[scribus] Scribus bundles (was : ! ;-))

[jwminer at accessvt.com]

I think it's important to get our history straight. There are a
couple of errors in Joseph Harris's message.

Joseph wrote:
> One point (that maybe is already understood), Windows has three
> active sets of users. 98, Xp and Vista. While Vista is being
> pushed hard it not not popular with a very large group of Xp
> users and Xp may remain the main - at least strongly competing -
> OS at least until Longhorn. 98 users are much less likely to be
> in the market for scribus, and it is now probably a rump.
>
> I am not sure that Longhorn will have more success. Xp solved the
> stability problem (I understand) and possibly SP3 has made enough
> improvements. Vista offers another learning curve, and Longhorn
> will as well. Judgement on this will affect how Windows bundles
> are planned and executed.

As has already been posted, "Longhorn" was the development name for
Windows Vista and its relatives. The next version of Windows has the
development name of "Windows 7."

Scribus is not supported under Windows 98, SE, Me, or earlier. It
requires Windows 2000, Windows XP, Windows Vista, and the
corresponding server versions. Windows 2000 is Windows NT 5, XP is
NT 5.1, and Vista is NT 6. The NT versions of Windows have always
been stable. However, Windows NT up to W2K was geared and marketed
to business users. It was only with the end of the Win 9x/Me series
and the arrival of XP that Windows NT became a consumer OS as well
as business OS.

SP3 for XP made very few changes. Vista SP 1 made significant
improvements. The "learning curve" for Vista is no larger than going
from Win 98 to W2K or XP.

Vista is liked better than reading talkback sections would lead you
to believe. Every "regular user" I know who has Vista likes it.
These people do not read or post in forums and talkback sections. My
nearly one-year-old laptop came with Vista Home Premium and I had
read all the negatives, but I went into it with an open mind. I
haven't had a bit of trouble with Vista, my computer does not run
slowly, I have never had a Vista system crash, and almost all my
programs run fine under Vista--and some of those are 16-bit programs
going back to Win 3.1 days, many Win 95 programs, and even a couple
of DOS programs. My four printers are all supported under Vista; one
is a LaserJet 4/4M that I got in early 1993 and one is an Epson
color inkjet dating back to 2000. My OS usage is about 65% Linux and
35% Vista or XP. Many Vista bashers are Mac or Linux fanboys who let
no opportunity pass to slam Microsoft. Others are people who have
never used Vista but they've "heard bad things" and have an opinion
based on hearsay. Some are techies who are driven by geek chic,
which currently dictates that you must bash Vista. The rest are
people with legitimate gripes. I *hope* none of them are people who
upgraded computers with inadequate hardware. It is definitely true
that Vista requires spiffier hardware than XP, but most computers
sold now have enough RAM (2 gigs minimum) and processing power. Many
did not when Vista first came out.

That said, there's nothing wrong with XP and no compelling reason to
upgrade from XP. One of my three other computers is fully Vista
capable, but I don't see myself upgrading it unless I find an
extraordinary sale on Vista (which I haven't).

As for the popularity of Scribus, remember that professional-level
desktop publishing software is NOT for the mass market. It's not so
much the technical depth of real DTP software as what someone needs
to know to do respectable DTP. It used to be that people were
specialists in typesetting or graphics manipulation. Skilled and
trained specialists set the type and prepared the graphics and a
trained graphic designer designed and laid out the pages. A
professional human printer did the color seps, imposition, plates,
and printing.

Then came Adobe PostScript and Aldous PageMaker (not
Quark--PageMaker was first). For the first time, it was possible for
the design, typesetting, graphics preparation, and final copy to be
done by one person on a computer. Of course, it was also possible to
have different people prepare text, set the type, prepare the
graphics, and deliver the files to the person who brought them into
the DTP software. Gradually, as expectations changed, budgets
tightened, and the software became more capable, the whole job
became more likely to be done by one person.

Of course, non-professional users saw the usefulness of and
opportunity in using the computer for things like club newsletters,
business cards, brochures, posters, and flyers. So lower-level
software incorporated support for doing this kind of kitchen-table
DTP. Unfortunately, too many people assumed the computer could make
up for their own lack of knowledge of type and graphic design. Just
find a template and add your own stuff. NOT!!! Even worse, many
users have NO IDEA that graphic design and typography are *skills*
that should be learned before they churn out ugly work with their
software--whether pro or consumer level. We thus see the flood of
horrible design and dreadful typography that are common today.

I am happy that Scribus is not trying to be a consumer-level product
and is aiming for professional standards. It is vital that the
software incorporate the tools needed for high-level typography,
which we do not have yet but which are on the roadmap. The ability
to produce excellent PDFs is vital because they free the user from
being trapped into the software the prepress people and printers
use.

Aim for DTP professionals and do not make things easier in hopes of
attracting more amateurs. Interested amateurs will come if they
realize the need to acquire knowledge and skills to improve their
document creation and want software that allows them to put their
skills into practice. This doesn't preclude having a logical,
elegant interface that makes life easier for the skilled user.

On a final note, I'm amused at how PageMaker is mentioned so often
as if it's a current product. Hey--PageMaker became unsupported
years ago. It was great in its day, but that day passed long ago.
Quark became widely used before InDesign was created; InDesign has
been picking up a lot of the professional market share. Ventura was
an excellent program and while it's still alive theoretically, Corel
doesn't promote it at all and shows no signs of updating it. By all
means continue to use PageMaker if it meets your needs, but don't
talk of it as if it's a current professional option.
--Judy Miner
   USA

Registered Linux User #397786