Introduction

Quark has finally started shipping QuarkXPress 6.0 (so far only the US English version is available - other parts of the world will have to hold their breath a bit longer). This is obviously excellent news for users of what appears to be the only major software package for the Macintosh that was not available for Mac OS X. Prior to this release, large segments of the publishing industry were consigned to a wait-and-see attitude about Apple’s new operating system.

For the publishing industry, the arrival of the new version is quite an event: most users of the program have not upgraded their software since the arrival of Version 4.x over 5 years ago, and there are still quite a few sites around the world that use the 3.x release.

Of course, there is also the ongoing QuarkXPress vs. InDesign saga, which has been heating up considerably over the last few months. A quick look at the newsgroups on the web shows that this issue is far from being settled--quite to the contrary. It will be interesting to see how the arrival of QuarkXPress 6 will impact the market, as well as what the market reaction will tell us about underlying trends in publishing and design.

A Bit of History

Just for those who missed an episode here and there: QuarkXPress is the most widely used page-layout program for design-driven publishing in the world. (Note: “design-driven” refers to page production in environments where design excellence is an essential part of the equation. It is important to make that distinction: Quark’s program does not lead in corporate publishing, a field largely dominated by Microsoft Publisher, followed by Adobe PageMaker. Nor does QuarkXPress have strong presence in high-end editorial systems for the newspaper market. And, yes, there are some regions, Asia-Pacific in particular, where PageMaker is the program of choice for designers.)

But apart from these exceptions, QuarkXPress by and large defines how professional print production is done today. And while Quark has alienated a significant number of its customers for a variety of reasons (including hardware copy protection of the international Passport version, support problems, and pricing issues), user loyalty to the software is generally very high.

In 1999, Quark got company: Adobe released the much anticipated InDesign page layout software, followed in early 2002 by InDesign 2.0, which, amongst a number of other innovations, already ran natively on Mac OS X.

While the response to the initial release was tepid, version 2.0 dramatically changed market reaction. Over the past 18 months, Adobe has started making significant inroads in some market segments, such as magazine publishing, particularly on an international level. Increasingly, the market perceives InDesign as the cutting-edge solution for professional publishing. But this article is not about comparing the two contenders in the “page-layout wars”. Pfeiffer Consulting will release in-depth technology analysis and productivity comparison of these products upon completion of all testing and benchmarking of release software.

So why do we think the arrival of QuarkXPress 6 is important? It is all about implications: the market reaction to the new program will be extremely revealing, well beyond mere technical considerations. It will take some time to see the results, but when we do, we will have a much better idea about underlying changes in the design and publishing market.

So let’s take the issues one by one.

Creative Edge vs. Convenience

The first thing one notices about version 6 is that Quark has not entered a features war, trying to match or leapfrog all the bells and whistles of its competitor. QuarkXPress 6.0 does introduce some innovative functionality that is not available in InDesign, such as the notion of layout spaces and projects. On the other hand, it lags behind InDesign in a number of important areas. The most significant are high-end typographic features and support for transparency.

Nevertheless, the positions are clear. Adobe can rightly claim that InDesign is the cutting-edge page-layout tool (the list of innovative features is impressive), while Quark can go ahead and tout convenience and productivity--relying on the loyalty of its installed base.

The real question is of course how the market will react. In the next few months, pent-up demand will make sure Quark will sell LOTS of upgrades to version 6. But what will happen over time? There is no doubt that some publishing environments may not need all the bells and whistles InDesign 2.0 offers. (In fact, many publishers around the world would probably be very happy to go on using QuarkXPress 3.x or 4.x for the rest of their lives were they given a chance.)

What will happen? The essential question--and it has far-reaching implications--is: does innovation still sell? Does the market at a large scale still want or need innovative functionality? Or is the price (changing software, learning a new tool, training a team) too high for a majority of sites?

There is no reliable way to predict the deeper market trends that will start to play once the initial demand for QuarkXPress 6 will have been satisfied. One thing is clear: users and sites that have switched to InDesign seem pleased with their new tool. On the other hand, QuarkXPress users should be pleased as well when they can finally upgrade their software and move to Mac OS X.

