PageMaker supports high-resolution printing and color management, which ensures that color is always consistent, from proofs to final output. There's no doubt that PageMaker has it all over Publisher when it comes to advanced publishing jobs. If you want one program to produce both paper and HTML versions of documents, Publisher 2002 is a better bet.

PageMaker's Web pages are only approximations of the originals the formatting is off and columns are misplaced, while PageMaker-created shapes such as ovals and boxes are never translated. Like version 6.5, PageMaker 7.0 can export documents in HTML format for Web publishing, but the results fall short of the much more affordable Microsoft Publisher. (Although PageMaker's newsletter templates are superior.) You need to dedicate training time to get the most out of this program. PageMaker lacks the slick wizards and step-by-step templates of Publisher. But businesses on a budget (and all home users) should still steer toward Microsoft Publisher 2002.Ĭompared to lower-priced SOHO (small office/home office) desktop publishers, particularly Microsoft Publisher 2002, PageMaker is a challenge for novices. PageMaker 7.0, with new tools for turning documents into PDF files and churning out catalogs from data in spreadsheets and databases, is best suited for small to midsized businesses that want to distribute Acrobat Reader-formatted files, produce sophisticated catalogs, and work on the Mac as well as the PC. At $499, version 7.0 is still a tweener: too expensive for budget-conscious, home-based and small-business users and not powerful enough for professional designers. It has also been thumped in the price wars by low-end competitors such as Microsoft Publisher. PageMaker may have started the whole desktop publishing deal 16 years ago, but it has long played second banana to high-end QuarkXPress.

Adobe pagemaker mac