As an Autstralian seeing the US political system from the outside, I couldn't agree more - at least about the need for finance reform.
Australia has its fair share of problems too, but many of the things that are routine for politicians in the US would be illegal here. Sadly, we seem to be on a trend toward a system more like the US - lately conflicts of interests by politcians have barely merited a mild telling off.
... here's where to get a decent virus scanner - free for personal use - and go here to get a firewall. Do the rest of us a favour and install them, would you?"
More seriously, I do think that's worth a mention - for the parents as much as the children.
Let the other office staff get frustrated and wash them with bleach then scrub them out. Just make sure you have good, up-to-date backups first (of course, you already do - right?).
That way you'll get nice, NEW, non-stinky servers;-)
Thanks for your comments, they're much appreciated. I'll cover the Scribus status of all the various app features you mentioned, too.
I would be delighted if you could file a bug on <a href="http://bugs.scribus.net/">the Scribus bug tracker</a> for #4. I realise this involves creating a login, but it's not a big deal and you'll be able to describe the issue and why it's needed much better than I can. You'll no doubt be delighted that it's <b>not bugzilla</b>.
Regarding point 1, I'm not sufficiently familiar with layers in other DTP apps to comment. It'd be nice if you could file an RFE on the bug tracker that explains the issues and limitations, as we're currently considering the roadmap for 1.3/1.4 so "now's the time". I'm pretty sure Scribus's layers would do the job though.
Point 2 has been supported for a very, very long time. Create the two frames, select the first one, then use the "link text frames" button in the toolbar and click on the second frame. *bing* two linked frames.
Point three is also well supported, though I have no idea when the support was added - quite a while ago at least. Either use the ("X, Y, Z") panel of the properties window to rotate the object by a specified number of degress (it's a spinner box) or use the toolbar's "rotate item" tool to do free rotation.
Anyway, It'd be really nice if you could file a bug on the accessibility issue you mentioned.
I don't think OO.o's importers are good enough either. The point is, however, that they can afford to be a few mm off, a point size out, etc. If you can't afford that level of change, you're using the wrong application in the first place, as Word may cause more changes than that when you simply change your page setup (or someone with different printer margins opens the document).
OO.o's filters still need a _lot_ of work. Some of what people complain about, though, is really their own misunderstanding of the app they're working with (and MS hasn't helped discourage this, either).
I regularly get MS word docs supplied as camera ready ads, despite our specs saying in no less than THREE places, one in large red text, that we do not accept MS word documents for camera ready ads.
"But everybody uses Word" they whine. I pity the cheap print shop they normally deal with who have to endure this crap. Nobody uses Word for layout who wishes to provide accurate fonts, colours, or positioning. It's also an incredible PITA to get decent output out of even with Acro Distiller.
So... I'm with you on the OO.o filters, but probably for different reasons. They need improvement, but not to make them pixel perfect - rather, they need to be able to export almost exactly what they imported in the first place. IMO that's what needs work.
As for Publisher, I think importers and exporters for it are a pointless waste of time. They simply CAN NOT be made good enough, probably not even if full document specs were availible. I reference, again, Adobe's unimpressive PageMaker import in InDesign - where they have the source code to both programs.
If you want to import or export Publisher, do it right. Use Acrobat distiller to make a PDF and use that. It's the only way you'll ever have a realistic chance of getting a vaguely OK result, and frankly even then it'd best that the/customer/ run out the job to PDF.
The newspaper I work for does not accept publisher - full stop. If the clients have been stupid enough to ignore our provided guidelines on formats, we'll happily set their ad in house upon receipt of a proof (fax, emailed image, printout, etc), original material (pix and text), and the appropriate fee. It's their loss.
If you can provide PDF, however... who cares what you use. If it passes through my preflight checks, I'll print it without caring if you produced it in AppleWorks.
<b>While there are definitely problems with CUPS</b>, the problem ESR ranted about was actually a redhat config interface not created by the CUPS folks at all. </blockquote>
No, I'm not trying to say everything is peachy. (mmm, peaches....). If you have a quality laser printer (or other PS printer), then things are OK - but job feedback and error reporting remains terrible. On the other hand, you'll get excellent print quality and printer settings discovery equal or superior to what is availible in MacOS X and Windows XP (if your app uses the CUPS interfaces that is - see OO.o, kprinter and Scribus for examples of this).
