[scribus] Views of users

[John Beardmore]

joseph harris wrote:
> From: "John Beardmore"

> John,
> 
> --Briefly.  I was not intending to challenge in any way, but merely to 
> respond usefully to your despair of the technical knowledge of some 
> users and wouldbe users and more so, perhaps, those not attracted to 
> Scribus. Similarly I was attempting to suggest that greater take up of 
> the program required a dumbing down.

Then maybe scribus should stay great rather than having greater take
up ?


>> But with this line you are hardly 'Joe Bloggs': MSc EDM (Open), B.A. 
>> Chem (Oxon), CMIOSH, AIEMA, MEI ;-). Added to which your previous 
>> experience looks regular as a consultant in a complex area.
> 
> Possibly, but a robust knowledge of environmental decision making
> doesn't make you an expert in DTP.
> 
> --I espressed it badly; my intention was to point to the quantity of 
> reports and papers and other documents you would have to prepare.  
> Involving many dozens of items a year I hazard a guess. Therefore the 
> experience you have built up as well as the technical arreas that you 
> are knowledgeable in.  Thsi was to contrast with many other DTP users

But every DTP user I've ever met has been using it for some professional 
reason or to a professional standard. I'm not sure who these "many other 
DTP users" are.


>> The trend has been to combine programs into simpler work flows and to 
>> reduce the need for additional programs. In that Scribus in in the 
>> flow... Again the issue is not what is available, but what does each 
>> individual perceive they need or can cope with.
> 
> I think that what matters is that the basic things are easy to do.
> Scribus has pretty much delivered this already.
> 
> Additional stuff is a bonus as long as the basic stuff remains easy.
> 
> --Easy? Not for everybody. If you want to draw a wider user base then it 
> becomes necessary to study their needs. This is not against Scribus, nor 
> people not attracted to the program, nor to you. Just a factor of 
> popularity.
> 
> .........
> I think all three of them are well suited to anybody who finds that WP
> doesn't give them the control over layout that they want.
> 
> I don't think they are especially sophisticated, though granted I've
> never used Quark.
> 
> --Again this may be true technically, but the range of choices and how 
> people make them can be an eye opener.
> 
>> On the other hand Word is like a WP with few-click DTP facilities [and 
>> plenty problems down the line ;-)].
> 
> Indeed. It was Word that first drove me to Pagemaker !
> 
> --I won't go near Word and continue to use WordPro97, which has 
> sophistication even for today, while I seek an up to date WP for my 
> purposes to replace it. I do not find OO that easy or controllable 
> though I fully recognise its depth. As my main writing is now done in 
> Liquid Story there is no hurry.
> 
> So how is Serif simpler to use that Pagemaker, InDe, Quark and
> Scribus ?
> 
> I've never used Serif, though some of my friends speak highly of it.
> 
> I can't imagine how the user interfaces of Pagemaker, InDe and
> Scribus might be much simplified ?  In each case you make a doc, stuff
> in some frames, populate them and Robert is your relative.
> 
> --;-) Er.. sort of. A comparison would need space time and words not 
> really relevant to this list, even were I qualified to make it. But I 
> can tell you that PagePlus does a great deal of what Quark does with a 
> lesser input of time and effort from the user.

Well perhaps it can produce many of the same things, but that doesn't 
mean that it offers the same ways to get them, or offers the same range 
of possible outcomes as easily.


>> From list discussions elsewhere I am aware of considerable 
> differences againt the other porgrams too.
> 
> --But others - two in the past day or two - have stated they have moved 
> from PagePlus to Scribus for greater control over the output. Which is 
> my point. Interface and ease of use are the keys for the majority, even 
> including many bookmakers.
 > When it comes to increased control Scribus is
> in the sights; then the learning curve is an acceptable cost for that 
> control.

Yes -  I'm inclined to think that if people want to produce pretty stuff 
without effort they go try MS publisher or maybe serif, but if they need 
it, they'll come to scribus in the end.

I'm also inclined to think that for most reasonably bright people, they 
might as well cut to the chase and go direct to scribus, but it's up to 
them.


> --But the numbers will remain relatively small while that is the case.
> 
> So how specifically does it make either simple basic jobs, or indeed
> complex ones easier or quicker, or shorten the learning curve ?
> 
> --The user interface is 'user-friendly' where 'user' means non-technical 
> and wanting the layout to be done by something close to magic!

The trouble with magic is that you have to know what the spells do and 
how to concoct your own.


> One 
> example is the ability to prepare the first page from the master [itself 
> possibly as simple as positioning guides], draw a text frame, enter the 
> text file and then be asked automatically if you want this continued 
> into same size frames on the necessary number of pages. Click 'yes' and 
> voila, It is all laid out accoding to whatever instructions have been 
> chosen [or custom defined]. Graphics frames can be similarly inserted 
> and fitted into the flow with simply applied wrap options.  This can 
> then be further formatted with heading and other styles either in the 
> frames on the pages or in the story editor [I think that is its name 
> too, I don't have it open at the moment], links either to the pages or 
> to the web can be fixed with a relatively simple process. It can then be 
> automtically saved as either pdf or html web folder - even site.

OK -  but this sort of thing may come in scribus with scripting I
guess ?


> I'm all for simplicity, but I'd still like to know how Serif would make
> my life easier, and for that matter, what might I loose access to ?.
> 
> --The trade off is there, as with all things in life - know what one is 
> doing or be limited for action. I am not suggesting the two programs are 
> equivalent, but that for popularity the easier (but less adaptable) is 
> necessary.

I think the knack is having both simplicity and adaptability.

I don't think they are mutually exclusive.


> I don't see Scribus users being forced to use the command line though.
> Do you ?
> 
> --Well, reading posts for a few months now I see something that reminds 
> me of it...

:)   Only poor mac users I think.

But to be fair -  it is the traditional linux way.

As an XP scribus user I don't need to touch a command line -  not that 
I'm phased by it.



> I thought they were on most machines sold because of a manipulative
> marketing machine and a gullible public.
> 
> --;-) A bit unkind,

I think not !


> but certainly comparatively few Windows users are 
> aware of things like Linux or any other OS and maybe even of Macs. And 
> they don't need to be to get their day done.
> 
> But I guess that's their choice however frustrating we may find it.
> 
> --Most machines come loaded with M$ and few users would want the bother 
> of changing OSs even if they knew it was possible.

Then they can miss out. Leave them to it.


> More frustrating is the situation where schools and colleges actively
> recruit microsoft accredited staff who promote corporate solutions
> because they know no better,
> 
> --And most companies use M$ becasue they know no better, and schools are 
> but training grounds for work these days.

Quite. Vocational training has a lot to answer for.


> -I'm not intending to continue to comment on this. In general we don't 
> really have a disagreement; but I do think you are over-harsh about the 
> fact that most people have no technical bent whatsoever.

They don't have to have, and they are welcome not to, but it is their 
loss and it's bound to result in some missed opportunity for all of us.

One community that has been fairy receptive oddly enough is local 
churches. I've written something for the diocese on open source and 
they're publishing it in their guides.


Cheers, J/.
-- 
John Beardmore, MSc EDM (Open), B.A. Chem (Oxon), CMIOSH, AIEMA, MEI
Managing Director, T4 Sustainability Limited. http://www.T4sLtd.co.uk/
Carbon Trust Consultant: Energy Audit, Carbon Footprint, Design Advice
Energy Efficiency Accreditation Scheme, (EEAS), Registered Assessor
Phone: 0845 4561332   Mobile: 07785 563116   Skype: t4sustainability