It seems that most graphic artists can be categorized in two ways. (Yes, I'm already generalizing, and yes there are always exceptions - let's get that out of the way upfront). There are the schooled artists and the non-schooled.

I don't know if I've ever met a schooled graphic artist who wasn't deeply embedded in the Adobe school. Many schooled artists don't even consider other software.

Is it too soon for an aside already? Yes? Well bear with me.

I always thought it ironic that so many graphic artists used a Mac and Adobe products. They complain about how the Mac is superior to Windows yet it's far behind in sales and popularity. And how those unenlightened Windows users would be convinced of the Mac's superiority if only they'd give it a serious chance. Then they sit down and use Adobe products and ignore similar complaints from the CorelDraw community. If only they'd give it a serious chance.

Anyway.

When I was hired at my current job 12 years ago, I was using PageMaker for page layout, Illustrator for vector, and Photoshop for bitmap editing. As most of you know, this was (and in many cases still is) the de facto setup for DTP: Edit images in Photoshop, create the vector images in Illustrator, and place them all along with text in Quark or InDesign. Three applications... all expensive.

That's how I did it... 12 years ago.

Until I was shown CorelDraw.

The ability to combine a page layout application with a vector illustration program had obvious and immediate appeal. The fact that CorelDraw alone was far cheaper than Illustrator or Quark made it even more appealing. Once I took a look at PhotoPaint's integration with CorelDraw, and found that it was a viable alternative to Photoshop, I knew my reliance on Adobe products had ended. Once I realized I could create and output multi-page documents within my vector illustration program, I knew I had found a better way. Yet here I am 12 years later, still enlightening people who had no idea.

I worked prepress many years ago, before becoming a professional graphic artist. I recall seeing then (just as I'm sure it is still being done now) Quark or PageMaker documents sent over that really looked like an Illustrator file plopped into a .qxd document and sent over.

I still see this sometimes, and it seems rather silly now. Too many times people hang onto the things they are familiar with, even to the exclusion of better, faster, cheaper, and easier methods.

Fortunately with the rise of the PDF format, graphic artists are now allowed more freedom to choose which application they feel best suited to their abilities. I've heard some old-school Illustrator apologists who still claim to be able to tell when something has a "Draw" look to it. But besides these misguided fringe thinkers, many newer generation pre-press workers don't even care anymore. If the file is in a format they can work with and lacking any major issues, they don't care if it was created in CorelDraw, Illustrator, Freehand, or Windows Paint.

So in the 1990's, when CorelDraw was being beat up by the schooled establishment, those of us who discovered that this fantastic product more than met our needs continued to use it. Reports of Corel's death were greatly exaggerated.

Which leads back to my initial aside above.

Apple was pronounced dead continuously during the 90's and early 2000's, but its loyal base of users refused to let it die. I am not an Apple user, but I salute and respect those people who stood by a product they believed in.

Sometimes a product doesn't become the most popular, but its fan base keeps it alive. Apple remained on life support for several years and is actually gaining popularity now. It was kept alive by zealous users and openings in niche markets, such as the graphic arts industries.

Ironically, mainstream graphics industries are what CorelDraw had to avoid in order to make its own comeback. The product found its way into other niches, such as signage, slot glass, clothing design, and overseas markets.

Macs and CorelDraw have clawed their way back onto the radar and can no longer be ignored.

Perhaps most ironic is that these two products have never found much love for each other. Apple embraces almighty Adobe, while Corel only has eyes for ubiquitous Microsoft.

Alas, it's perhaps best this way. Chances are that if it were the other way around, and Corel/Apple and Adobe/Microsoft had taken sides, I'd still be using Illustrator, you wouldn't own an iPod, and Corel would reside only memory of a few loyal fans.