I got an email from them asking that question and my response was: It looks like a single story “a”

Ouuch. It seems their customer policy and Graphic Identity remain on a “bottom-level”. They have to put a gun at my head to switch back from InDesign. Sorry I just had to...

Cheers

Agreed, Dan.
It wouldn’t have taken too much more to tweak the shape and create a spark of recognition so valued in creating brand.

I think its important to not kill Quark but to try to gently nudge them to a better solution. The pending Adobe monopoly of the market is not a good idea.

It looks like a single story “a”

I think it looks like the pushpin from Google maps.

“They have to put a gun at my head to switch back from InDesign. Sorry I just had to…”

Stefan, this is so very true. They need to rethink their business model fast, or they are doomed.

Also, this looks quite a bit like the shape for Sterling Brands: http://www.sterlingbrands.com/ , not to mention the 1,000 other marks that incorporate this same shape.

Snip snip here,
    snip snip there...

It reminds me of the Technorati logo.

Quark sent me (and a million others) an email today to show off their new brand. My response to them was, “It is far easier to change your branding than your customer underhanding.”

a-men,

ChrisL

Looks like somebody forgot to close their (true) italics. :)

Agree, I don’t like Monopoly at all. And believe me, as a Swede I have had a big chunk of it in the past. Quark had a really good chanse in the beginning and blew it big time! They just got lazy and fat from the initial sucess.

Couldn’t afford a good designer? I think Quark is loosing so much clientele that there’s no more money for design. Props for InDesign! Its time for designers to move away from designing to a trend rather than a client.

Quark can rebrand all they want, but Xpress is still an inferior product. While monopolies are never a good idea, they’re making it easier for Adobe to snatch up their market share. InDesign is a much better product and when companies realize how much money they’ll save (particularly smaller firms) by just buying Creative Suite, they’ll be left in the dust.

If Quark wants to start anew, they need to set their price point for Xpress even lower and introduce programs that can compete with Adobe. One trick ponies don’t last very long.

I’m not impressed, but then I can’t remember what the old one looked like either, so it can’t have been up to much.
What I do remember about the Quark name is that the P in XPress is capitalized.
Really, Quark is such a good name (subatomic particles? oh yeah.), they don’t have to worry about the logo.
As for the product, it still has a huge customer base, and people have been writing it off vs IndDesign (just like Apple vs Microsoft) for ages, and it ain’t dead yet.
BTW, Adobe’s symbol is no great shakes, rather prosaic, looks like a character from the Stop typeface.

People like my boss will always stick with Quark. People whom are too stubborn to admit that they need to hand over the flippin’ credit card and license a new software package.

*seg*

Gimme a break

I guess Apple already took the good ’Q’ design?

That Scottish Arts Council thing is really, really unfortunate, particularly since Quark is an international brand. Whatever, their new look is just rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. Though, they still have enough market share to turn it around...

Even I designed a symbol using a better Q than Quarks in 1989.
It was for a Water Quality campaign. Here is a GIF:
http://www.faceshift.com/H2O-quality-symbol.gif

ChrisL

I think the new Quark logo is just fine. Unfortunately, with a symbol that simple, it’s inevitable that somebody somewhere would have already done pretty much the same thing, thus the Scottish Arts Council.

They’ve succeeded in getting folks talking about the company, anyway.

Cheers,

T

“They’ve succeeded in getting folks talking about the company, anyway.”

Yes they have—in the same negative way that has brought them to their current state of hospice residence.

ChrisL

Compare http://www.quark.com/ and http://www.acdsystems.com/ :)

A.

It looks like a single story “a”

Like the “a” in this typeface?

Actually, Quark is about to announce a merger with the Scottish Arts Council. The new entity will be called Squark.

Do you think this rebrand will give him a second life?

Does anyone think the similarity to so many non-Quark things be a legal problem for them. Hacks. ?

The Scottish Arts Council is most likely the only entity that has any legal legs to stand on, as far as litigation goes.

Peter, maybe you should get royalties!

I think their new identity is just another example of how Quark underestimates the intelligence of their user-base. I think a rebranding was/is necessary, but they have to make real, and not just surface changes, both to their product, and how they deal with their users. Their recent print-campaign was ridiculous - a series of tightly cropped “funky” designers talking about how great Quark is - like we don’t what Quark does and doesn’t do by now. “...Pride goes before a fall...”

So Pantone 368 is now Quark Green. Shouldn’t it really be named Quark Green with Envy?

Nobody needs kill Quark. They seem to be doing an excellent job on their own.

The logo is less than impressive.

Can I ask you something. When Quark was the only player in town did they do anything to improve the product? My answer is no. So now InDesign is poised to be the only player in town and you feel confortable Adobe will continue to improve their product. I don’t think so, unless there is competition. Don’t kill Quark, make them compete. I don’t use Quark I haven’t since InDesign 1.5, but I want InDesign 4 to be tremendous not just average.

Nice point dan. I couldn’t agree more. Competition brings us (as consumers) better products.

First thought was that it looked like Punchstock’s ’P’, but skewed.

Secondly, I think that Adobe should continue their monopolous rise, because the software they put out consistently f*ing slays the competition. If designers can’t make the switch, they’re just LAZY.

Mathew Foster
Portland, Oregon

Photoshop has no competition and they improve it regularly. It seems that Adobe’s plan is to constantly come out with new revisions to keep the revenue from their existing customers flowing back.
The only prayer for Quark is to be bought out by someone who gives a damn.

ChrisL

test

test
Pouvez-vous détailler d’avantage votre pensée?

Sniff of blood in the air?

Personally, I seriously doubt Quark copied these logos.
This is what happens when you use such simple elements without any
distinguishing features. Quark’s new symbol may have been more unique say in the 1950/60s but today...well you see what I mean:
http://www.artworkers.org/
http://www.alcone.co.uk/
http://www.scottisharts.org.uk/images/logos/sac.gif

Quark faces Scotland in new logo nightmare:
http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/index.cfm?RSS&NewsID=12611

Whoa... betcha ten bucks they change it. Anybody want to start a pool? :)

How did you come across Artworkers and Alcone? Did you already know about them, or did you search in some way? I guess you’d need a technique more sophisticated than googling “funny little circle with a squared off corner logo”?

It would be nice if they changed it. In one of those articles they say that they have 5 other versions they could use. I wonder if any of those are “original”?

What I would really like to see is them do is spend some time making a usable layout program. I have never liked Quark and would really like to see them go away, it would make my job a lot easier. If they’re going to revamp stuff at least make a good layout program.

“How did you come across Artworkers and Alcone?”
It’s all over the web on design forums, blogs, posts etc.

Now this is unfortunate.

Quark Press Release:
“Show everyone why I’m different “
Publishing leader Quark adopts new logo and identity
http://www.quark.com/about/presscenter/prview.jsp?idx=633

And on it goes.
http://store.akademiks.com/
http://www.photoobjects.net/

It looks like way too many companies have a lack of ingenuity.

Tony Spaeth has a nice review of the brand over at www.identityworks.com. check out the review here: http://identityworks.com/reviews/2005/quark.htm