I could not  believe this was considered by the college’s design department to be what industry was using since Quark Xpress was rapidly replacing the last of the paste-up artists and phototypesetting houses. In the 1990s Indesign emerged from Adobe replacing the difficult to use Pagemaker and has since been in something of a head-to-head with Quark.

In the last decade Adobe has won out in terms of market share but Quark continues to hold a large chunk of the business and has its devout followers and seems to hold its own in some businesses such as newspaper production. There is also the question of once a designer has invested in one system there is an incentive to stick to what they know. In terms of price Indesign wins out if purchased with the Adobe creative suite, but price of course is not the only criteria for many.

We asked graphic designer Alison Curtis of Minuteman Press in Bath which system she preferred. She says: “Indesign is the best software to use for any layout needed ranging for business cards and leaflets and is ideal for setting up a document with multiple pages such as magazines, booklets, newsletters and reports. You have more control over the text when adding or deleting multiple pages. It can also be used for large-format design posters and banners.”

There are lively discussions about the two systems on a number of internet forums including LinkedIn. This is a flavour of the points made there: Kelly Richards of ARTreach says “I used to love Quark! I didn't realize they were still making it. In my opinion it was more intuitive than InDesign.”

Judy Johnson of Modiphy is in the Quark camp. She says: “I have used it for years and am still using Quark 9. I know how to use InDesign when I have to, but find Quark more geared to professionals. The cost doesn't seem high to me because it is not meant for OTC software. When I taught I encouraged my students to use Quark but many of them used InDesign because it was packaged with the other Adobe products. Too bad for Quark that they didn't see the designers they were losing because for years they didn't offer student discounts. That's changed now. I'm sure it has been extremely difficult for Quark to fight the Adobe marketing. I agree that the typography capabilities are far and above any that InDesign could ever do.”

One graphic designer in New York has weighed up the pros and cons in an attempt to give a definitive verdict on the two systems. Roberto Blake gave the following scores out of ten for his various sectors. Ease of use: InDesign: 10/10, Quark: 6/10. Cost: InDesign 10/10, Quark: 5/10.
Workflow: InDesign 10/10, Quark: 5/10. Totals: InDesign CS6 9.6/10 Quark 5.6/10.

Perhaps the final word should go to our own graphic designers at Link Publishing. They have access to both systems. Kevin Lester says: “Personally I prefer ID as it can do a lot of things that still Quark can't after all these years.” While Shaun Edwards says: “Quark has less cluttered palettes and looks good. It appeals to old school designers with its classic layout and still has an appeal amongst some older graphic designers.”