The Question of Copy Protection

Quark has always been a strong proponent of stringent copy protection measures, especially outside the United States. The Passport version of QuarkXPress used to be protected by a hardware dongle, while English language versions relied on simple network-copy protection. With version 6, Quark follows the lead of Microsoft and requires on-line software “activation” that effectively links the installed software to the specific hardware configuration on which it is installed. This type of copy protection is quite common for costly vertical application software, such as 3D animation systems. For mainstream software, it is quite unusual, however. Users tend to reject it because, beyond the “Big Brother” aspect, it makes managing software or upgrading hardware much more intricate.

In addition, especially in Macintosh environments, users are accustomed to floating licenses: it is quite common in publishing environments to see the same copy of Photoshop, Illustrator and QuarkXPress installed on several machines in a workgroup. Every workstation on the network can use the program, provided nobody else is running a copy with the same serial number. This level of copy protection seems to be generally well accepted by users. Even for a single user, it is practical to install the same copy on several machines, in order to have the ability to work on one computer while another is completing other work.

Unlike previous versions of the program, QuarkXPress 6.0 does not support floating licenses, although Quark does provide a utility for managing site licenses. For small workgroups where several people tend to do several things (the reality of many small to mid-size design shops), this aspect of the new release could turn out to be a serious problem in managing resources, since users will now have to purchase a copy of the software for every machine on which it will be installed, even if these licences are not used concurrently.

It will be extremely interesting to see how Quark fares with his new approach: the only time the company attempted hard-core copy protection in the U.S. markets was with version 1.0, in 1987, but when confronted by a universally negative reaction, it quickly dropped it. If the market, especially in the United States, accepts the software-activation scheme, then users will have become far more resilient about copy-protection schemes than they used to be. In our opinion, Quark is taking a serious risk here, which may push otherwise loyal users to look at the competition more closely. Time will tell.

The Impact on Mac OS X

Another area where market reaction to QuarkXPress 6 will be revealing is Mac OS X market adoption. By and large, the absence of a MacOS X native version of QuarkXPress has been considered the principal culprit for the slow adoption of Apple’s new operating system in publishing markets. Now that this program is finally available, will the market react? How rapidly will publishers really switch?

While it is clear that the majority of IT Managers in publishing companies see MacOS X as the logical next step for their businesses, actually making the switch is a more profound step. It will be interesting to see whether professionals will adopt Mac OS X rapidly now.

The Reality of Cross-Media Publishing

Cross-media publishing is one of the most elusive aspects of modern publishing systems: while every self-respecting editorial system for the newspaper market now offers the possibility of repurposing content for different information channels, the situation, is much more complex for the rest of the publishing world, which has not even clearly defined the real needs and requirements for using the same information in several different media. The reality is simple: cross-media publishing is still in its infancy, and the available generic tools reflect this lack of a maturity.

QuarkXPress and Adobe InDesign take a completely different approach to this problem: since version 5.0, QuarkXPress allows the creation of web pages from within the page layout program. InDesign supports relatively sophisticated HTML export, but otherwise focuses on XML and PDF for repurposing content.

Obviously, repurposing especially for web delivery will be important as the market matures. Today, most publishing managers have only sketchy appreciation of their cross media needs. For this reason it will be revealing to observe how the market takes to the functionality offered by both contenders. In fact, for most small to mid-range publishing environments, we are still at a point at which emerging tools can significantly shape how the production reality evolves.

Don’t Hold Your Breath

Don’t expect any spectacular evolutions in the market very soon. Right now, the market is very busy beginning to evaluate QuarkXPress 6: while smaller shops may upgrade directly, most larger publishing environments will do solid validation of the new release in their production environment. And rightly so: upgrading a major piece of application software at the same time as moving to a completely new operating system is enough to keep an IT manager awake at night - especially when the new software also requires all-new extensions, and is not completely backwards compatible.

Finally, most publishers are aware that Adobe will likely announce a new release of InDesign in the not too distant future, and will probably hold off their final judgement until then.

In any case, the professional publishing market is heading for interesting times. It will be instructive to analyze the situation once the dust settles.

July 4, 2003

©2003 Pfeiffer Consulting

.