Talk:Adobe InDesign

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Pro-Wikipedia Bias in Screenshot[edit]

The screenshot used seems unprofessional. Perhaps a more neutral example would be more appropriate?

—Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 03:46, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

not natively compatible[edit]

"Because CS2 has code tightly integrated with the PPC architecture and hence not natively compatible with the Intel processors used in Macs starting from 2006, porting these products is a huge endeavor."

WTF? There have been Windows/X86 versions of InDesign since 1.5 or earlier.

Clearly, the original comment refers to the need to convert the Macintosh code.


There seems to be redundancy between this and InDesign.

Merged. -Peter

Wikipedia is not a link farm[edit]

I know "Wikipedia is not a link farm," but I thought the recent pruning of external links went quite a bit too far. A lot of those seemed pretty useful. Do others agree? the pruning - Thomas —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tphinney (talkcontribs).

Yes, I looked at the old list and I think a lot of what's there is both useful and appropriate.00:43, 17 October 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk)
I was the one who pruned the links - many of these links can be found easily using a Google search and do not shed much light on InDesign and do not help users who actually want to find out more about InDesign - many of them are just commercial sites. Feel free to restore some links that are relevant, but before the pruning, there were almost twenty external sites. That's too much - and not needed. –- kungming·2 | (Talk·Contact) 23:04, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Upset users.[edit]

Is there a citation for "This decision has upset many Intel Mac early-adoptors, especially since Adobe initially announced it would be first with a complete line of Universal Binary products?" I can't find anything about any announcement or verification of either of these claims after a g-search. =Sjledet 11:06, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Good call. –- kungming·2 | (Talk·Contact) 14:52, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

too brief[edit]

This article is way too brief, for such a big complicated important program.-- 00:04, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

As a user, I am willing to write something about the features of InDesign - perhaps along the line of the Photoshop article. What exactly, do you think should be added? –- kungming·2 (Talk)
Well, I imagine this program has about 1000 features. And this article basically mentions none of them, tells us nothing about what the program does or how it does it. Is this program truly a totally generic, indistinguishable DTP program? It just seems like an appropriate, well-written article would be very long, thorough, and detailed.-- 22:56, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia articles are not user manuals, so there is no need to cover every each and single function of the software. However, a reasonably extensive summary of the features should be provided indeed.--Kellerpm (talk) 16:26, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

file formats[edit]

Many readers will be coming to this article for advice about accessing InDesign data files. Can any versions of ID create any native internal-format data files that can be read by any other programs? If so, please give complete details, so that people without ID can have some clue about how to access such files.-- 22:56, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

InDesign can export PDF documents, but I'm not aware of any other software (Quark perhaps) that can read the native format... Average users will not find too many .indd files floating around because they tend to just be used in design and printing. Crocadillion 04:55, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

New Screenshot[edit]

I just changed the screenshot to the lastest vesion (CS3 running in OSX), hope no one minds... NeoRicen 14:03, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't mind, but I wonder why people (and not just you) are so enthusiastic about updating screen shots in this way? The article is, or should not be, about "InDesign CS3, the version available today", but should be about the software and its history, all versions. What is to be gained with this rush to update the screen shot? Notinasnaid 14:08, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
Well I just figured since the program has been updated the screenshot should too, I mean the icon was updated. Also people who don't have the program will see the article and the screenshot will be of the version that's available for them. Current owners of past versions don't need a screenshot because they have the program and a screenshot of an old version would be useless to someone looking to buy. NeoRicen 01:38, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
That's a strong argument, though the idea that Wikipedia is a buyer's guide is somehow disturbing (if unavoidable). So long as the same argument is not used to remove information about older versions from the article. Notinasnaid 07:14, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Couldn't older screen shots exist in the article in the section that talks about versions (presuming there is such a section)? It could be argued that the images are as helpful as the text in this kind of situation. Also as a Mac user, I find it novel and interesting to see Adobe software on windows... Crocadillion 04:51, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

What is with the current screenshot? It looks absolutely shocking with the "Wikipedia Rocks!" scrawled across it. Also, it's a screenshot of the Windows version, not exactly representative of the average userbase of InDesign. (talk) 12:26, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

I've just updated the screenshot to CS5 on Mac OS X. No silly scrawling in this one! AussieNickuss (talk) 13:00, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Screenshot updated = Adobe InDesign CS5 running on Windows 7 x86 = with Wikipedia Design --Umar1996 (talk) 14:43, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

History of versions[edit]

Has anyone considered adding a table showing screenshots of the history of versions and significant changes, sort of like you get in some computer magazines? List_of_Ford_Taurus_models was the example I was using. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 11:14, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

I'm aware of the policy "What Wikipedia is not", but this is intended to be a summary, nothing else. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 11:12, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

InDesign CS6[edit]

My name is Ferry Roland , What About The Indesign Features? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rolandhelper (talkcontribs) 03:05, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Middle Eastern Versions[edit]

Why is the entire article about the Middle Eastern versions? -- (talk) 17:25, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Wikipedia is a work in progress. So, it is probably because no one has yet had time or resources to write anything else. Do you?
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 23:56, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Assessment comment[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Adobe InDesign/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Last edited at 10:07, 22 June 2013 (UTC). Substituted at 06:43, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Adobe InDesign. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required on behalf of editors regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification, as with any edit, using the archive tools per instructions below. This message updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 1 May 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:04, 6 December 2017 (UTC)