And I haven't managed Appleworks yet ! Just know how to print a letter, sort of. What kinds of professions are you all in? I am sure you don't print out brochures and make layouts for posters and configure headlines and bottomlines for the pure pleasure to use the medium! I am always amazed when I read Dan Crutcher, and then, when I see the Louisville Magazine I say to myself : How did they ever do this? ( Of course i could do without what is their bread and butter, those flashy full page ads!) - One of these days I shall come and observe the clumsy pagemaker in action, then the quicker Quark ( that's the German name for a kind of cottage cheese) . I think i shall forego MacDraw, but then the Design thing might be interesting. - As far as putting in the newest systems etc., it isn't that I am so enamored with everything new either, I haven't put the tiger in my tank as yet, but all of sudden, when you ask questions about an old software or system, you can't find anybody who can answer them anymore. And you lose the "how-to" in an old system when you haven't used something for awhile. I don't know whether I would feel at home even in classic now. Marta On Sep 14, 2005, at 19:57, Jonathan Fletcher wrote:
> On Sep 14, 2005, at 5:15 PM, Rob Kersting <laffmakr at aye.net> wrote: > >> I first started using it in 1988 (remember those days, guys...the >> entire >> program would fit on a floppy) and used it for brochure and poster >> layouts. > > With PM 1.0, the system, the app AND the documents all fit on one > [400K] floppy. I remember having to upgrade my original 128K to 512 K > (RAM) Mac and upgrade to an 800K floppy drive to be able to run the > hot, new Pagemaker 1.2. What a disk hog! > > ;;-) > > (Hard drive? We don't need no steekeeng hard drive! Until years later, > anyway. FIVE MEG hard drives were $2 GRAND back then!) >> >> For some reason, however, newspapers turned to Quark for their layout >> needs. I've only dabbled with Quark, so I don't understand the >> differences, but Pagemaker always seemed easier to me. I've used it >> for > > Pagemaker was way better at free-form layout. Drag something here, > click there and type. It was easy. XPress, OTOH, was much better at > documents that needed to be consistent throughout. Style sheets, > multiple master pages and that box-y layout structure were way better > if you were in a production environment. That is why design agencies > and publications went that way, big time. It also did credible color > separations way sooner. > > Pagemaker just was not as powerful, but there is no one who will argue > against the fact that it was way easier to get started in page layout > and create a document in Pagemaker. I used to create everything in > Pagemaker. (It was a BIG improvement over MacDraw! I actually created > brochures for customers in MacDraw. Whoa.) > > That free-form unstructured approach to page layout got many people in > trouble, though. It allowed you to create some horrendously > sloppy-looking documents. In fact, Pagemaker takes MORE work to get a > document looking even and consistent than anything else, except maybe > MS Publisher. > > Then someone handed me a copy of QXP 2.1 and I had what an old > professor of mine used to call "a religious experience." I still had > to use Pagemaker for a lot of things, but once I learned how XPress > did things, I never looked back--and was far more productive for it. I > always prefer to have software that helps me rather than fights me. > > Kinda like why I use a Mac! > > ::-) > > And then InDesign came along with its Leaping Quantum. But, you're > right: not everyone needs that much power. (So why do we buy V-8s > anyway?) > > >> brochures, posters and flyers around the club. I had a template with >> our >> company letterhead and I could print out letters as needed without >> using >> the pre-printed stock. Back in the 90s, I was using it to fax out form >> letters and promotional information along with my trusty USR FaxModem. >> Once or twice a year I have to print out a number of uniquely-numbered >> and designed event tickets. That took a couple of days for the layout, >> but I reuse the template and all I have to change is the date. >> Pagemaker >> wors best for this because of it's simplistically-accurate layout >> capabilities. >> >> And after 20 years, I understand why it's nickname is "Ragemaker." But >> every app has it's ups and downs. >> >> The reason I responded to the comment was that too often people >> condemn >> classic apps because they're not the "latest and greatest." Everything >> has to be the most up-to-date to make them happy and that thinking is >> too narrow for me. If an app works, use it. From a purely economic >> side, >> I can't see putting a few hundred down for the new stuff if the old >> stuff still does everything I need. I still use an old OS9 only audio >> application because it works great. It will never be upgraded to OSX >> and >> I really don't care. Why? Because it works. > > Audacity is great, free and works in OS X. You're not much enthralled > with OS X, are you? >> >> At my old job (which I just left, July 29) I used a PowerMac 7300/200, >> OS 8.6 with two internal drives, an upgraded ethernet card and an old >> "MacWindows" card for the few times I needed to access the evil empire >> (that's a great story in itself!). It was a little slow, but it >> worked fine. >> >> My point is, get off the chauvinistic thinking that classic apps are >> bad. Just because something is older doesn't mean it's worthless. Why >> do >> you think the Street Rod show is such a big draw? I'd take a 67 >> Mustang >> Conv over any of these junkers they're making today. > > Rob, I have to take you to task for an, um, inadequate, analogy. Maybe > I can dig up a Mac Classic or something for you to do your work on. > Think about it: There is very little original equipment on those > street rods. They resemble the originals in vague shape only. It's > like taking my 1984 original 128K Mac, "chopping" the case, adding > curvy body extensions, dropping in a G5 and attaching a 23 inch cinema > display to it. Oh, and painting the case a high-gloss candy apple red. > > BTW, there were a lot of really clunky Mustangs on the road in 67, > too. They may have had sex appeal, but they were NOT very well built. > You still want to rebuild a cheesy two-barrel carburetor every couple > years? Hmm, to each his own. That restored '67 convertible you want > probably has very little of the original sheet metal and probably > emits more pollutants than a Hummer--unless they replaced the engine > with a newer fuel-injected one. > > The point you made correctly was that not everyone needs as much power > as QuarkXPress and Indesign (and for that matter even a dual-processor > G5) have to give. That's why Apple makes Minis. AND dual-processor G5 > towers. > > Many might do very well with Pagemaker and Classic. But after you've > gotten familiar with an OS that almost NEVER crashes, it's hard to go > back. I used to brag that my office full of Macs only crashed once or > twice a day each, rather than the several times a day that a PC did. > Now my 'Book gets restarted only when a software install insists on > it. It typically goes WEEKS or even MONTHS between restarts. NO one > can say that about any flavor of the Classic OS. > > I guess that I why I am "chauvinistic" about OS X. It does the job > like NOTHING else can. Just like I tell my PC-using friends and > relatives: "It's time to switch." > > Yes, I guess SOME things ARE worth less (sometimes even worthless) > because they are older. > > (Quite the opposite with people, though, eh, Marta?) > > If Adobe thought that Pagemaker still had legs, they'd have upgraded > it to OS X and would still be selling it. > >> >> rob > > jonathan > -- > Jonathan Fletcher > jfletch at newmediaconstco.com > > > > | The next meeting of the Louisville Computer Society will > | be September 27 at Pitt Academy, 6010 Preston Highway. > | The LCS Web page is <http://www.kymac.org>. > | List posting address: <mailto:macgroup at erdos.math.louisville.edu> > | List Web page: <http://erdos.math.louisville.edu/macgroup> | The next meeting of the Louisville Computer Society will | be September 27 at Pitt Academy, 6010 Preston Highway. | The LCS Web page is <http://www.kymac.org>. | List posting address: <mailto:macgroup at erdos.math.louisville.edu> | List Web page: <http://erdos.math.louisville.edu/macgroup>