If you don't have a decent PS (or PCL, which is usually alright) printer, IMO things begin to suck badly, fast. It can be especially difficult to cancel a job for some reason, something that's infuriating.
However, the person I was replying to was referring to ESR's rather misdirected rant, and that, at least, is not a CUPS problem.
I too like to see the GIMP folks not giving ground to those that say GIMP should be a clone of the PS interface.
That sort of thinking bought us OpenOffice.
*shudder*
I do think that more general usability concerns should not be put out of sight, however. Clearly the GIMP folks do too, given the clear improvements in 2.0.
Three or four years ago, everybody said InDesign would go nowhere.
Look where we are now.
I have far too much experience dealing with Quark (we use Quark 4 on MacOS 9 at work) and they're awful. Overpriced, bad^Wno support, and generally unpleasant.
You also pay a lot each upgrade for OS compatiblity fixes and very little in the way of actual improvements to the software.
It's had document corruption problems and issues working on networks for as long as I've used it.
Quark just dropped its prices in Australia for the first time... pretty much ever. Because of InDesign. The competitor everyone said would go nowhere "because everyone knows Quark."
"The thing about [InDesign] is that [Quark] is such a standard that it has a harder time making inroads than other [DTP] programs. I mean, with page layout and vector drawing there are a few different programs popular with designers (i.e. for vector drawing many people use Illustrator, but many people also use Freehand or CorelDraw, or other programs). With [layout] though, the huge majority of professionals use [Quark]."
A common sentiment until recently - InDesign will go nowhere because everyone uses Quark. I'm just trying to provide a counterpoint.
InDesign is much better than anything else out there, sure.
However, it's PDF abilities are unimpressive given it's origins, and that's what Peter was referring to. It's TeX-derived typesetting engine is currently unbeaten in graphical DTP... well, except maybe by FrameMaker.
Unfortunately, good import filters are incredibly hard. Look at how much trouble OO.o has with Word... and they can afford to get things wrong.
Even Adobe's filters for PageMaker (for which they have the source code) are far from perfect. Their Quark filters often result in pages that need a lot of tweaking.
If a small error is found in the print job, it's not fun. At all. Even if the client approved the wrong proof, they'll bitch, moan, be generally difficult, and waste your time.
Also, good clients who can properly check proofs, provide good quality samples, etc are rarely the ones using Publisher in the first place.
In my experience the best importer for DTP is Acrobat Distiller.
While there are definitely problems with CUPS, the problem ESR ranted about was actually a redhat config interface not created by the CUPS folks at all. They didn't even know about it.
Not only do I get it, but I think similar things apply to the software market when it comes to free/libre software.
High volume shrinkwrap software is likely to take a hit. So is infrastructure software. That'll free up cash - home and office users who aren't buying expensive OS, AV, and office software. That cash goes back into the economy. Some of it will go to higher-level software, some to cusomisation and services. It'll all still be taxed.
Good for you? Not if you sell shrinkwrap software, but probably yes if you're a custom software house or "value added" provider. Good for the industry? Hard to tell.
The end of the world that'll cause governments to collapse and countries to fall into anarchy? Hardly.
Have you considered the possiblity that you're doing them a favour? Improved PageRank, improved awareness, etc. For some companies, any publicity really is good publicity.
Of course, their site will be out of action for a few hours and _nobody_ deserves to deal with forum comments and emails from slashdot, but overall I think many companies would choose to suffer it anyway.
Then again, if your company has sufficiently offended some of the/. readers... well, sadly not everybody is above botnets and cracking attempts. So it could be pretty painful too.
Slashdot Mirror
Funny, because they seem to do their best to make my life hell...
I guess I've never seen what it's like without them.
As an Autstralian seeing the US political system from the outside, I couldn't agree more - at least about the need for finance reform.
Australia has its fair share of problems too, but many of the things that are routine for politicians in the US would be illegal here. Sadly, we seem to be on a trend toward a system more like the US - lately conflicts of interests by politcians have barely merited a mild telling off.
... here's where to get a decent virus scanner - free for personal use - and go here to get a firewall. Do the rest of us a favour and install them, would you?" More seriously, I do think that's worth a mention - for the parents as much as the children.
