![]() ![]() If you remember, we mentioned that InDesign was initially designed as a rival to QuarkXPress and its layout design capabilities for print assets. Nevertheless, if you're looking for a solid print layout tool, this is definitely the better option. It can also handle web- and mobile-based design needs such as app page layouts, web page layouts, online marketing collateral, and so on. QuarkXPress Specific Use Cases - Flyers, brochures, magazines, eBooks, infographics, photo montages/collages, and any printable material that requires a design tool. The product has evolved into a holistic content design platform over the years, but its strengths are still in graphic design and print layout design. Most of the features that came later on focused on enhancing this capability while adding on the ability to design digital assets and take appropriate outputs. ![]() XPress is ideal for print layouts since it was designed for this in the first place. Why? Because different usage scenarios may still use the same set of tools, but some features are meant specifically for either print layouts or digital asset creation. This is a good starting point because, to be honest, the question of "better" depends entirely on what purpose these tools are being used for. Now, let's dive into a comparative analysis to see which one is really the better DTP software. Until now, we've only seen their standalone capabilities. This is where we come to the meaty part of the article - the actual comparison between QuarkXPress and InDesign. Comparisons Between QuarkXPress and InDesign
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |