Scribus 1.0 Released

McShazbot writes "Graphics.com has this article about the release of Scribus 1.0 (homepage, mirror) desktop publishing software. Check out some screenshots. If it can even marginally compete with the industry leader, this is a big deal -- I know a lot of people for whom Quark is the killer app that prevents them from moving to Linux, and most of them are tired of paying a grand for the privilege of using it."

Comments

Mac OS X Version

[daeley]

For Mac OS X users, there is a version of Scribus (RC1 of 1.0, I believe.) in fink-unstable. Not the latest version (and not stable of course), but might be worth a look-see.

Re:Mac OS X Version

[darien]

Quark may be really, really good, but at close to $1000 bucks, I have looking around for an alternative.

Thing is, it's not even "really, really good." It's OK; it does the job. But it has many excruciating foibles, certainly up as far as version 5 for the Mac, which I still have to use at work. Its undo facility is embarrassingly underpowered (it's particularly great that you can't undo "replace all"). It insists on showing graphics onscreen only as low resolution previews, and won't even print them at high resolution. It doesn't let you shrink images below 10%, nor is there any equivalent to InDesign's "fit image proportionally to box" command. It crashes while trying to render previews of graphics that are too large. It won't let you make different pages different sizes. Creating a PDF is maddeningly slow and often requires gigabytes of disk space to eventually create a 100Mb file. Its native file format doesn't support embedding fonts or even images, so OPI hell is never far away. I could go on.

I guess if I have a point, it's that Quark is crammed with brain-damaged misfeatures that a decent, active open-source coding community would have fixed long ago. It's no surprise to me that InDesign is already making big inroads into its market share, and if a credible free alternative were to emerge as well, Quark would have no choice but to ramp up the quality of their product and/or drop the price. Sounds to me like a win for the end user.

Interesting... but ...

[Lightman_73]

I remember a couple of really *great* DTP programs on the Amiga, they were killer apps, but they didn't survive.

Being a killer app doesn't mean you won't be crushed and killed...

Anyway, nice to see some free good app in the DTP arena under linux.

Not quite Quark

[be-fan]

But might make Microsoft Publisher unnecessary :)

Good luck!

[Zanthany]

No offense to the wonderful people creating the Scribus software. It's great to see options other than pay-your-left-nut-for-software.

However, this is mostly pie-in-the-sky. With the new release of Quark for OS X (http://www.quark.com/products/xpress/mac_osx.html ), I bet many, many more OS X boxen will be sold, averting any "Great Migration" to Linux anytime soon by the DTP folk.

Re:Good luck!

[bogie]

"However, this is mostly pie-in-the-sky"

Why's that? So the big DTP houses won't move to Scribis. Who cares? That doesn't mean this won't turn out to be a valuable tool for anyone who doesn't have the cash to plop down down on commercial DTP program. Contrary to popular belief free software isn't Always about destroying commercial competitors.

Up till now there simply hasn't been anything DTP running on linux worthing mentioning. I'm really happy to see a workable Pagemaker alternative available on linux. Let's not forget that since Adobe won't tough linux with a 10 foot pole Scribus is well on its way to 100% marketshare on linux.

Gimp+Scribus=quality publishing software for free on a free platform. This will be VERY useful for those schools, small businesses, and users who want to do some graphics work without breaking the bank.

Just because this won't spur a mass migration to linux doesn't mean this software won't be valuable to a hell of a lot of people.

Re:Good luck!

[scribusdocs]

My first slashdot post..:o

Let me begin by noting I wrote most of the documentation and have done significant testing of Scribus since 0.3.7. I also support DTP and pre-press folks professionally.

I can assure you Scribus was not created to be a "Quark killer" or divert Quark or Mac users to Linux. That would be stupid and pointless. I find in the pre-press business here and there folks who are quite bigoted about Quark and/or Macs, but that is another discussion.. MacOSX in this case is irrelevant. Moreover, Windows 2k and XP in particular have reached near parity in DTP app support. Until MacOSX, they are far more stable than the older Mac OS's. I have clients who are magazine and newpaper publishers who run entire production departments not on Macs, but on Win2k.

Quark is not the end all and be all of DTP.Quark has many many weaknesses going forward into the new PDF oriented workflows of commercial printing. Personally, I think Indesign 2.0.2 is the current state of the art in DTP. It is much better than earlier versions. Printers who bitch about the current version, typically need to update their RIP's.

The value of Scribus stands alone. Scribus gives Linux and *nix users a badly needed tool for the desktop. Scribus gives Linux/*nix users around the world the ability to create content like hi-res PDF and DTP files, previously impossible before..

