[Date Prev][Date Next][Subject Prev][Subject Next][Date Index][Subject Index]
- Subject: Re: Question
- From: leslie bialler lb136@xxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1999 18:07:56 -0400
> This may be a dumb question,
I'm sure you're forgiven. :-)
> but... . I've been free lancing as a proof
> reader/copy editor with a publishing house that uses Pagemaker and Quark
> with which they seem to be having constant problems. There would seem
> to be room for a really good program.
We use Quark at Columbia.
> I've never used either Pagemaker nor Quark but with all the its
> variables, why can't Xywrite do the job? What do the aforementioned
> programs have that would be impossible to incorporate into Xywrite?
Pagemaking capability, my dear Cate. Pagemaker and Quark do page
layouts. They do not do wordprocessing. Have you ever watched the
operators do their stuff? Perhaps if you asked them to show you how it
works, they might make time for you. Might cost you a lunch, but hey,
you'll learn stuff.
> Please pardon my ignorance,
S'all right. ;-)
> just thought of it as a possible marketplace
> that seems to be vulnerable and a potential way of encouraging XYwrite
> to re-enter as a universal word processor cum publishing page making
What page-making qualifications do you imagine XyWrite has?
> Thanks for your consideration.
Why sure. Oh, BTW: Quark (I don't know about Pagemaker) works very
nicely as the "back end" to XyWrite files. We filter the XyWrite files
into Quark, using XyWrite SS/US formatting, and then, as if by wizardry,
proofs are created. As I said, it's an interesting thing to see in
So spring for that lunch!
Columbia University Press