Product Reviews

You have to hand it to Quark. It's been trying hard recently to show us that it's not only listening to its users, but responding to our needs. There are definitely signs of that in QuarkXPress 7, particularly as it will run natively on Intel Macs when it ships. Now it's launched a new application aimed at users who don't need the full functions of XPress.

CopyDesk isn't really a new program, as it used to be part of Quark Publishing System. However, Quark has decided to float it as a standalone package designed for use in conjunction with either XPress or XPress Passport Edition, depending on your needs. Essentially, CopyDesk is a word processor than can handle special versions of QuarkXPress layouts. The idea is that the designer can create pages with XPress, and when the designs are ready, they can export the layouts as CopyDesk files.

Editors and writers can then use CopyDesk to flow their text into these layouts, rewrite it, reformat it, proof it and so on. When they're finished, the designer imports their copy into the original Quark layout. In theory, everyone should be happy: the designer should be happy because the editors can't mess around with any of the layout elements, only the text; the editors should be happy because they know exactly how many words they need to write, where sub-heads need to go and so on; and publishers should be happy because they don't have to buy full versions of XPress for everyone.

How about in practice? Well, there are a few problems. First, if you have difficulties with versioning in your company, steer clear of CopyDesk. Since CopyDesk can't use XPress layouts, only specially saved versions, there are going

ADVERTISEMENT

to be at least two copies of every file around. Although it should be easy to use naming schemes and so on to prevent confusion, you just know someone will eventually wipe over one version or the other.

Second, CopyDesk isn't a very good word processing program. While CopyDesk is a slight improvement over XPress in terms of having word counts, line depths and other useful information in the standard Measurements palette, it's still essentially XPress with the layout tools removed. That means when editors have a choice between the useful spelling, grammar and editing tools of Word and the slightly anaemic CopyDesk dictionary, they're almost always going to choose Word.

Third, QuarkXPress 7 is due soon. It has a fine series of collaboration tools for allowing multiple users to edit the same layout simultaneously. Its composition zones enable designers to define what areas of a layout are editable, making CopyDesk slightly superfluous to anyone except the seriously cash-strapped. Publishers might well be inclined to buy the full version of XPress 7, rather than the cut-down version that is CopyDesk.

Lastly, CopyDesk isn't exactly identical to XPress. There's different terminology: layouts aren't layouts, they're 'articles', text chains are 'components', tables of contents are 'lists', and so on. Moreover, it handles these features in different ways to XPress, which seems unnecessary and is going to confuse a few people from the outset. With the additional costs of training courses thrown in, CopyDesk no longer looks like such a steal.

CopyDesk does have some handy features, however, many of which we wish were built into XPress. New to version 3.5 are change-tracking and redlining, which enable editors to keep track of what text has been changed and roll back any changes that shouldn't have been made. An improved notes feature lets editors leave messages on layouts without recourse to text boxes on the pasteboard full of 72pt text.

Nevertheless, QuarkCopyDesk is probably twice the price it should be for its features. If it was more like a word processor and less like a hobbled, slightly confused version of XPress, it would be a useful addition to most workflows. As it stands, it's a luxury most companies can do without.