<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Friend or Foe? For Adobe and Quark, their actions speak for themselves.</title>
	<atom:link href="http://m-bossed.com/2010/03/quark-and-adobe.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://m-bossed.com/2010/03/quark-and-adobe.html</link>
	<description>A Media Blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 04 Feb 2012 18:07:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ryan McAbee</title>
		<link>http://m-bossed.com/2010/03/quark-and-adobe.html#comment-81</link>
		<dc:creator>Ryan McAbee</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Mar 2010 12:45:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://m-bossed.com/2010/03/friend-or-foe-for-adobe-quark-their-actions-speak-for-themselves.html#comment-81</guid>
		<description>@ Jeff,
Good points...
Adobe and Quark&#039;s business practices share similarities and differences. The similarity is that in both cases the pipeline or input side of print work is not controlled by the printer. By not owning the marketplace, printers have to meet certain requirements for membership and presumably pricing agreements.
The difference is in the approach. QuarkPromote, as you point out, offers any printer the opportunity to join and receive work. Adobe&#039;s would have sent the work to one single source, Kinko&#039;s.
Quark also recently stepped up an offer after Adobe canceled/shifted its Print Service Providers plan.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@ Jeff,<br />
Good points&#8230;<br />
Adobe and Quark&#8217;s business practices share similarities and differences. The similarity is that in both cases the pipeline or input side of print work is not controlled by the printer. By not owning the marketplace, printers have to meet certain requirements for membership and presumably pricing agreements.<br />
The difference is in the approach. QuarkPromote, as you point out, offers any printer the opportunity to join and receive work. Adobe&#8217;s would have sent the work to one single source, Kinko&#8217;s.<br />
Quark also recently stepped up an offer after Adobe canceled/shifted its Print Service Providers plan.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeff Lazerus</title>
		<link>http://m-bossed.com/2010/03/quark-and-adobe.html#comment-80</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeff Lazerus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Mar 2010 00:47:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://m-bossed.com/2010/03/friend-or-foe-for-adobe-quark-their-actions-speak-for-themselves.html#comment-80</guid>
		<description>Ryan,
The difference between the Adobe debacle and QuarkPromote is night and day. Quark is NOT actually using its software to send work to Kinko&#039;s. What Quark is doing is sending work from its site to printers who get on their network. It&#039;s more work for printers, not less, as in the Adobe case.
Quark has always been more printer-friendly than Adobe.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ryan,<br />
The difference between the Adobe debacle and QuarkPromote is night and day. Quark is NOT actually using its software to send work to Kinko&#8217;s. What Quark is doing is sending work from its site to printers who get on their network. It&#8217;s more work for printers, not less, as in the Adobe case.<br />
Quark has always been more printer-friendly than Adobe.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using disk: basic
Page Caching using disk: enhanced
Object Caching 694/698 objects using disk: basic

Served from: m-bossed.com @ 2012-02-05 15:04:17 -->
