Still at the job, but QuarkXPress is such immense garbage and most of our legacy documents were built in it so It still a daily requirement, thankfully InDesign was an option for use a few years after starting so its less of an issue these days. Obviously no piece of software is perfect but the amount of extra steps Quark causes to do basic functions reminds me of back in college when I was forced to use Avid for some class projects—similarly bloated, clunky, unintuitive nonsense.
Quark touted adding the “eyedropper tool” a few years back in a new release—in 2020 (or maybe the 2019 version, I can’t remember). This software is just as old as InDesign, the fact they didn’t add an EYEDROPPER tool for style selection is beyond confounding. They also hadn’t implemented individual cell styling for tables until like 2018. The company also has the nerve to put front-and-center that it will open and convert InDesign files in an attempt to appeal to people sick of Adobe’s current subscription model (which don’t get me wrong, I am equally annoyed with), but let me tell you as a daily user of both: STAY AS FAR AWAY AS YOU CAN FROM QUARK.
Yeah, in my mind I just date most adobe apps as ancient since they are for the most part absorbed from prior companies’ software (pretty sure the only mainline cc apps Adobe didn’t acquire are acrobat and photoshop, maybe premiere and after effects?).
Anyway, Quark is maybe older but that doesn’t excuse the company still building its program like its 1987.
Adobes software, nice, works well together, made tons of great content with the suite. Not a fan of subscription services, but it's ok I guess for the Adobe suite as renting a toolbox.
Quark however, was a total dumpster fire when I used it a few years ago. Crashed constantly.