run in classic mode, which creates problems that aren't totally its fault. I was in a "get to know XPress"-type meeting with a rep from Quark, and everytime he mentioned a "feature" that the next version would have I had to think to myself "InDesign [Adobe's competitor to XPress] already does that." "That too." "Wow. Adobe thought of that 4 years ago."

Maybe suck isn't a strong enough word.


Anonymous said…
hey, i'd quark with him ...

Popular posts from this blog

Clay and Adam are a couple of dorks.

But I certainly had nothing to do with this monstosity. Or did I?

Some things are better left uncovered

Sometimes you hear a cover and go to yourself, "hey, that's doper than Sam Perkins at Woodstock." Other times, you wonder (possibly aloud) "that no talent hack! They couldn't even carry [inset original artist here]'s guitar case!" [Ed. note: You should have seen what the author originally wanted to use as the carried item. Believe us, it wasn't a guitar case.] Today was an example of the second. Some fool whose name I cannot even spare the mental RAM for, has covered "High and Dry" by the esteemed Radiohead. This is up there. With the worst covers of all time. Some songs just don't ever need to be covered. Like this one. And like "It's My Life" by Talk Talk. But No Doubt did a decent job with that one, although they crapped all over it with that video. This one today was bad. When you do a cover, you're supposed to bring something to it. Maybe your sound is similar to the original artist's, an