How different is INdesign as opposed to QuarkXPress?

My company is readying to make transition from Quark layout to INDesign ... Anybody know the key differences? How hard it will be to learn one from the other?

Thanks.

 

InDesign is a lot more user friendly. It's Adobe, so it's compatible with Illustrator and Photoshop, which makes everyone's life easier. In knowing both well, I see InDesign as being much more flexible -- it seems there are just many more possibilities and accessibilities. I will say InDesign is a tad slower than Quark XPress though, depending on your computer, of course.

Bottom line is if you know Quark, you can make the transition to InDesign pretty seamlessly. I used Quark in college and I learned InDesign for my current job very quickly, so I assume most people can do the same.

 

They're both fairly similar.

As the other guy said, if you know Quark, you'll pick up InDesign easily and quickly.

 

We switched from Quark to InDesign back in April. The first few days were brutal. Handling photos on the screen is tricky business until you learn exactly which tool to use and when. InDesign is also less compatible with Baseview's News Edit, it seems, but we are told they are working out the bugs on it.
It is important to have someone actually familiar with doing pages to teach you the main points of InDesign. We got some bozo who taught us how to make ads and pamphlets, but couldn't really help us much because he hadn't actually ever built any pages. We were all furious.
But a week later, we were all laying out pages in InDesign without a hitch. We got on the phone to others who've used InDesign and they were able to answer our questions. So it's good to have contacts in the business.

 

Hotrobber's post speaks some truth: It's all about the training.

That training has to come in two phases:

1/How to use InDesign in general. Don't turn your nose up at ads-and-pamphlets training; you can learn from the functions required to do those, too. And yes, the biggest difference between InDesign and Quark is how each handles photos.

2/After you know how to use InDesign, you need to be trained in how to use InDesign as it integrates with your editorial system. This training, of course, is best provided by your system's vendor -- or in-house, by people who have been trained by your vendor. Each vendor (Baseview, DTI, etc.) integrates with InDesign in a different way, and each vendor's functionality will affect how InDesign works. This training will also help make you aware of the particular bugs or quirks with your vendor's integration.

 

My shop switches to InDesign June 26. Mercifully, my last day is June 25. ;D

 

We're making the switch, too, and I forsee at least three people's head exploding. Hell, mine might, too.

If anyone is willing to talk tips, let me know.

 

It's still a layout program. You draw boxes, use the style sheet, have a library, etc.

The photo box tools are the biggest difference (and not in a good way). One tool controls the box frame, the other the innards. It's not intuitive. (BTW, a text box can be cornfused the same way).

Also, if you are used to the alt-drag feature in Quark, InDesign will make you mad at first. There are two different keys for dragging.

However, the design possibilities with ID are good. Just like in Photoshop, you can control transparency and add a drop shadow (don't overdo it, please).
I find the auto-runaround way better than Quark. I rarely need to create a clipping path on cutouts because InDesign makes its own so well.

 

also, when InDesign crashes, it has everything backed up for recovery.

 

That's what the salesman told us, as well.
Unfortunately, we've had a few bad incidents where larger volumes of work were lost and nobody could explain how it happened.
In defense of InDesign, though, it might prove to have been a server problem more than InDesign, but it WAS InDesign that crashed.

 

Quark can have an autosave feature, too. If you need it, PM me and next time I'm in the office, I'll get the path.

We've got our set for every 180 seconds.

 

Photos and that's basically it. Well, almost.