Let the other office staff get frustrated and wash them with bleach then scrub them out. Just make sure you have good, up-to-date backups first (of course, you already do - right?).
;-)
That way you'll get nice, NEW, non-stinky servers
It's entirely likely that you're right. I refer to two specific features I know are absent.
(1)The inability to control the maximum permissable interword spacing or willingness to hyphenate (reduce rivers in justified text).
(2) The inability to manually tweak interword spacing at a particular location, eg when adjusting a headline to look right.
Thanks for your comments, they're much appreciated. I'll cover the Scribus status of all the various app features you mentioned, too.
I would be delighted if you could file a bug on <a href="http://bugs.scribus.net/">the Scribus bug tracker</a> for #4. I realise this involves creating a login, but it's not a big deal and you'll be able to describe the issue and why it's needed much better than I can. You'll no doubt be delighted that it's <b>not bugzilla</b>.
Regarding point 1, I'm not sufficiently familiar with layers in other DTP apps to comment. It'd be nice if you could file an RFE on the bug tracker that explains the issues and limitations, as we're currently considering the roadmap for 1.3/1.4 so "now's the time". I'm pretty sure Scribus's layers would do the job though.
Point 2 has been supported for a very, very long time. Create the two frames, select the first one, then use the "link text frames" button in the toolbar and click on the second frame. *bing* two linked frames.
Point three is also well supported, though I have no idea when the support was added - quite a while ago at least. Either use the ("X, Y, Z") panel of the properties window to rotate the object by a specified number of degress (it's a spinner box) or use the toolbar's "rotate item" tool to do free rotation.
Anyway, It'd be really nice if you could file a bug on the accessibility issue you mentioned.
I don't think OO.o's importers are good enough either. The point is, however, that they can afford to be a few mm off, a point size out, etc. If you can't afford that level of change, you're using the wrong application in the first place, as Word may cause more changes than that when you simply change your page setup (or someone with different printer margins opens the document).
... I'm with you on the OO.o filters, but probably for different reasons. They need improvement, but not to make them pixel perfect - rather, they need to be able to export almost exactly what they imported in the first place. IMO that's what needs work.
/customer/ run out the job to PDF.
... who cares what you use. If it passes through my preflight checks, I'll print it without caring if you produced it in AppleWorks.
OO.o's filters still need a _lot_ of work. Some of what people complain about, though, is really their own misunderstanding of the app they're working with (and MS hasn't helped discourage this, either).
I regularly get MS word docs supplied as camera ready ads, despite our specs saying in no less than THREE places, one in large red text, that we do not accept MS word documents for camera ready ads.
"But everybody uses Word" they whine. I pity the cheap print shop they normally deal with who have to endure this crap. Nobody uses Word for layout who wishes to provide accurate fonts, colours, or positioning. It's also an incredible PITA to get decent output out of even with Acro Distiller.
So
As for Publisher, I think importers and exporters for it are a pointless waste of time. They simply CAN NOT be made good enough, probably not even if full document specs were availible. I reference, again, Adobe's unimpressive PageMaker import in InDesign - where they have the source code to both programs.
If you want to import or export Publisher, do it right. Use Acrobat distiller to make a PDF and use that. It's the only way you'll ever have a realistic chance of getting a vaguely OK result, and frankly even then it'd best that the
The newspaper I work for does not accept publisher - full stop. If the clients have been stupid enough to ignore our provided guidelines on formats, we'll happily set their ad in house upon receipt of a proof (fax, emailed image, printout, etc), original material (pix and text), and the appropriate fee. It's their loss.
If you can provide PDF, however
Tools menu -> properties
The scribus folks keep an eye on the GNOME HIG, though don't strive for "compliance" as such. Also watch the Apple HIG as it has some good ideas too.
Thanks or the pointer though.
I too like to see the GIMP folks not giving ground to those that say GIMP should be a clone of the PS interface.
That sort of thinking bought us OpenOffice.
*shudder*
I do think that more general usability concerns should not be put out of sight, however. Clearly the GIMP folks do too, given the clear improvements in 2.0.
Right click on frame -> show properties
(The properties pallette is your friend.)
Click on image tab of properties palette.
Play to heart's content.
Also note the "Scale to frame size" option.