Scribus has many unique features and design goals which are somewhat different from Quark and Indesign:

• It is translated in 17 languages and porting to other languages is really easy. It also supports right to left languages like Arabic and Hebrew.
• It has the ability to create interactive PDF with hyperlinks, form fields and javascript. Only Acrobat can do this equally. Other DTP apps like Quark, Pagemaker and Indesign can do a very limited set of these features.
• It is much more user friendly than quark without the dumbed down wizards of other DTP apps.
• The Scribus format is XML and fully documented.
• With the optional color management of littlecms, the first open sourced color management system in any app. Hopefully, the GIMP folks will follow with CMYK support. Scribus supports CMYK fully, including importing spot colors in EPS.
• We're having fun!!

Screenshots mirror

[Cee]

Here.

Fonts and such

[djrisk]

What is the availability of type faces on Linux? Part of the Mac's dominance in the DTP arena is that the type collection is so massive, and most converters don't do the fonts justice (in previous experiences, this held true, not sure if it's like that now). A strong offerring of type face compatibility as well as image capability (scanning/editing), would help users move to Linux for their DTP needs.

Re:Desktop Software

[listen]

Quanta + is turning into a pretty damn good web designer thingy - it uses a modified khtml to do Wysiwg or visual page layout as they call it. Thats in cvs. Should be out with KDE 3.2, sometime in the autumn. PHP support is strongest atm, 'twould be good if it got some more JSP and Zope support in there. Maybe even asp.net for mono....

Kivio and Dia are visio like tools.
Kivio is getting some active development after a bit of a lull, and Dia has AFAIK been actively developed for quite some time.

Good enough...

[sterno]

Like many other Linux applications, this product is probably good enough. Is quark better? Almost certainly, and you'll pay $1000 premium for that improvment. Is Office better than OpenOffice. Yes. But most people don't need everything that makes Office better. Is Photoshop better than Gimp? Yes.

If your livelihood is dependent on it, then it may very well be worth $1000. But if you are just doing some amateur work or you have a small home business needing some DTP, then this is good enough. Programs like this change the game because it allows people to dabble in whole new areas without having to shell out a premium price.

$1000 == $3/day

[cwikla]

I know a lot of people for whom Quark is the killer app that prevents them from moving to Linux, and most of them are tired of paying a grand for the privilege of using it.

You have to be joking. Anyone who whines about the prices of these products probably uses it as a convenience, and not for critical work. If they did they wouldn't complain about the $1000, or the $3/day a year -- you know, that StarBucks latte they have every day -- to use it. I'm always amazed by software organizations that try to skimp on paying for tools because things "cost too much", and then make that tool an integral part of their process. Alot of programs fall into this arena of specialized software with high price tags and great at what they do (or at least some people find them great at what they do, I have no interest in debating what you or I think are great software): math software like Mathematica and MathCad, IDE's and other development tools for programmers, RoboHelp, PhotoShop, and on and on. These programs are NOT meant to be cheap programs for Joe Blow, they are meant to be specialized and essential tools for professionals, researchers, whatever, and due to how successfully they perform their task have very wide acceptance.

Sure it's great when a free tool shows up that is just as good as another product. I love free tools. But if your work with such a tool doesn't justify the $3/day, you probably aren't the market they are shooting for.

Re:OT: can you translate?

[Anonymous Coward]

"Scribus is a particularly poor choice if you're trying to scale best-of-breed users to engage proactive content"

• Scale = climb on
• Best-of-breed = well-bred, aristocratic, upper class
• engage = agree to marry
• pro = call girl
• active = working
• content = happy

So, Don't use Scribus if you intend to climb over sombody who is using the services of an upper-class call girl who is happy in her job, in order to propose marriage.

Warning: being self employed I haven't worked in a corporate environment for some time so I may not have a completely correct interpretation of this jargon.

I work in the industry...

[azpenguin]

We use Quark at our newspaper, naturally. There's a few hundred licenses in the company. It is a damn expensive app. But consumables are even more expensive. We print directly to negatives, and film costs a good chunk of change. If there's a problem, we have to re-print the negs. If we have to re-plate, that's a bunch more money. If we don't know there's a problem till the press starts, there'll be hell to pay. Some papers are using new technology that lets them print directly to the printing plate. The materials for that are even more expensive. With Quark, we know what we're getting when we click "Print." $1000 may be expensive for a program, but we use more than that in film and plates every day. Quark Inc. isn't a very well liked company - but when you know what you're getting for sure in your finished product, that makes all the difference.

YEEEHAH!!!! CMYK for GIMP via Scribus

[Tsu Dho Nimh]

"Is Photoshop better than Gimp? Yes."

But the GIMP plus Scribus would give me the last missing bit of PhotoShop/Quark, the CMYK and pre-press stuff.

Edit photos in the GIMP, which in a head-to-head test several years ago (a very early GIMP for Windows) produced finished photos that were not distinguishable from the same photos edited in PhotoShop. Then bring them into Scribus and export the color separations.

Save about $2000 :)