Recommendations for Software - Price point, Features, Mac

[iago]

I've looked back a few months and found http://www.indie-rpgs.com/viewtopic.php?t=4633, which talks some about InDesign being the way to go, and while Clinton recommends PagePlusPDF, which looks mighty, it is subject to my great disappointment, as it is not available at all for the Mac (no: I don't want to run a PC emulator).

Rob Donoghue, my partner in crime, tends to use FrameMaker, but that is a monolithic thing.  Still, even at that price, I'm considering it, but it's sort of the upper bound.  Not OS X native (have to run in Classic mode).

I hear good things about Quark, but they don't offer an OS X native version of it yet (Quark 6 supposedly will be, but they haven't provided a release date yet).

InDesign is available today, and is OS X native.

The marketing glossy for InDesign suggests that it is more something for "magazines", while suggesting that Framemaker is more for "books", but that's a marketing glossy, so I'd be interested in hearing specific commentary on this.

I once used Pagemaker, but every time I've gone back to it in recent years it hasn't felt like it's moved all that far forward.

So, clearly, I have a few requirements - Reasonable price is a nice to have, and I need MacOS compliance (OS X native nice, Classic mode necessary if not), and I want something that's robust enough to handle large publications (100pp+) as well as small (20pp or less), with reasonably automatic indexing and  table of contents generation (preferrably, when producing PDF, with the ability to make the index and TOC entries clickable links).

Anyone have some solid recommendations, anecdotes, etc, specifically in the context of Mac-available publication tools?

[Clay]

InDesign is a great package from everything I hear.  I was able to turn out something nice in about half an hour, and I'm no pro.

[Mike Holmes]

Hmm. I can't think of a product that neccesarly fits your needs exactly. I was, however quite happy to find that any document in OSX can be saved as a PDF. So, if you can get something that does layout not specifically for PDF for cheaper, you can still use it for creating PDFs.

I'm not sure if that broadens your field of available products or not. Most layout programs are going to have the ability to make PDF. But in the interim I've used Word, and made PDFs from that.  Yeah, Word sucks, but it's better than nothing. :-)

Also, how important is native OSX? What's wrong with running in Classic mode (I do that with about half my applications now)? There are some performance downsides, but they seem minimal to me. If it's not a problem then Quark is available.

Mike

[Matt Snyder]

Iago, if you're on a Mac platform, I really can't recommend Quark enough. It is The Way. I use it for nearly everything, and that includes the day job.

Now, I can't speak to the OS X issue, but I'm sure Quark works on that environment, just not optimized for it, right? I'm still using Mac OS 9.2. Note that I HAVE had problems with fonts between these two operating systems, because I guess OS X has a new way to handle fonts. (May only matter if you're sharing files, for example.)

The downside? Quark is very expensive, even compared to comparable Adobe products. I think it's worth looking into, though. Quark is that good. Besides the price downside, Quark does everything else you want very well.

[iago]

Also, how important is native OSX? What's wrong with running in Classic mode (I do that with about half my applications now)? There are some performance downsides, but they seem minimal to me.

I've found it to be a significant pain in the ass occasionally, but it's not enough of one that it's a dealbreaker (which is why I said native OS X is nice-to-have).

[Mike Holmes]

So you're looking for a stronger endorsement of Quark then before putting up with those minor hassles? Or, given that they may have a new product, you'd prefer to wait? Hmm...

I wonder if you might be able to wrangle a liscence from a sales associate for the current Quark that would allow you to upgrade when the new version comes out - perhaps for free or at a discount. I know companies do this sort of thing for larger companies (to get the int he door). Usually you have to pay the higher price if the new product will be more, however. I wonder if they'd do it for a publisher like you. Couldn't hurt to ask...

Mike

[JSDiamond]

Not to sound like I'm on the payroll, but InDesign also handles a lot of customized art layout quite well.  Weird text wraps, multi-page spreads, etc.  It's a lot more than just text layout.

[iago]

So you're looking for a stronger endorsement of Quark then before putting up with those minor hassles? Or, given that they may have a new product, you'd prefer to wait?

