ez002644@castor.ucdavis.edu (Eric W. Douglas) (06/06/91)
[lot's o' stuff about a rough install deleted...] First, let me say that I use Quark, installed many different versions, and still use it, without any problems. Second, I've used PageMaker... XPress licks it no problem. Much more versatility in Quark Xpress. >forced to at virtual gunpoint. I don't do marketing surveys >for free. I *DO* demonstrate software & recommend it to members >of the University community; I will be recommending a great >many copies of PageMaker to people. Hey, you can't blame a company for trying to protect its software from being violated and run on more than one machine... I personally don't like this, but hey, if I was in their shoes, I'd want to get paid for what was rightfully mine. I tend to think that Quark has done a fairly efficient job of copy protecting their software, without making it too difficult to use. >I do not need to deal with a second string company with an >attitude problem towards its customers. (By the way, I called >their tech support number to inquire about my problems, and was >told that everyone who could help was "in a meeting." STRIKE >THREE, Quark!) If you're that upset, write a letter to the Customer Relations department at Quark. Hell, you might get a technician showing up on your doorstep with a complementary 10 pack of XPress, willing to install them for you. (Well, so this is a little far fetched..) My point is, before you go off half-cocked bad mouthing them on the nets, maybe a little more effort on your part is in order. Call me crazy, but I guess it is *possible* that everyone in tech support *was* in a meeting. Whenever I have installed Quark XPress, I find that *following the directions* that come with the package, yield a painless install. --eric Eric W. Douglas * ericd@caticsuf.csufresno.edu Dept. of Computer Science * ericd@yosemite.csufresno.edu California State University, Fresno * ez002644@deneb.ucdavis.edu
guelzow@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Andreas J. Guelzow) (06/06/91)
In article <13188@aggie.ucdavis.edu> ez002644@castor.ucdavis.edu (Eric W. Douglas) writes: > >[lot's o' stuff about a rough install deleted...] > >First, let me say that I use Quark, installed many different >versions, and still use it, without any problems. Second, I've >used PageMaker... XPress licks it no problem. Much more versatility >in Quark Xpress. > > >>forced to at virtual gunpoint. I don't do marketing surveys >>for free. I *DO* demonstrate software & recommend it to members >>of the University community; I will be recommending a great >>many copies of PageMaker to people. > >Hey, you can't blame a company for trying to protect its software >from being violated and run on more than one machine... I personally >don't like this, but hey, if I was in their shoes, I'd want to >get paid for what was rightfully mine. I tend to think that Quark >has done a fairly efficient job of copy protecting their software, >without making it too difficult to use. I can hardly see what a multiple screen marketing survey has to do with protecting one's software. It should be no more useful than asking for the name and company. > >>I do not need to deal with a second string company with an >>attitude problem towards its customers. (By the way, I called >>their tech support number to inquire about my problems, and was >>told that everyone who could help was "in a meeting." STRIKE >>THREE, Quark!) > >If you're that upset, write a letter to the Customer Relations >department at Quark. Hell, you might get a technician showing >up on your doorstep with a complementary 10 pack of XPress, willing >to install them for you. (Well, so this is a little far fetched..) >My point is, before you go off half-cocked bad mouthing them on >the nets, maybe a little more effort on your part is in order. >Call me crazy, but I guess it is *possible* that everyone in tech >support *was* in a meeting. While it is of course possible that everyone in tech support was in a meeting that doesn't change the fact that this wouldn't be the case in a company dedicated to helping its customers. -- Andreas J. Guelzow <guelzow@ccu.umanitoba.ca> Department of Mathematics & Astronomy University of Manitoba
Adam.Frix@p18.f20.n226.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Adam Frix) (06/10/91)
ez002644@castor.ucdavis.edu (Eric W. Douglas) writes:
EWD> Hey, you can't blame a company for trying to protect its software
EWD> from being violated and run on more than one machine... I personally
EWD> don't like this, but hey, if I was in their shoes, I'd want to
EWD> get paid for what was rightfully mine. I tend to think that Quark
EWD> has done a fairly efficient job of copy protecting their software,
EWD> without making it too difficult to use.
yes, but there are still many of us out here in the real world that don't appreciate that Quark (or any company that uses any form of copy protection) starts out with the assumption that its customers are crooks.
Bad PR move.
--Adam--
****************************************************************
* "...it was a lot easier to train a pilot to pick up *
* a rock, than train a scientist to land on the moon." *
* --Mark Berent, in _Steel Tiger_ *
****************************************************************
* CIS: 70721,504 *
* America OnLine: AdamFrix *
* Internet: Adam.Frix@p18.f20.n226.z1.FIDONET.ORG *
****************************************************************
--
Adam Frix via cmhGate - Net 226 fido<=>uucp gateway Col, OH
UUCP: ...!osu-cis!n8emr!cmhgate!20.18!Adam.Frix
INET: Adam.Frix@p18.f20.n226.z1.FIDONET.ORG