lotus



previous page: 07 Jpeg viewer? (What's the best... - Macintosh application software)
  
page up: Macintosh application software FAQ
  
next page: 09 Drawing application? (What's the best... - Macintosh application software)

08 Electronic publishing software? (What's the best... - Macintosh application software)




Description

This article is from the Macintosh application software FAQ, by Elliotte Harold elharo@shock.njit.edu with numerous contributions by others.

08 Electronic publishing software? (What's the best... - Macintosh application software)

Professional electronic publishers tend to swear by either
QuarkXPress or Aldus Pagemaker, typically because they haven't
tried the other package. The interface metaphors of the two
products are quite different, and forcing your mind to switch
between the two is non-trivial. However many people have made the
effort to switch to Quark. Few have moved the other direction
unless forced.

Quark offers more control over the placement of objects on the
page and various color effects than does PageMaker. This makes
Quark particularly popular for advertising and other layouts
that don't look like traditional books and magazines. For instance
I can't imagine laying out Mondo 2000 or Spy in PageMaker. In
Quark it might actually be fun. This is not to say that such
things can't be done; the MacWarehouse catalog is done with
Pagemaker; but Quark is certainly easier to use for this sort of
free-form layout. Pagemaker fits a more traditional layout like
MacWeek's where everything fits neatly into non-overlapping
rectangular columns and boxes with occasional pull quotes.

Aldus has been playing catch-up with Quark for several years
now, and with the recent release of PageMaker 6.0 they may finally
have pulled even. The two products still aren't equal (Quark's
XTensions are superior to Aldus Additions; PageMaker's book
publishing features like automatic indexing are non-existent in
Quark.) but they are roughly comparable. PageMaker is a little
more expensive, but Aldus provides much better support. For
users just starting out I recommend PageMaker.

Many people choose PageMaker because its simpler interface
makes it easier to use for simple black and white newsletters,
books, and other printed matter that doesn't push the art of
electronic publishing to its limits. However if this is all
you want, you may be surprised at just how well today's word
processors fit your needs. With text and picture boxes,
styles, multi-column capabilities, sectioning, EPS import,
and many other features traditionally associated with desktop
publishing, word processors like Word 6.0, WordPerfect 3.1,
and even ClarisWorks can do a surprisingly professional job
when producing relatively simple documents. These features
may not be obvious (especially in Word 6.0) but they are
present, and for considerably less money than Pagemaker.

 

Continue to:















TOP
previous page: 07 Jpeg viewer? (What's the best... - Macintosh application software)
  
page up: Macintosh application software FAQ
  
next page: 09 Drawing application? (What's the best... - Macintosh application software)