<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.11" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Quark listens: Alters licensing for previous versions</title>
	<link>http://quarkvsindesign.com/articles/a1/news/2006/quark-listens-alters-licensing-for-previous-versions/</link>
	<description>The Authority for News &#038; Opinion on the War of the Desktop Publishing Giants QuarkXPress and Adobe InDesign</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 00:16:07 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.11</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: Pariah S. Burke</title>
		<link>http://quarkvsindesign.com/articles/a1/news/2006/quark-listens-alters-licensing-for-previous-versions/#comment-17065</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Nov 2006 18:31:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://quarkvsindesign.com/articles/a1/news/2006/quark-listens-alters-licensing-for-previous-versions/#comment-17065</guid>
					<description>"Key Observer" said:
&lt;blockquote&gt;I wonder why this is a big news. On Intel Macs, there’s no point in running old QXP versions, when one can do so with a UB 7.02. On PC’s one can’t install multiple copies of a similar application due to windows registry entries !! Is anybody laughing his way to the stores, hmmm ?&lt;/blockquote&gt;

I'm afraid you haven't been observant enough, Key Observer.

First, the Windows Registry does not prevent or limit in any way the ability to run different versions of the same software. Some applications, like MS Office, have difficulties with multiple versions, but that's not a consequence of the operating system's Registry; it's because the application itself was built in such a way that it cannot tolerate multiple concurrent installations.

To wit: On my WinXP teaching laptop I have installed the following fully functional applications:
- 4 versions of InDesign
- 4 versions of InCopy
- 4 versions of QuarkXPress
- 3 versions each of Illustrator, Photoshop, and Acrobat (note that only the most recent Acrobat Distiller printer [usually "Create Adobe PDF"] will function because of its application limitations)

My PowerPC OSX PowerBook has similar multiple-version installations of those and other applications.

The ability to run multiple versions of any creative pro application is important to several segments of the visual communications market. With QuarkXPress and its limitation of saving file compatible only with the current and immediately previous version of the application, that ability is absolutely critical to the viability of numerous workflows.

Not everyone moves up to each new release of creative pro applications. There are many, many workflows still running QuarkXPress 4.x, including book, catalog, and direct mail publishers, and most especially newspapers who run a more robust front-end system atop QuarkXPress 4.x or even 3.3. Ad agencies, designers, and advertisers who send content into such workflows need to be able to deliver QuarkXPress 4.x- or 3.3-comptable files, which means keeping a copy of those versions of XPress locally.

The matter is even more important for print and pre-press service providers who must accept digital files from an even broader and more diverse base.

Someone like myself needs to maintain multiple versions of creative pro applications for training, consulting, book and article writing reference, troubleshooting, and so on.

Because XPress 7 disabled all prior versions installed on the same system, any workflow that needed access to prior versions simply could not upgrade to XPress 7. With the licensing fix, Quark has removed that major upgrade hurdle and opened the door for more XPress 7 sales.

So, to answer your question more directly: Yes, this news &lt;em&gt;will &lt;/em&gt;inspire the hundreds of thousands of people in numerous, multiple-XPress-dependent workflows to laugh all the way to the store.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Key Observer&#8221; said:</p>
<blockquote><p>I wonder why this is a big news. On Intel Macs, there’s no point in running old QXP versions, when one can do so with a UB 7.02. On PC’s one can’t install multiple copies of a similar application due to windows registry entries !! Is anybody laughing his way to the stores, hmmm ?</p></blockquote>
<p>I&#8217;m afraid you haven&#8217;t been observant enough, Key Observer.</p>
<p>First, the Windows Registry does not prevent or limit in any way the ability to run different versions of the same software. Some applications, like MS Office, have difficulties with multiple versions, but that&#8217;s not a consequence of the operating system&#8217;s Registry; it&#8217;s because the application itself was built in such a way that it cannot tolerate multiple concurrent installations.</p>
<p>To wit: On my WinXP teaching laptop I have installed the following fully functional applications:<br />
- 4 versions of InDesign<br />
- 4 versions of InCopy<br />
- 4 versions of QuarkXPress<br />
- 3 versions each of Illustrator, Photoshop, and Acrobat (note that only the most recent Acrobat Distiller printer [usually &#8220;Create Adobe PDF&#8221;] will function because of its application limitations)</p>
<p>My PowerPC OSX PowerBook has similar multiple-version installations of those and other applications.</p>
<p>The ability to run multiple versions of any creative pro application is important to several segments of the visual communications market. With QuarkXPress and its limitation of saving file compatible only with the current and immediately previous version of the application, that ability is absolutely critical to the viability of numerous workflows.</p>
<p>Not everyone moves up to each new release of creative pro applications. There are many, many workflows still running QuarkXPress 4.x, including book, catalog, and direct mail publishers, and most especially newspapers who run a more robust front-end system atop QuarkXPress 4.x or even 3.3. Ad agencies, designers, and advertisers who send content into such workflows need to be able to deliver QuarkXPress 4.x- or 3.3-comptable files, which means keeping a copy of those versions of XPress locally.</p>
<p>The matter is even more important for print and pre-press service providers who must accept digital files from an even broader and more diverse base.</p>
<p>Someone like myself needs to maintain multiple versions of creative pro applications for training, consulting, book and article writing reference, troubleshooting, and so on.</p>
<p>Because XPress 7 disabled all prior versions installed on the same system, any workflow that needed access to prior versions simply could not upgrade to XPress 7. With the licensing fix, Quark has removed that major upgrade hurdle and opened the door for more XPress 7 sales.</p>
<p>So, to answer your question more directly: Yes, this news <em>will </em>inspire the hundreds of thousands of people in numerous, multiple-XPress-dependent workflows to laugh all the way to the store.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Samuel John Klein</title>
		<link>http://quarkvsindesign.com/articles/a1/news/2006/quark-listens-alters-licensing-for-previous-versions/#comment-17059</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Nov 2006 10:52:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://quarkvsindesign.com/articles/a1/news/2006/quark-listens-alters-licensing-for-previous-versions/#comment-17059</guid>
					<description>Now &lt;em&gt;that&lt;/em&gt; is some notable news. 

This means that anyone with a .qxd that was generated in Version 5 will be able to save twice and convert up. That's fantastic.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Now <em>that</em> is some notable news. </p>
<p>This means that anyone with a .qxd that was generated in Version 5 will be able to save twice and convert up. That&#8217;s fantastic.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Key Observer</title>
		<link>http://quarkvsindesign.com/articles/a1/news/2006/quark-listens-alters-licensing-for-previous-versions/#comment-17053</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Nov 2006 21:55:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://quarkvsindesign.com/articles/a1/news/2006/quark-listens-alters-licensing-for-previous-versions/#comment-17053</guid>
					<description>I wonder why this is a big news. On Intel Macs, there's no point in running old QXP versions, when one can do so with a UB 7.02. On PC's one can't install multiple copies of a similar application due to windows registry entries !! Is anybody laughing his way to the stores, hmmm ? -- Key Observer.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I wonder why this is a big news. On Intel Macs, there&#8217;s no point in running old QXP versions, when one can do so with a UB 7.02. On PC&#8217;s one can&#8217;t install multiple copies of a similar application due to windows registry entries !! Is anybody laughing his way to the stores, hmmm ? &#8212; Key Observer.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>