I'm referring to post-1.2 CVS but it should be the same in most versions IIRC.
There's talk about better support for spot colours for 1.3 . As for PANTONE, there are unfortunately licensing issues that make it tricky.
Exactly.
... pretty much ever. Because of InDesign. The competitor everyone said would go nowhere "because everyone knows Quark."
Three or four years ago, everybody said InDesign would go nowhere.
Look where we are now.
I have far too much experience dealing with Quark (we use Quark 4 on MacOS 9 at work) and they're awful. Overpriced, bad^Wno support, and generally unpleasant.
You also pay a lot each upgrade for OS compatiblity fixes and very little in the way of actual improvements to the software.
It's had document corruption problems and issues working on networks for as long as I've used it.
Quark just dropped its prices in Australia for the first time
*sigh*. It always repeats.
"In my experience the best importer for Publisher is Acrobat Distiller"
Sorry. It's 6am here and I've been up all night.
A common sentiment until recently - InDesign will go nowhere because everyone uses Quark. I'm just trying to provide a counterpoint.
It seems the Scribus folks are well aware of how TeX does things, but alas it's not as easy as grabbing the guts and dropping them in.
Improvements along these lines are being looked at for future versions though.
OK, now to respond to your comment properly.
Hyphentation and other fine typsetting: InDesign is the king. Scribus is getting well up toward Quark though.
Transparent images: I'm pretty sure these are well supported, as transparency in general is, but I don't use them myself.
Kerning: quite good, and a h-scale function is also provided, but no tracking controls yet.
My personal suspicion would be that they may feel they have better things to work on - like core functionality.
IMO the really important things PS gets write - like the quickmask - are the important bits to look at.
I'm a heavy Photoshop user myself, and I prefer it - but mostly because of the more polished tools like the masking, filters, and selection tools.
Perhaps a group of users who really want a PS-like UI will get together and write one...
Scribus is doing OK on typsetting, but I don't personally think it's the strongpoint of the program. There's lots of work coming on that though.
It has quite good hyphenation and very good, going on excellent support for typsetting non-latin languages.
Work on smarter widow avoidance etc is being discussed for 1.3.
InDesign is much better than anything else out there, sure.
... well, except maybe by FrameMaker.
However, it's PDF abilities are unimpressive given it's origins, and that's what Peter was referring to. It's TeX-derived typesetting engine is currently unbeaten in graphical DTP
Unfortunately, good import filters are incredibly hard. Look at how much trouble OO.o has with Word ... and they can afford to get things wrong.
Even Adobe's filters for PageMaker (for which they have the source code) are far from perfect. Their Quark filters often result in pages that need a lot of tweaking.
If a small error is found in the print job, it's not fun. At all. Even if the client approved the wrong proof, they'll bitch, moan, be generally difficult, and waste your time.
Also, good clients who can properly check proofs, provide good quality samples, etc are rarely the ones using Publisher in the first place.
In my experience the best importer for DTP is Acrobat Distiller.
While there are definitely problems with CUPS, the problem ESR ranted about was actually a redhat config interface not created by the CUPS folks at all. They didn't even know about it.
IMO the real issues with GIMP are more with CMYK support, 16bit per channel , and other pro features.
The interface isn't too bad with 2.0 - unless you're expecting a Photoshop clone.
Not only do I get it, but I think similar things apply to the software market when it comes to free/libre software.
High volume shrinkwrap software is likely to take a hit. So is infrastructure software. That'll free up cash - home and office users who aren't buying expensive OS, AV, and office software. That cash goes back into the economy. Some of it will go to higher-level software, some to cusomisation and services. It'll all still be taxed.
Good for you? Not if you sell shrinkwrap software, but probably yes if you're a custom software house or "value added" provider. Good for the industry? Hard to tell.
The end of the world that'll cause governments to collapse and countries to fall into anarchy? Hardly.
Have you considered the possiblity that you're doing them a favour? Improved PageRank, improved awareness, etc. For some companies, any publicity really is good publicity.
/. readers... well, sadly not everybody is above botnets and cracking attempts. So it could be pretty painful too.
Of course, their site will be out of action for a few hours and _nobody_ deserves to deal with forum comments and emails from slashdot, but overall I think many companies would choose to suffer it anyway.
Then again, if your company has sufficiently offended some of the