Well, seeing as Quark is amazingly expensive (but I may be able to manage it), I'd like to buy something that will remain current for the next 12 months, and, preferrably, run native on OS X.  Quark 6 satisfies these requirements, but not the third requirement: Be Currently For Sale.

Quark 5's out there, but fails both of the first two.

So, I find me looking upon InDesign as at least the thing which is there now, given that Quark is currently unable to commit to when Quark 6 will be for sale.

[Rob Donoghue]

My religious fondness for frame knows no limit, but I'll try to set it aside for the moment to propose something that would normally be repugnant to me: MS-Word.

I have heard (secondhand, as I am not a Mac guy) that the whole of MS office is a lot cleaner on Mac.  This may be important because there are a number of features that Word has (styles most specifically) which would be amazing if they worked, but do not.

If they _do_ work (and I'd love to hear if they do), that could combine well with the native PDF functionality into somethign pretty potent.

-Rob D.

[iago]

My religious fondness for frame knows no limit,

I'm so shocked, Rob. :)

Alas, Frame remains a non-X-native app at the moment.

but I'll try to set it aside for the moment to propose something that would normally be repugnant to me: MS-Word.

I have heard (secondhand, as I am not a Mac guy) that the whole of MS office is a lot cleaner on Mac.  This may be important because there are a number of features that Word has (styles most specifically) which would be amazing if they worked, but do not.

I have Word on the Mac, but I don't know that it'll do everything I want it to, as fluidly and (occasionally) graphically as I want it to.  It's great for producing something simple, but I'm enough of an Illustrator-tinkerer that I'm fairly certain some of my intentions won't play out using it.

It is, certainly, my fall-back, as it doesn't require any additional capital investment, but it also means I won't be super satisfied with what I make with it.

Plus, it still can get really maddening with the styles stuff.

If they _do_ work (and I'd love to hear if they do), that could combine well with the native PDF functionality into somethign pretty potent.

You can print to PDF just fine, but I don't think it does the clickable links, PDF bookmarks, etc, things I'd like to see happen with a "true" full-featured PDF implementation.

[Jason Lee]

I've had a few minor misbehaviors with Quark 4 in classic mode.

I experienced a scrolling issue with Quark 5 in classic mode that made the application completely unusable.  I never bothered to find out if their was a patch (to either classic or Quark)

I know one of the programmers for Quark and in order to be OS X native the software will require a lot of work (something about a rewrite into objective C- I think, I dunno, not a programmer).  I have no idea when it's due, but I didn't get the impression it was anytime soon.

[iago]

I know one of the programmers for Quark and in order to be OS X native the software will require a lot of work (something about a rewrite into objective C- I think, I dunno, not a programmer).  I have no idea when it's due, but I didn't get the impression it was anytime soon.

Well, that's bitterly disappointing, but exceedingly informative.  Thanks much for the information.  I suspect I'll end up with some manner of Adobe product.  They've been good to me so far and InDesign, at least, can do the OS X dance.

[Jason Lee]

I last spoke to the guy (where I got this info) on new years eve, so it has been a little bit.

I got curious, so I did a quick search and rumors point to an attempted (attempted being the operative word) release date of June/July.  Again these are not facts, just what I found.

There are download-able demos for both Quark 5 (here) and InDesign 2 (here).

I tried the Quark 5 demo, to see if I had the scrolling issue with my current configuration (10.2.4).  I did not, but it lags something fierce.

Check out the demos, and if Quark 5 appeals to you maybe check into the validity of getting a free update to Quark 6 as Mike suggested (and rumors point to Quark doing as they clamor for sales).

[iago]

I got curious, so I did a quick search and rumors point to an attempted (attempted being the operative word) release date of June/July.  Again these are not facts, just what I found.

There are download-able demos for both Quark 5 (here) and InDesign 2 (here).

Yeah.  I just started evaluating InDesign last night ... Quark will have to wait, as the download aborted halfway through the last time I tried to get it.  InDesign, at least on the very surface, looks like it will probably suit my needs, but I'm at about 30 minutes of evaluation at this point, not enough to really make a call.